#is so good. and the characters have like consistent internal logic

[macbethheadband]

Why IS mash the way that it is btw. Is it just because its a good show

[takaraphoenix]

One of the things about Teen Wolf lore that really pisses me off is how it just makes so little internal sense is the murder angle.

On first glance, it seems consistent.

Murder is rewarded.

You kill an Alpha? You become the Alpha.

You kill your own betas? You absorb their strength.

In the meantime, kindness is punished, as proven by Derek losing his Alpha spark for healing his pack mate.

Had he just killed her, he would have become physically stronger. But instead, he showed kindness and love and goodness by saving Cora's life and he was punished for it by losing his Alpha spark.

And then they explain the blue eyes and make it sound near shameful. I'm sorry, but in the "murder is rewarded" world, werewolves would absolutely wear blue eyes as a badge of honor.

And then they introduce the True Alpha nonsense and I'm sorry, the strength of character and virtue are rewarded? In the world that established that werewolves are rewarded for murder and where kindness is punished?

This fully contradicts everything you introduced about werewolves! Congratulations, you are a werewolf show with fucked up, contradictory werewolf lore. How did you manage to do that?

(Rhetorical question. I know how)

Any other show featuring werewolves, like literally any single one, and the concept of a True Alpha would be more believable than in this show, because this show spent three seasons establishing that murder is kind of a big deal (in a positive sense) in their werewolf lore, you kill and you get a reward for that. So by what internal logic would a werewolf receive an even higher reward for being especially virtuous?

[taliabhattwrites]

On the topic of the Edelgard rambling… I’d love to see it! I have so, so many thoughts about her story and character, about how she’s maligned at every turn by readers, about how she’s clearly using her own heart as fuel at every turn (written in BIG BOLD LETTERS AFTER Arianrhod, for the people who missed it), and so on. But I don’t… have the words. I’m not especially well versed in theory as a whole, I have struggle expressing the emotions and thoughts inside of my mind as form.

I’d just like to be able to see both where my interpretation falls against someone much more learned than me, as well as challenge myself if it is different. Give me a chance to enjoy El more, from angles I never conceived of.

Of course, I absolutely understand your concern! This is the blorbo site. And they’ve shown time and again that they fall into the same misogynistic lines about Edelgard and other women in fiction time and again. Just… if you did do it, there’s at least one person who would greatly enjoy the dialogue!

The thing you have to remember is that the story we love is ultimately a product of decisions by creatives, not a living world. We do not need to defend characters as though they are real people with a consistent internal logic, free of the critiques of poor storytelling choices and bad characterization.

And let's just say that when a videogame ends 3/4 routes with you killing a powerful woman, who was irresponsible and "driven mad" by her power due to not being fit for that power innately ... for the ultimate aggrandizement of the presumed-male self-insert (do not deflect with the gender-choice excuse y'all KNOW the self-insert is presumed male narratively) ... you fucking notice the pattern

FE3H could have been an epic where the various factions struggling against the tyrannical rule of an absolute theocracy drew on realistic political histories ... but instead we had to have Two Antisemitic Conspiracy Type Shadowy Agents to prop up A Very Azor Ahai Tale for 3/4 routes

Note that I'm dinging Crimson Flower here too. Everything good about Crimson Flower is an accident, in spite and not because of artistic intent.

So that's my Edelgard take. The creator wrote her wrong.

Do not appeal to 'authority' to me, I am better than your 'authorities'.

[my-rose-tinted-glasses]

Whenever there's a line up event, one of the things that I'm starting to look forward to the most are the show's english names. They are always...interesting. Anyway, a lot of new stuff. They are certainly rivalling gmmtv in terms of content and the event itself. That was looooong and there were a LOT of announcements.

Before I go into new shows. We finally got a date for The Next Prince and it's April. Also Zomvivor has a new teaser and it will air...soon. Goddammit. Speaking of elusive air dates, Khemjira is also coming...soon. It's like they don't want me to be happy. I need all the horror. Your Sky of Us will be a special 3 episode event that will follow the characters into adulthood. I like the idea of seeing the couples after the show's hea so this should be nice. Now for everything else. I added link to the mdl pages and the trailers, so if you don't want my unsolicited opinions just click on the links below the pics.

[ MDL | Trailer ] Love Upon a Time - It's not exactly a new announcement but we finally got a pilot with the new cast and I really enjoyed it. I'm convinced that Net is one of those actors that can have chemistry with anyone so this should be good at least when it comes to the main couple. When it comes to fantasy thai bl, I never want to get my hopes too high because a lot of the time they tend to forgo internal narrative consistency for the sake of the romance, but either way, I will be watching this one.

[ MDL | Trailer ] Your Third - MaxNat romcom, why not? When it comes to the romance, I think they can pull it off, but the comedy? Not so sure. I don’t hate anything here, but I can’t say I really love anything either.

[ MDL | Trailer ] Mr.Fanboy - Well this should be interesting. I do like when bl goes a bit meta, so I'm looking forward to see what DMD has to say about this. AuAu and Save fans must be losing it to see them as leads, and I was surprised to see James. I thought he wasn't gonna be in any series for a while, but I'm not as well informed about these things. Interesting cast and concept. I will be tuning in.

[ MDL | Trailer ] You(r)Tuber - Do you see what I mean? These names kill me. Looks cute. Surprised to see Earth and First but nothing really excites me about this one. Oh wait, I'm wrong, there are pets and more importantly a cat. That makes me happy.

[ MDL | Trailer ] Duang With You - My crumbs have graduated and I'm screaming. I love everything about this, but honestly, I love TeeteePor. They are beautiful. I also love a shameless flirt that will thaw the heart of a brooder. So I'm winning either way.

[ MDL | Trailer ] Restart - This is giving Elite but with some extra bullying for good measure. It's also giving nakedness galore. DMD knows their audience. I'm guessing we will be seeing a lot of showers. I'm happy to see Tommy again. I'm not sure if this is exactly bl, but with the amount of naked boys in the pilot alone, might as well be.

[ MDL | Trailer ] Magic Lover – I guess it was only a matter of time for BL to start playing with magic. I mean, we're in our vampire season, so this was the next logical step. Anyway, ThomasKong are back. And Keng… I have to admit, very few actors illicit a strong reaction from me solely based on their looks, but Keng is one of them. That guy has an absolutely flawless face. I like that we have 3 different couples and I like fantasy and fated mates so I'm definitely on board.

[ MDL | Trailer ] HUG E-Lhee The Musical - Ok, I LOVE musicals. Seriously. And let’s be real, when it comes to musicals, especially the more comedic ones, there’s always a built-in level of cringe. Which is fine. People randomly breaking into song pretty much guarantees that. But throwing BL into the mix, along with some folks who aren’t exactly great singers? That might just be a step too far for me. No shade, just a personal preference.

Also announced was another ThomasKong show, Unknown Lover, and a DMD Sitcom, หอตัวดี, with literally all the boys.

Well, that's everything from me. Obviously most of these will come in late 2025 and 2026. And despite everything I just said, I’ll probably still end up watching the first episodes of all the shows.

[tjodity]

Elaboration on the tr!Ros disability thing--

I am making this connection largely because I am a bit chronically ill and have mental health issues, both of which contributes to me needing varying amounts of assistance with life compared to an ordinary person. That is to say I don't necessarily believe that this is an intended reading, I'm just connecting parallels because of my personal history.

That said, I think there is something about tr!Ros's whole struggle that really does resonate with that experience. Ros places such a high importance on being competent and independent. The most visible motivation for this is her desire to be helpful to the people around her, which is what she has voiced as her reason for wanting to become stronger most frequently.

But below that is the certainty that she will be left alone, that she will have no one to turn to when it really matters, which is something she's been voicing at the start of the Realmathon.

And below that, much more rarely voiced, is the desire to be a fully fledged, autonomous human being, capable of doing great things and treated with respect.

I think this is why tr!Ros is so continuously resistant to things like being handed armor and weapons, given physical protection and immunity from her harmful actions, and does not internalize any assurances or compliments she's given by the people closest to her. She is sort of treated with kid gloves by the people closest to her.

Aimsey loves her, but will also frequently override her decisions, brush aside her concerns, and corral her back into the castle to keep her safe. The Kingdom cares about her, but they also don't really ever acknowledge that she has an interiority and problems that run deeper than resources and physical protection. She is treated like she is extremely susceptible to harmful external influence and fits of emotion, and not like she has a complicated, flawed system of morality and logic she operates off of. She is frequently shut down, isolated, dismissed or demeaned under the pretense of her safety or her own good.

And I think the consistent conflict and the parallel start to come in here when this desire intersects with the fact that she is somewhat dependent on other characters. She dies a lot. She struggles with fighting on a PvP and PvE oriented server. She is easily overwhelmed emotionally and physically. She is prone to destructive behavior that leaves difficult consequences. She is suicidal. She loses important items like her elytra on a somewhat regular basis that make large chunks of the server inaccessible for her.

And I feel like the fact that she does need help with a lot of stuff is frequently used against her to undercut her desire for autonomy and the fact that she's a fully fledged adult human being. She is corralled into the empty Castle and told to stay there. When she talks about how she wants to do things on her own she is scoffed at and immediately handed whatever item or resource she was working for. When she expresses jealousy or dislike towards anyone on the server she is dismissed as childish. When she talks about wanting to be independent her need for assistance in the past is used to shut her down. Her violent actions are used to wave away any perspective on morality she may have.

IDK. I feel like tr!Ros's struggles are relatable to the struggle for personhood when you are disabled and/or mentally ill in a way that requires assistance and how people sometimes treat you.

[morningfangirl]

Overall I did like The Fish and the Whale as an episode, but I really think the poker plot outshined the baby shower plot... and maybe not in the way people think.

The Brad voice over was giving Contemporary American Poultry which as a Community fan I was here for and it seems a lot of people really enjoyed it. The poker storyline overall was really well done from Brad to David to even Ian. All three were acting as foils to each other with how they deal with their canonical shitty childhoods in adulthood. Like Ian bringing up his father abusing him and then David just being like that's irrelevant was great. Also, Ian starting to get annoyed that David didn't know Poppy hated her sister and then getting distracted by trying to get a dig in at David was really funny.

Which brings me of course to the Poppy plot of the episode. I feel like this part of the episode was a bit more stereotypical sitcom than most episodic storylines that MQ does. The scene that was released ahead of the episode was Tracy showing up at the baby shower, so I thought we might get an insight into why Poppy is on bad terms with her family as an adult because Sarian made it seem like Poppy's parents just didn't really understand her (which is not uncommon with how her character is neurodivergent coded) and her and her sister just had nothing in common so they felt pitted against each other for their mom's approval. Like in terms of set design, there are pictures from Sarian bts of young Poppy, Tracy, and their dad when Poppy tells Storm she is pregnant in Second Skeleton.

Also, like Mythic Quest has had really great internal consistence, and the Jo-Poppy-Rachel dynamic did not seem quite consistent with Crushing It. Like Rachel and Dana were at Storm's gallery opening in Boundaries. Although, I did think it was funny having Rachel question if Poppy had any kind of social life (which leads me to the question of how did Poppy, who prior to this season only had a work life, meet Storm?).

There just didn't seem to be any internal logic for Tracy to fly halfway across the world just to be a bitch to her pregnant sister? I feel like it would have been more satisfying for Tracy to have been a normal person who gained her parents approval when Poppy dropped out of college who is now trying to be a good sister but ultimately lashing out because Poppy never grew out of being, in her eyes, a "freakazoid" and that's when Rachel, Jo, Carol, and Dana jump into Poppy's defense. Having Tracy think Poppy was the problem with their relationship only to have it turned back on her. The Poppy-Tracy storyline just was not as revealing in terms as backstory as I would have liked and did not really build onto Sarian. It just felt like Tracy was a little too much like Zack but without the emotional depth/rationalization. Like in Breaking Brad, it is clear that Zack is continuing a cycle of abuse and genuinely has the sociopathic & narcissistic traits Brad uses as a mask in the first two seasons. But I felt like Tracy was very one-dimensional which seems out of character for the show.

[txttletale]

Your discussions on AI art have been really interesting and changed my mind on it quite a bit, so thank you for that! I don’t think I’m interested in using it, but I feel much less threatened by it in the same way. That being said, I was wondering, how you felt about AI generated creative writing: not, like AI writing in the context of garbage listicles or academic essays, but like, people who generate short stories and then submit them to contests. Do you think it’s the same sort of situation as AI art? Do you think there’s a difference in ChatGPT vs mid journey? Legitimate curiosity here! I don’t quite have an opinion on this in the same way, and I’ve seen v little from folks about creative writing in particular vs generated academic essays/articles

i think that ai generated writing is also indisputably writing but it is mostly really really fucking awful writing for the same reason that most ai art is not good art -- that the large training sets and low 'temperature' of commercially available/mass market models mean that anything produced will be the most generic version of itself. i also think that narrative writing is very very poorly suited to LLM generation because it generally requires very basic internal logic which LLMs are famously bad at (i imagine you'd have similar problems trying to create something visual like a comic that requires consistent character or location design rather than the singular images that AI art is mostly used for). i think it's going to be a very long time before we see anything good long-form from an LLM, especially because it's just not a priority for the people making them.

ultimately though i think you could absolutely do some really cool stuff with AI generated text if you had a tighter training set and let it get a bit wild with it. i've really enjoyed a lot of AI writing for being funny, especially when it was being done with tools like botnik that involve more human curation but still have the ability to completely blindside you with choices -- i unironically think the botnik collegehumour sketch is funnier than anything human-written on the channel. & i think that means it could reliably be used, with similar levels of curation, to make some stuff that feels alien, or unsettling, or etheral, or horrifying, because those are somewhat adjacent to the surreal humour i think it excels at. i could absolutely see it being used in workflows -- one of my friends told me recently, essentially, "if i'm stuck with writer's block, i ask chatgpt what should happen next, it gives me a horrible idea, and i immediately think 'that's shit, and i can do much better' and start writing again" -- which is both very funny but i think presents a great use case as a 'rubber duck'.

but yea i think that if there's anything good to be found in AI-written fiction or poetry it's not going to come from chatGPT specifically, it's going to come from some locally hosted GPT model trained on a curated set of influences -- and will have to either be kind of incoherent or heavily curated into coherence.

that said the submission of AI-written stories to short story mags & such fucking blows -- not because it's "not writing" but because it's just bad writing that's very very easy to produce (as in, 'just tell chatGPT 'write a short story'-easy) -- which ofc isn't bad in and of itself but means that the already existing phenomenon of people cynically submitting awful garbage to literary mags that doesn't even meet the submission guidelines has been magnified immensely and editors are finding it hard to keep up. i think part of believing that generative writing and art are legitimate mediums is also believing they are and should be treated as though they are separate mediums -- i don't think that there's no skill in these disciplines (like, if someone managed to make writing with chatGPT that wasnt unreadably bad, i would be very fucking impressed!) but they're deeply different skills to the traditional artforms and so imo should be in general judged, presented, published etc. separately.

[afurtivecake]

My hot take on AFTG? At first glance, the original series appears to be amateurishly written, but actually it's like that because it's in an autistic POV.

Ok look, anyone who has read AFTG will notice the language is fairly simple, the vocabulary not particularly varied, the phrasing is repetitive, there's a lot of detail about small, seemingly pointless actions, a ton of exposition and hardly any detail on many of the characters or their emotional states. I'm not denying that. I'm saying it's intentional because all of that is how Neil thinks.

Firstly, Neil isn't particularly well-educated. The longest he's stayed in one place is that one year in Millport. I don't know what kind of an education he's gotten on the road, but it surely could not have been consistent. He also doesn't have Andrew's memory so he's not going to be spouting big words and fanciful adjectives where simpler ones will suffice. (Also, Andrew is an intellectual and considers himself as such, which is why he talks the way he does, but that's a whole other tangent) It would be a wildly different character or a different style of POV altogether if it was written in a more literary style.

As for why it feels specifically autistic, it's hard to explain because for me, it's very intuitive and largely based on personal experience and exposure. But I can say that the books read like what some of my autistic friends (and I) have going through their heads. It's the methodical thought processes, the meticulous observation, the internal exposition, the logical reasoning that gets applied to every small thing, the conscious decisions that go into every action. It's also how there's an absence of descriptions of people and their personalities and how sometimes it seems like it suddenly shifts to a complete non sequitur. It reads like we're inside Neil's head and the inside of Neil's head feels really familiar.

Now, I'm not sure how much of it is the author herself and how much of it is just Neil, or if it's a case of Neil being exactly the sort of character Nora Sakavic's natural writing style (at the time) just happened to fit precisely. But my point is that having the kind of flaws English teachers would wag their fingers at doesn't make it a less effective piece of writing. Not all characters and not all humans are going to tell their stories in a way that sounds like what we think of as 'literature' but that doesn't make their story less meaningful or significant or less well told.

EDIT: I should say, there are literary authors who also have a very sparse, simple style, who nonetheless, manage to convey so much sentiment and emotion in simple, short sentences. AFTG has, by no means, the simplest or sparsest writing I've seen. You don't need complex words or sentences to tell a good story effectively!

[qiu-yan]

I think if MDZS was truly about moral good, then Cultivation Society would have been fundamentally changed and everyone who tried to change it wouldn’t be dead. The fact that XXC and SL wanted to change cultivation sects from being dynastic to more merit based and they got such horrible fates is tragic. JGY wanted to use his power to help the more common folk, but he was struck down and any good he’s done is going to be tainted. WWX and LWJ choose to walk away rather than do anything in the novel, so I’m not sure if their actions can be considered a net positive. There’s only so much good they can do as wandering cultivators, there needs to be some kind of structure to help the community but most sects are unwilling to put in a lot of effort if it doesn’t benefit them specifically. There was no social change in MDZS.

thank you for the message! and sorry it took me five million years to get to it...

from a utilitarian point of view, i think you're completely correct: the one individual the novel holds up as the most righteous out of everyone has a far greater negative than positive impact on the world at large; society and the plight of the common folk are in a worse state at the end of the novel than they are at the beginning. postcanon, no matter how much individual nighthunting wei wuxian and lan wangji do, the life of your average commoner is probably going to get more dangerous. you are correct that there was in fact no social change in MDZS. shit did not change on a major scale.

two comments about this: first, the moral framework employed by MDZS is decidedly non-utilitarian. second, as you said, MDZS is not About Moral Good.

first, the moral framework employed by MDZS is not utilitarian at all. wei wuxian and lan wangji are not "righteous" in the way that someone who pulls the lever in the trolley problem can be called "righteous" via utilitarian reasoning; rather, wei wuxian and lan wangji are "righteous" in the way that someone who walks away from omelas is righteous. from a utilitarian perspective, walking away from omelas doesn't accomplish shit because the child is still suffering and one person's absence is not going to change that. from a non-utilitarian perspective, though, walking away from omelas isn't about bringing about a certain result but rather is about living in accordance to your own ideals and code of honor. it's not about helping as many people as possible or about bringing about the best possible outcome, but rather about living your own life without any regrets.

this isn't a philosophy i (a utilitarian) really buy into, but many people do find it persuasive. and though there are still some logical holes induced by protagonist-centered-morality, i do think that MDZS is overall thematically cohesive if analyzed through this non-utilitarian lens. unfortunately, one side-effect of this lens (as well as the general non-utilitarian sorts of philosophies this lens is based in) is that the story ends up somewhat handwaving actual negative consequences.

second, MDZS is not Purely About Moral Good. it has an internally consistent moral framework and it has a lot to say about what it thinks is righteousness, but it isn't a "ringing endorsement of the Correct Course Of Action" book in the same way many other works of fiction are. MDZS is about a certain kind of righteousness, but it's also a cynical condemnation of society, a remark upon the role and unreliability of rumors and hearsay, a subversion of typical xianxia/wuxia genre tropes, an interpersonal tragedy of love and duty and sacrifice and hubris, and a thorough rejection of the just world fallacy. it's also a romance.

i say that MDZS is also a social critique and a rejection of the just world fallacy because, in my view, we aren't meant to read characters like jin guangyao as "unambiguously evil characters who got what they deserved." i do think we're meant to see the way in which society turns on jin guangyao, the way in which that parallels wei wuxian's unfair downfall, and the way in which the genuine good jin guangyao did for the world is now at risk, as a tragedy. as a rather depressing insight upon the morally bankrupt nature of society. MXTX wrote it that way on purpose. you're not meant to read jin guangyao's downfall and go "he got what he deserved;" rather, you're meant to look at the black-and-white, hypocritical, and classist way in which society turns upon jin guangyao as a criticism of that society - one that builds off of the social criticism baked into wei wuxian's character arc.

there is no structural change in MDZS because MDZS is a criticism of society, not a story about how society got better. MDZS posits that this polite society is classist and morally bankrupt, and then does not fix said society. MDZS says "this polite society was hypocritical and self-serving then, and it still is now." in that sense, then, the ending is deliberately rather tragic.

in that sense, then, wei wuxian stepping away from the cultivation world does also feel like him giving up on society. which, from an interpersonal perspective, is fair: he already set himself on fire and literally died trying to do the right thing, so i don't think we can really begrudge him for not wanting to risk it a second time. maybe this time someone else can try to fix things (and die in the process). also, given his and lan wangji's absolute lack of any political ability, it's probably also for the best that they not try to involve themselves in politics to better the world, because realistically they'd probably just make a bunch of enemies and solve zero of the problems.

MDZS tries to give us some hope for the future of its fictional society: both the novel and the fandom (including me myself) posit that said hope for the future lies in the juniors, by whom wei wuxian's generation tried to better than their parents did for them. jin ling's generation certainly seems kinder than wei wuxian's generation. i think we're meant to conclude that things aren't completely hopeless because jin ling's generation, kinder and nobler than the previous one, will try to fix things.

but personally, i'm not sure how i feel about placing the hopes of social reform on the specific personalities of citizens and leaders, rather than the structures those people exist in. instead, i'm reminded me of what i wrote a few months ago about the granularity of morality in MDZS being the entire individual and not the action, by which i mean that MDZS seems to assess and conclude entire characters as "good people" or "bad people" or "complicated and morally grey people," rather than analyze the morality of specific actions. and i think it's because MDZS treats the unit measurements of morality as people rather than actions or policies, that MDZS is ultimately able to posit that the future will be better because a specific group of individuals from the next generation have kinder personalities - even though there was no structural reform. as if the state of a society is determined purely by the personalities of a select group of future leaders within it, rather than the laws and institutions that bind it and the material conditions its populations live in. to put it in other words, this is peak "we replaced the evil king with a Wise And Just king (and made no other changes), so we've saved the day!!!" thinking.

.

i feel like i rambled a lot in this response, so i apologize for its relative lack of cohesion. i hope i haven't misinterpreted your points and that i've continued the conversation in a relevant manner.

[ilikekidsshows]

Gotta love the irony of Miraculous claiming "All it takes for evil to win is for good to do nothing" and then turning around and say "If you dont like us teaching countless of harmful messages to children so Marinette can be the ever-victim girboss ruler of the universe, then fuck you. You're wrong, you're an awful women hater (even if your a woman. That's the only reason you could take an issue with the story, you hate women) and if you want to watch this show in peace, you have to kneel and surrender your moral code to what WE tell you is right (for Marinette)"

Miraculous, I thought I was SUPPOSED to think for myself and speak up when I see injustice and people being harmed for someone's ego? Why did you lie to me when I was a kid? Marinette doesnt care for justice, she's self-righteous and now always puts herself first. If looking away benefits her, she'll always do it and only sobs little "sowwys" when things go bad, but then mostly only really cares about making sure SHE gets out of it best as possible. Sure, she's doing her best, but clearly much more the best FOR HERSELF then anyone else. Since s4 she stopped caring for justice once she isnt the one getting the most out of it.

She was upset that saying "I forgive you" to Alya at the end of Strike Back didnt make Alya put her life and loved ones on the line just so Marinette can continue having Rena Rouge. Just wanted her to keep the Miraculous, expecting that Alya too agrees that Marinette's feelings were all that mattered in Hawkmoth knowing Rena's identity. She "forgives" her, so Alya may risk and loose everything now. Poor Marinette, Alya didnt agree that Mari's forgiveness was all that mattered :'(

She never tried giving her friends or teachers real reasons to believe her about Lila, she just wanted them to believe her whim and punish and bully the new girl bc Marinette said so. Sure doesnt sound like Marinette dislikes abuse of power and bullying, she just wants to be the one to decide who "deserves" it.

And Cat Noir we dont need to explain, I'll do it anyway. Marinette is nothing but selfish when it comes to Cat to a level that honestly were impressive if it wasnt so horrible in a kids show. I have never seen such an awful and selfish leader and partner who then has herself nothing but rewarded for not giving a shit beyond the barest minimum and being a toxic to outright abusive hypocrite as long as she says "I'm sowwy, I'm just so blameless and correct :'( and you're wrong and need to do better and take care of me for unfairly making me feel NOT like a Queen :'( Oh no! I'm so awful! But, like, only in the really flawless way where you have to do all the effort or else I'll get upsette"

That's no hero, no role model, no loving partner both romantic and platonic, and sure no ruler of the universe.

Dont tell children to care about Justice and then punish them for doing so.

---

Yeah, the reason I say that the writing feels like Miraculous writers are punishing people for disagreeing or liking non-Marinette characters too much is specifically because of how utterly everything about the show and its actual, established moral code falls apart as soon as your suspension of disbelief is broken by one of the many, many, many, many breakdowns of its internal logic. This show is agonizing to watch when you aren't part of the segment of the audience the writers’ priorities cater to. When you aren’t excusing and forgiving everything the writers mess up, watching the show feels like a punishment.

Because, yeah, it’s about caring about the wrong thing. Caring about justice, when the writer’s want you to care only about Marinette’s personal justice. Caring about consistency when the only consistent thing is how far the writers are willing to bend things to excuse Marinette. Caring about any character besides Marinette, when the writers only care about Marinette. Caring about seeing a cute wholesome romance, when the only romance is the most toxic depiction of soulmates possibly ever seen.

There’s so much you have to ignore to just enjoy this show anymore, and it would be ridiculous if it wasn’t so depressing. And, because this show refused to conclude any of its arcs before it decided to turn them all into nightmare versions of the show you thought you were watching, going back to watch those old episodes also makes you feel like there’s this inky doom hanging over all the characters and their arcs. It's like peering behind the veil; you’ve seen something you shouldn't have and the normal doesn't feel normal anymore.

[coraniaid]

Vaguely on the topic of Jenny and the whole vengeance deal with Angel, I know Anya spends very very little time on the show concurrently with Angel (off the top of my head I can only think of them maybe sharing scenes in the Bronze in Doppelgangland and I assume he could've been there in Graduation Day when she's explaining the Ascension deal but I couldn't say if they'd ever spoken a word to each other. Maybe she was one of the many people who he talked to in that decidedly not good Thanksgiving episode if she was even in it), do you know if Anya ever expresses her expert opinion with like a milennia spent wreaking vengeance on people under her belt on the whole Angel curse thing? And if not how would she fall on it? I'm torn between her either admiring how miserable it made him for so long or thinking its stupid and they should've just turned him into a giant worm instead that'd teach him and he wouldn't have been able to kill people again.

Yeah, Anya and Angel are both at the Bronze early on in Doppelgangland when vamp!Willow shows up (but don't interact at all: Angel leaves to get help before Anya introduces herself to that other Willow) and they're both back at the Bronze for the final big fight (but also, I think, do not interact then). I don't think they interact at all in Graduation Day either (Anya delivers her news about the Ascension during the day, so Angel wouldn't have been around even if he and Buffy hadn't broken up already, then she leaves town well before Angel shows up for the battle against the Mayor). I don't remember if they interact in Pangs and I refuse to rewatch that episode to check.

I don't know if Anya (or any other vengeance demon) ever talks about the curse, but it feels like they should? D'Hoffryn gives Willow the whole recruitment spiel to try to convince her to become a vengeance demon in Something Blue, and he never mentions that her very first bit of magic was to curse somebody? Innocence has Enyos give the whole spiel about how for him "vengeance is a living thing", and then we meet multiple vengeance demons -- characters who are literally vengeance as a living thing -- and none of this gets called back to?

I suspect a show other than Buffy -- one that cared more about internal worldbuilding logic and having a tightly crafted consistent mythos (a worse show, in other words) -- would have been very tempted to retcon Angel's original curse as somehow involving Anya or Halfrek or some other vengeance demon we later met. Honestly, maybe the should would have done this anyway if Angel hadn't gotten his own spin-off and had still been around in Sunnydale when the idea of multiple vengeance demons became established.

(Or maybe they'd still have avoided it, on the grounds it would make the different way the show treated Anya becoming human and Angel getting a soul a bit too glaringly obvious.)

That said, I think that on balance Anya would not approve of this particular curse. As you suggest, I think it's a bit too needlessly subtle for her. We know Anya likes big, flashy wishes with immediately obvious consequences. This is, I'd argue, one of the very few things about Anya's characterisation that's been consistent from the beginning: she talks about the world of The Wish being "exciting" and "wonderful"; she tells approving stories about women wishing their husbands' heads would explode (in Graduation Day) and we know she likes physical transformations like boils in unfortunate places or unlikely diseases or turning unfaithful men into trolls or, as you say, turning them into a big worm.

I think she'd find the whole Angelus thing kind of needlessly pretentious, especially when she found out about the happiness loophole. "Well, he's just making himself miserable, anybody can do that. Oh, it's poetic, is it? I see. So, are we supposed to be impressed? And ... look, the curse broke and he started killing again. Typical shoddy amateur work, no finesse at all. This is why if you want vengeance done right you should call up a professional. You know, if you'd just stuck with the classics and made his head explode when you had the chance your life would have been a lot simpler. Longer, too."

[bread-tab]

okay random 4am rant time, don't take it too seriously, but: people need to recognize there's a difference between "bad worldbuilding" and "worldbuilding styles you personally don't like."

bad worldbuilding is, for example: internally inconsistent, bigoted, or something else that messes up the plot or characterization of the story itself. sloppy. careless.

things that are *not* bad worldbuilding:

minimalism.

i've been thinking about this in the first place because i saw a post about the Murderbot Diaries a while back (don't know who made it, don't care; this ain't personal) saying the worldbuilding in those books is bad and lazy. to me, as an avid sci-fi reader and writer, that is clearly not true. but i understood why they thought this. the series uses extremely minimalist worldbuilding which intentionally withholds a lot of detail, in a way that is consistent with the (nonhuman, robot, depressed robot) first-person POV. this could also be a feature of the author's writing style in general—i haven't read her other works—but i wouldn't bet too much on it.

the signature of intentional minimalism is that there *are* details about the speculative setting—they're just doled out very thoughtfully and sparingly. the intent is to leave you a little hungry for more. it's to make you think very carefully about the details you do have. this is best suited to stories that already have elements of psychological and/or mystery plot types. the worldbuilding you do see should still be believable, internally consistent, and have interesting implications if you think about it a bit. but you are for sure going to have to think harder to get it.

if you're not in the mood, i will concede, a minimalist style definitely comes off as a bit dry. if you are in the mood, it's relaxing.

whimsy.

this is a big one for sci-fi fans in particular. see: the constant debate about whether any particular story is "hard" or "soft" sci-fi, and whether soft sci-fi is bad, etc etc. but worldbuilding doesn't have to be realistic to be good. you're allowed to have Jedi and humanoid aliens and time travel in your sci-fi. you're allowed to have historical anachronisms and astrology and po-ta-toes in your fantasy. whether or not they're silly isn't the deciding factor on how "good" these worldbuilding elements really are.

the key thing is tonal consistency. you've got a serious high-fantasy setting with its own strict, un-Earth-like theology and magic system, and you throw Santa Claus in there? yeah, that's not gonna land well. but C.S. Lewis can get away with that in Narnia just fine. why? because the Chronicles of Narnia are whimsical children's stories with a strong Christian/Western mythological influence already, and their central conceit is a crossover between the mundane world and the magical world. of course Santa can cross over too. it's whimsical, but it's not actually random. (and if you ventured into straight-up comedy, you could get away with random too. as long as it's funny.)

the unreliable narrator.

i don't have a good example for this off the top of my head (maybe Murderbot again? idk, i'm sleepy, fill in your own) but i'll tell you how to recognize when this is done well.

by definition, an unreliable narrator has some key misconceptions about their own world. so how do you tell what's going on as a reader? how do you know the writer isn't equally confused?

you connect the dots. solve the puzzle. in practice this is similar to reading a minimalist setting—but instead of just sparse clues, you also have a boatload of red herrings. you can catch some of these misleading details by comparing them to your real-world knowledge and saying "wait, this doesn't add up." other times, the false clues intentionally trick you by subverting those real world expectations.

the trick is in the consequences. regardless of what the narrator says, their actions should still have logical consequences. there should be things going on that the POV character doesn't know about. the character will be forced to learn and adapt their narrative because of these shifting circumstances. you can catch them in a lie. the inconsistencies themselves tell a story.

...

i'm gonna stop myself there because this post is long and i oughtta be sleeping. just. this is a distinction worth making. is it really bad worldbuilding, or is it simply not the genre you're craving today? learn the difference for your own sake. you'll have an easier time realizing if a story is something you'll find enjoyable to read, regardless of its actual quality.

[jungkoode]

hi! this might be totally random, and of course i don’t expect a reply—especially with the sheer amount of asks and notifs you must get on the daily (not to mention you’re out of town this weekend, i hope that’s going well btw!)—but i really needed to share this thought spiral with you. it hit me out of nowhere and honestly i haven’t been able to shake it off, and it feels important. so i hope you receive this simply, and read it when you can. no pressure, just—this one’s been sitting in my chest all day and it’s your fault (in the best possible way).

so. i was watching one of those short-form chinese dramas that tiktok loves to throw at me—something light for a saturday morning after walking the dogs. the premise was peak melodrama, which, fine, love that for them: emperor disguises himself as a homeless man to find a wife, a princess drops the satin ball (we’ve all seen this plot), and he catches it while in disguise. the court and her family are scandalized. but of course, our girl doesn’t care about wealth or appearances (because obviously—god forbid a female lead has material standards lmao). anyway. it was campy, it was dramatic, it was something.

but the more i watched, the more i started to unravel. not because the drama was particularly intense or bad, but because it made me realize something very specific about why your writing hits so hard. see, the show had all the beats of a classic story—conflict, betrayal, stakes. and yet… i couldn’t take it seriously. i was angry. i was bored. i was waiting for nuance that never came.

like—the protagonist’s parents were just cruel. unrelentingly, senselessly cruel. there was no arc, no remorse, no deeper motivation—just this weirdly flat, endless loop of them hating their daughter and loving the one who married rich. they threw handmade gifts in her face. the sister literally made her walk barefoot over burning stones. like?? is this tragedy or satire?? because it had none of the emotional grounding to justify the former, and none of the self-awareness to pull off the latter.

and that’s when it hit me. i’ve seen this before. i’ve felt this frustration before. but it’s only after reading your work that i could name it.

you write with coherence.

i mean that in the most jaw-droppingly sincere way. you write with intention. the drama in your stories never exists for its own sake—it comes from the characters themselves. their backstories. their fears. their desires. their specific, recognizable humanness. and it’s so seamless that you almost don’t notice until you do, and then you start seeing everything else fall apart by comparison.

because here’s the thing—it’s easy to create a hook. to throw conflict into a story and let it spiral. but it’s hard—insanely hard—to create tension that matters. to make a reader feel like every moment is inevitable and surprising. to have them see the betrayal coming, and still gasp when it happens, because it makes so much sense. and you do that. consistently.

your characters don’t just act—they behave. they respond in ways that feel psychologically sound, emotionally layered, real. and when something hurts, it hurts because it was earned. because it’s not just shock—it’s history. it’s logic. it’s everything unsaid coming to a head. and that’s the difference.

that’s why your writing is revolutionary, actually.

not because the stories are wildly experimental (though some of them are, like 25H—i’m still not over that), but because they’re honest. grounded. you’ve set a new standard for what “good storytelling” actually means, and i think a lot of people are slowly starting to realize that. it’s not about originality—it’s about authenticity. about the care you put into making sure everything lines up: motivation, arc, internal logic, plot. even when things break, they break with intention.

i’ve seen people in your asks saying you’ve ruined other fics for them—and i get it now. because once you’ve experienced storytelling where characters fall in love for a reason, where their wounds and fears and decisions are in character, where the plot grows organically from who they are… you can’t go back. you notice when something is lazy. you feel it when a choice is unearned. and it’s jarring.

so yeah. this ask is long and maybe dramatic but i needed to say it: you’re doing something quietly, devastatingly brilliant. and even if not everyone can articulate why your writing hits the way it does, i promise they’re feeling it. subconsciously, absolutely. because once you read something like this, you change. you start to expect more.

thank you for ruining bad writing for me. sincerely. i wouldn’t have it any other way.

What. The. Fuck. :(((((

I read this in one breath. I think I forgot how to blink. My chest physically hurt a little from the recognition in it. I don’t even know where to begin except just—thank you. Thank you so much. This is not just “feedback.” This is like… the anatomy of storytelling reflected back to me in full color. ☹️

What you said about coherence—about the emotional grounding and behavioral logic—I think that’s it. That’s exactly what I lose sleep over trying to get right. I genuinely believe stories don’t have to be shocking to be shattering. They don’t have to be cruel to be compelling. They just need to make sense. And “sense” doesn’t mean clean. It doesn’t mean likable. It means: can I trace this decision back to who this person is, what they’ve been through, what they’ve internalized, and what they’re afraid of?

And when you said they don’t just act, they behave—I don’t know if you realize how rare it is for someone to see that. Like truly see that. That language means so much to me. Because I think often people read behavior as just noise or mistake or messiness, when really, it’s patterned. Even when it’s self-sabotaging. Especially when it is. And you named it. You named the pattern. That’s so rare.

You said it wasn’t dramatic, but this ask is honestly devastating to me in the softest, most humbling way. It means more than you know that you noticed. That something I built with a trembling hand and a hundred second-guesses managed to sharpen your sense of what matters in a story. That you now expect more. That you want reason. That it jarrs you when it isn’t there. That… woah, it means the world to me. Really.

This… message is something I’ll carry with me. For real. It’s not just kind or generous—it’s sharp. It’s incisive. You didn’t just compliment the fic. You named the standard. And I feel honored (and a little terrified??) to be the person you held that standard to.

Also—your read of that drama?? How it collapses under its own weight because it lacks the emotional logic to stand up straight—is exactly the thing that makes me want to write at all. That ache, that hunger for sense, for truth, even in the most heightened, fantastical settings. Especially there. Because when a story asks you to suspend disbelief, I think it owes you honesty in return. And when it doesn’t—when pain is used cheaply or people behave like plot puppets instead of humans—it’s not just frustrating, it’s alienating. It makes you feel like your own depth of feeling is too much. Like you’re wrong for wanting more.

So to hear you say this—to feel like someone else sees the intention, the spine under the story, the why behind every moment—god. It matters so much to me. Not just as a writer but as a person trying very hard to make sense of her own world, and finding shape and safety in fiction first.

And the fact that this all began with a Tiktok drama and a satin ball and a barefoot girl on hot pebbles. That’s poetry. That’s meta. That’s you, already thinking like a writer.

Thank you. For real. Thank you. I’m saving this in ten places and reading it when I doubt myself. Because this isn’t just kind. It’s true. And I believe in truth over praise every time.

Come closer next time. I’ll make you tea and cry with you in the corner.

And then maybe talk shit about the emperor’s wig. (Maybe he should’ve been bald.)

[miraculouslbcnreactions]

If you had to pinpoint the main issue of MLB, the root of all evil if you may (aside from Astruc), what would it be?

If we're going super high level, it would be narrative consistency (I believe this is a synonym for "narrative coherence" or, at least, I've always used them pretty interchangeably and googling one finds you stuff on the other). I wanted to get an official definition of this term and wikipedia gave me this from a larger article on the theory of narrative paradigm:

Narrative coherence is the degree to which a story makes sense. Coherent stories are internally consistent, with sufficient detail, strong characters, and free of significant surprises. The ability to assess coherence is learned and improves with experience. Individuals assess a story's adherence by comparing it with similar stories. The ultimate test of narrative sense is whether the characters act reliably. If figures show continuity throughout their thoughts, motives, and actions, acceptance increases. However, characters behaving uncharacteristically destroy acceptance.

I also found a pretty good overview of the topic on the blog of a random editor. You can follow that link to read the whole thing, but I wanted to highlight this section on characters as I thought it was particularly relevant to the stuff I talk about on this blog:

Your characters will have their own personalities and behaviours that the reader will become familiar with as the story develops, so if you deviate from these patterns, the reader will notice. That’s why it’s important to maintain character consistency – that they would act in a way that is right and in keeping with their personality, rather than making them act out of character to make elements of the story fit.

As you can hopefully see from the above sources, the stuff I've talk about on here, and just generally thinking about the show, most of the issues with Miraculous have to do with the show being narratively incoherent. Characters do whatever the writers want them to do. Plot lines get dropped and picked back up then dropped (Lila) with no rhyme or reason. Big, meaningful setups lead to nothing (Gabriel learning all the temp heroes identities). Twists come out of nowhere (Kagami being a senti). They all indicate that something is majorly wrong here.

I am not involved in the production of this show, so I cannot tell you where all of these issues come from. It may be that the writing staff doesn't know what they're doing or it could be that unknown forces like marketing are driving the writers to do things that they'd rather not or it could be a mix of the two. For example, I'm pretty sure the magical charms we get in season four were only added to sell stuff like this and this, which is why I try to approach this show without pointing fingers at anyone too specific unless there's some hard evidence to back up what I'm saying. All I know is that this show has a massive writing problem and I'll end with a little advice on how I avoid this issue. It may or may not work for you. It all depends on your writing style.

When you sit down to write a story, it's very normal to not have a clear path for how to get from story point A to story point B. You don't need to find that path before you start writing. You just need to keep in mind that B is your goal and start figuring out how to logically get there.

I often describe this process as taking a journey with a known destination, but no planned route. However, just like with a road trip, the further you go, the more limited your options become because of the choices you made. If you skipped stopping at an interesting city or landmark, you can't change that fact and we're not turning the car around just so you can get a picture next to the big ball of string. You had your chance and you missed it. Accept that and move on.

Similarly, as you write your story, you have to own the choices you've already made on your journey. If you choose to let a character in on a massive secret (Alya learning Ladybug's identity), then you have to fully own how that choice would impact all elements of the story (Alya's opinion of Lila) not just the short sighted elements you wanted it to impact (note how Lila's not a thing in season four? Almost like they didn't plan out how to handle her and Alya at the same time?) Own the route you committed to and find a way to tell the next part of the story in a way that feels like it's on the same route and you'll be fine.

Does that mean occasionally having to give up on cool ideas that you really liked? Yep, but that's the nature of story telling. It's part of the reason why people are told to "kill their darlings." That's just a thing you have to learn to do if you want to be a good writer.

[bluedalahorse]

Here's a random YR ask for you:

As a writer, what would you say are some of Sara, August and Felice's core characteristics/essential building blocks? (Feel free to do Wilhelm and Simon's as well if you'd like!) From a canon perspective, but also from the perspective of a fic writer?

What a wonderful ask! Thank you for sending it. This made me think a lot about what I do to develop characters in a story more generally. Then I had to put those techniques into distinct categories. So what I’m going to do is explain the categories first, then move on to how I think about these categories for each character.

I just did Felice, Sara, and August, but I could do additional characters upon request if other people wanted. My askbox is still open!

On to answering the ask. Here’s some things I try to keep in mind more generally when writing any character in a fic…

Desire lines: a story is driven by what a character wants. This want often comes into conflict with what a character fears, or what they believe to be true about themself that isn’t quite true. What a character wants will determine what they do over the course of the story and the different scenes that will transpire as they try to get it. One of the trickiest things about desire lines is that you have to think about them on both the abstract and the concrete level, which determines how those desires show up internally and externally.

Bodily and sensory experiences: every character has a different body and a different experience in that body. Part of these experiences are going to be external—how other people respond to them because of their race, gender expression, perceived ability, etc. These experiences will also be internal. An important part of making a story gripping is sitting close to your viewpoint character’s perspective, and you can bring a reader closer to a character by bringing them into that character’s body. It’s also a good way to reinforce how a character is feeling their emotions.

Contradictions, rationalizations, and sources of cognitive dissonance: This is a fun one! I think sometimes we fall into the trap of trying to make characters too logical, because we hear that characters should be consistent. The reality is though that people tend to run on their own internal logic, and that sometimes internal logic is inconsistent or hypocritical or complicated, and we spend a lot of life trying to process all that. Leaning into the weirdest parts of a character’s internal logic, instead of trying resolve everything or smooth it over right away, is part of how you make a character unique. You can also deepen your understanding of a character’s internal conflict by doing this.

Mentor texts: My writing life changed dramatically when my writing teachers encouraged me to start looking at stories I liked and studying their craft techniques so I can experiment with using them in my own work. In fanfiction, this will mean studying the source text you’re making fanfiction about, but I don’t think you *only* have to study the source text. Like if a book you read reminds you of a particular character in YR and you love that book, you can study that book’s pacing or voice or POV or whatever to get an idea of how you’d tell their story.

On to each of the three characters…

Felice

Desire lines: Canon tends to be somewhat vague about Felice’s desire lines, but if I had to pick, I’d say her desires line up with living an authentic life that is true to herself, and secondarily, achieving justice through discovery of the truth. Felice concretely goes after these desires by pursuing a friendship with Sara, trying to figure out who releases the video, changing how she wears her hair, telling the school inspectors what really happens at Hillerska, etc. I don’t think she has to stick with these desires in a fanfic, but they can inform a new desire I might assign her. For instance, if I was writing a fic where Felice wants to fall in love and get into a long-term romantic relationship, I think I’d build upon her canon journey by having her grapple with who she becomes in dating situations, and what kind of relationship feels authentic to her. Her interest in justice and the truth might also lend itself to a storyline where she learns to advocate for herself in a partnership.

Bodily and sensory experiences: Felice knows she is going to stand out in most situations and be noticed for things that others aren’t. Whenever we’ve seen her in canon, she’s one of the few brown faces in a room full of white ones. (Side thought: I’d love to read a fic where Felice is in a predominantly Black environment, so we can see how her thought patterns would shift.) She’s also rich, and has been raised by her mother to pay attention to physical appearance and brands of clothing and so on. As such, Felice is probably going to be constantly monitoring her body language and how she occupies space. She’s going to be thinking about how her clothes fit and her makeup and the messages they send. Because of the comments her mother makes about her weight, she’ll probably be self-conscious about her figure. We can also consider how Felice takes in information through her senses. Because she’s interested in cooking, she’ll probably be fairly attuned to the taste, smell, and texture of food, and pick up subtleties that others might not.

Contradictions, rationalizations, and sources of cognitive dissonance: In canon we see Felice breaking away from the world of Hillerska and its values, and it’s actually a process. Her parents don’t show up much in the show, but one headcanon I have is that they aren’t just doing the things they do to make Felice’s life miserable. I think on some level they believe they’re protecting her and providing her with the best possible life. Felice’s mother thinks Felice can marry Wilhelm not only because she wants her family to be related to royalty, but because she thinks it’s what’s going to make Felice happy and powerful. Similarly, Felice’s girl squad looks up to her and thinks she’s wonderful, and they have fun together, but they also microaggress her. I think a lot of cognitive dissonance Felice will have to push through surrounds these situations. I think she might tell herself “it could be worse” a lot. Like, sure her mom’s being a nightmare, but it could be worse, right? Felice’s friends sometimes say weird stuff about race, but it’d be worse in public school or if she lived elsewhere, right? I think Felice might have to push past this supposed safety of being a rich popular girl at Hillerska, to really articulate what she needs in life.

Mentor texts: My two favorite books that pair with my understanding of Felice are When You Were Everything by Ashley Woodfolk and The Black Kids by Christina Hammonds Reed. Both are focused on Black teen girl protagonists coming to understand their friendships, their families, and their relationship to power structures in the world.

Bonus Felice note: Felice can be a little messy sometimes! I think there’s this pressure to portray her as thoroughly wonderful, but we also know her closet’s a mess and she lies to get out of gym class and had a shoplifting phase. Next time I write her, I’m challenging myself to lean into a moment where she might be selfish or impatient or dishonest or a bad friend, because she can be even more wonderful when we can embrace her flawed moments too.

Sara and August go below the cut, because this is already very long.

Sara

Desire lines: In canon, Sara wants to be seen as independent and capable of handling things without Simon. She also wants to feel connected to other people, having grown up quite lonely and bullied by other children. Sara pursues these desires concretely by pursuing a friendship with Felice and a romance with August, trying to live on campus at Hillerska, etc. Again, we see her achieve these desires in canon, but we can evolve them and use them as a springboard for new stories. Like, we’ve seen what independence looks like at Sara’s current age, but what does it look like in university? Or at a job? What would it mean for Sara to seek out not just friendship but a community of fellow neurodivergent people? It’d be fascinating to take her newfound confidence and put it to the test in new situations.

Bodily and sensory experiences: Sara is small, and we see the way her smallness interacts with her being an observer or witness. Some people might perceive her as younger than she is because of her height. She has to look up at almost all of her other classmates and the people around her. Any romantic interaction between Sara and August is going to start as a negotiation between his tallness and her smallness—you can say a lot in a scene based on whether she stands on tip toes to reach him, or he bends down or picks her up to kiss her. Sara’s autism and ADHD are also going to play a role in how she experiences her body. She’ll need to take meds in the morning, and as her meds wear off over the course of the day, she might feel different stimuli pulling her attention and/or need to move her body more. Her meds might work differently when she’s on her period. She may also struggle with interoception, and not register signals from her body right away. Sensory sensitivities might come up for Sara, especially when she’s distressed. Smell and sound might get to her especially, since we see her using headphones to concentrate in school, and since her dad mentions fragrance-free laundry detergent. Because she’s a high masking autistic, she may have an internal monologue going in high stakes social situations—checking to see if she made the right amount of eye contact, wondering if her tone of voice was right for a situation, wondering why she can never smile the right amount for other people. Based on season 3, shame changes the way Sara carries her body. She’ll be feeling that internally, too.

Contradictions, rationalizations, and sources of cognitive dissonance: Sara’s living so many of them! Everyone else calls her authentic and praises her for being uniquely herself, but like any other teenager, she’s still figuring out who she is. She loves people who let her down and wonders why the love persists anyway. One of the reasons I enjoy Sara’s overall arc so much is she has to come to terms with the way life and one’s emotions are messy, and then she takes action without sweeping the emotions under the rug completely or disavowing them. To me, I think leaning into that beautiful mess instead of trying to make Sara’s emotions neat and tidy and fandom-approved is an important part of doing her justice. I’d say more, but I worry about triggering another round of Sara Discourse, and the sad thing is that there are still people out there who will read anything she does in bad faith. Sigh.

Mentor texts: When I write Sara, I find myself turning to 19th and early 20th century classics. Jane Eyre, the March sisters, and LM Montgomery’s protagonists go well with Sara’s balance of pragmatism and romanticism, as well as her outsider status. I also find Sara in Joy McCullough’s Enter the Body, a verse novel where Shakespeare’s tragic heroines retell their stories, and in the Into the Woods musical soundtrack. All of these mentor texts help me get at what’s going on with Sara internally.

Bonus Sara note: After receiving my AuDHD diagnosis, I created a guide of resources that fanfiction writers can use for approaching Sara. I’m linking it again in case anyone needs it!

August

Desire lines: Okay this is wild but… what if I told you August’s more abstract desire is a fulfilled sense of belonging and the opportunity to create a sense of belonging for others? August is notoriously bad at understanding his own desires, and even worse at figuring out how to go after them concretely and in ways that don’t bother or harm people, and at the end of the series he is perhaps just realizing he may have miscalculated when he’s in line to be crown prince. But I think one of the things I see as being core to his character is that he’s lonely and traumatized, and he’ll do anything to feel like he belongs with people and is safe somewhere, and part of that shows up in also trying to be a leader within the Hillerska community. Because if you’re running all the traditions, no one’s going to question if you belong, right? Hence his working so hard to be prefect and captain of the rowing team and de facto leader of the Society and planner of all the parties. He knows those things matter to him and to others. At the beginning of the series, August’s idea of how to create a sense of belonging for himself is deeply flawed. It rests more on the exclusion of many so that an elite few can feel included. Over the course of the series, we see him reevaluate that idea, and I would argue that his understanding of belonging is now changing. I think I’ve gone on a tangent here, so let me try to bring this to some sort of satisfying conclusion. I think any portrayal of August that tries to simplify him down to wanting power or status or the ability to make Wilhelm and Simon’s lives miserable… just isn’t going to hit as hard as an August with a deeply buried earnest need for belonging and love and safety at his core. Even when I wrote him as more of a villain with a deeply tragic ending, this was true.

Bodily and sensory experiences: August’s relationship to his body is so fraught! He’s tall and imposing and looks quite grown up, but this is a fairly recent development, and it wasn’t long ago that he likely looked like a sweet little kid and then an awkward gangly boy in his early to mid-teens. This is all happening very fast, and I think there’s a stark contrast between August’s internal little boyishness (and all the fear and earnestness that goes with that) and his apparent adult maturity. August is probably always physically coming up against stuff that reminds him how fast his life changed—it’s not just that his father died, it’s that he can now wear his father’s old clothes, and his mother is now smaller than he is and hugs from her probably feel different. Moreover, August seems to need to move his body to self-regulate. If you’re a writing a fic from his perspective, think about where he’ll feel his restlessness, and whether he’ll be tapping a pen or pulling his hair or trying to for a run to process it all. I think it’s worth considering all this history of August’s body alongside more obvious things like August’s disordered eating and exercising, and whatever he feels after standing naked in front of the third years. As someone carrying a lot of complex trauma, he’s probably hypervigilant, with sensory sensitivities to go with that.

Contradictions, rationalizations, and sources of cognitive dissonance: We could be here all day, couldn’t we? Like Felice, August is supposed to be benefitting from the system he’s in, but he’s not. He tends to assume he’s failing the system instead of the system failing him, and doubles down on trying to meet this elite idea that will only make him miserable. At the same time, August has an impulsive streak, so he sometimes acts first and rationalizes his more impulsive decisions after the fact. He does an initial round of harm when he acts impulsively, but then doles out additional harm through what he does when he’s rationalizing. In addition, August is trapped in a well of traumatic grief for both his father and Erik, both of whom gave him some sense of identity and belonging, but who also harmed him in their own particular ways. He’s sitting in the emotional dissonance of that every minute of the series. While August and Wilhelm have begun to grieve Erik together, August still doesn’t have anyone he can discuss his father with yet.

Mentor texts: Tana French is my go-to for all things August. She’s great with unpleasant but compelling characters, writing about social class, and unearthing buried traumas. Her settings often act as extensions of the characters and themes, and I feel like August-centered fics can develop and lean on emotionally resonant settings (Årnäs, Hillerska, the palace) as an extension of his internal landscape. I also want to mention the soundtrack to Fun Home as another inspiration, because of the way it handles grief and dysfunctional families.

Bonus August note: As fun as it is to write August doing the wrong thing for the wrong reasons, he can’t be that way all the time. I also write him doing the wrong thing for the right reasons, the right thing for the wrong reasons, and even the right thing for the right reasons. I also do not write him as a cold master manipulator or as someone with a high opinion of himself—internally August loathes himself to the point of self-destructive behaviors. Any story that acknowledges these things really captures the flavor of August, in my opinion.

[fireflysummers]

Final Thoughts on GO S2

I'm probably gonna pull back on discussing S2, at least publicly, after this. I did actually like a lot of the season, but it's triggering some of my religious trauma and also the fandom is already stressing me out. So here, let's have some final thoughts.

First and foremost: I am not a Gaiman simp. I've read a decent amount of his work: comics, short stories, essays, and novels. Aside from Good Omens, I've liked Coraline and The Graveyard Book the best by far, whereas American Gods just. Did Not Connect with me, even though it's should have, given the stuff I tend to enjoy.

However. Regardless of whether I like a given work (or even like how he adapted it, a la parts of The Sandman TV series), he is a veteran writer who has proven that he does, actually, know how to write a story with consistent characters.

Beyond that, I do actually believe that he's trying to do right by Pratchett, and loves and respects the story and characters they created together. He's generally shown up as an ally to a variety of social causes, and directly and respectfully responds to fans on Tumblr. While no saint, I feel that there is cause to give the benefit of the doubt that things will resolve satisfyingly in S3, and that there is Intention about some of the things in S2.

This, of course, does not absolve it of being "bad," but even here I think we need to articulate better the different types of "bad" that people are reacting to. There seems to roughly be three camps here: 1) People who thought it was "bad" because of how it ended, with the breakup and a lot of unresolved plot threads; 2) People who thought it was "bad" because it struggled on a technical level with its set, lighting, directorial choices, editing, etc; 3) People who thought it was "bad" because they felt the characterization was significantly off and that the internal logic of the series had been violated.

With regards to Point One, the only solution is to Wait and See. Judgement should be reserved until the story is properly finished--easier said than done, especially considering the current media landscape, and the number of series or franchises that fail to live up to their promises.

Point Two isn't something I understand well enough to contribute meaningfully, except that I suspect the pandemic affected this aspect the most and am willing to give it a bit more mercy. That aside, I for the most part I don't find it bad so much as not as good as S1. Except for the parts with epilepsy warnings, surely there could've been a better way to do that.

Point Three... that's the stumbling block for me, and I find it interesting that most of the folks who struggle with this point in particular are long time fans of the book.

I trust that instinct.

There are two different directions to go from here. The first is the assumption that these problems are a result of ego, carelessness, or lack of skill from the showrunners/writers/director. It's cynical but not unjustified. The second is the belief that the breaks in lore or characterization were intentional, building towards a much grander conspiracy. Of course, even in this case I don't think it forgives the lack of signposting that would indicate that this is a choice rather than an accident. It just makes it feel clumsy and poorly constructed, a major risk on a show that hasn't had its third season confirmed.*

However, regardless, it still feels salvageable. I've enjoyed reading a lot of meta on all this, and I've pulled some things from others (particularly That Theory by @ariaste), but I don't really want to put forth a single, defined theory myself. Instead, here's some questions I've got, why those questions are important (to me, at least). Actual theorizing comes after, and anybody who snidely mentions Sherlock in the comments or tags is going to get auto-blocked. Like seriously, I'm aware that some stuff is a stretch, but it's fun??? To theorize????? And I'm here for me and my peace of mind rather than trying to argue a point.

*I have some suspicions here, particularly with Gaiman stating that the decision from Amazon would come much faster than The Sandman's second season (which was four months). I don't know enough though to say if that's actually significant.

Questions

Who the fuck is telling this story?

This is the most important piece, in my opinion. There's this assumption when reading books (or research papers, newspapers, etc...) that the narrator who is writing the words is a non-presence, Neutral and objective. That's not the case, and an important part of literature critique is figuring out who the narrator is, and what their goals are. Oftentimes, the narrator and the author are the same person, but with Pratchett's work, particularly on Good Omens and Discworld, the Narrator was its own unique character.

This is why people struggle adapting Discworld to live action--that medium requires a Reason for having a Narrator, and especially in the age of method acting that's often considered immersion-breaking. Good Omens worked so well because they not only kept the Narrator, but they made Her God.

This added some really interesting new dimensions, such as the scene where Crowley speaks to God about his fall and the destruction of humanity. He doesn't receive an answer, but we're watching from God's perspective, so we as the audience know that She's listening.

Another advantage of making God the Narrator is that it justifies all the goofy little asides we get into the lives of minor characters (i.e. Leslie the Mailman), without losing focus. It helps the world feel like it’s full of people, rather than characters and plot contrivances, and the theme that individual people and their choices are important. The Narrator is such a central character of Good Omens that without it, the story struggles to stay focused.

It also highlights a key difference in the writing styles of the two authors. Pratchett’s work tends to introduce four or five totally unique plot threads that feel completely disjointed until the last act (if not even later), when it turns into a Chekhov’s Firing Squad. Plot twists around secret identities and backstabbing and schemes are relatively rare, as the omniscient Narrator doesn’t lie about the intentions of people or their actions.

Gaiman’s writing is typically not like that, to my knowledge. He buries characters in misdirection and hints, and you never know the true identity or motives until all the chips are down. It’s a perfectly valid way to approach storytelling, but it makes it jarring to see it in S2. The lack of a Narrator is a huge reason why S2 doesn’t feel like Good Omens to some folks.

My gut feeling is that the decision to shift from the original Narrator was highly intentional. It helps to obscure the thoughts and intentions of people, and it also muddles the insights that we’re supposed to take away. (I would have loved hearing God monologue about what’s going on in Jim’s head. I think it’d do a lot to make him seem less.... obnoxiously stupid.)

More than that, it brings up a reasonable potential plot point of: Where did God go? Why isn’t She present in the story? Even in her early appearance in the Job flashback, she doesn’t sound like the narrator for last season. After the first part of her speech (which Gabriel later quotes), her tone turns casual and condescending, which might line up with her being a bit of an asshole, it doesn’t line up with the whole “dealer of a mysterious card game who is always smiling”).

Also, I don’t think it’s safe to assume that nobody is telling the story either. Just because they’re not making their presence known doesn’t mean they aren’t there, and in a story like Good Omens, that’s concerning.

Wait, where's Satan?

Another person I saw while scrolling the tags pointed out that Satan is nowhere to be seen this season. He's really only mentioned in reference to a bet God made in Job, but then Crowley is the one on the ground causing mischief. There's no Hail Satan among demons (like Hastur and Ligur did at the start of S1).

That's might be because the writers didn't want us to think it was important (a la Hastur), but that feels off. Given that Satan speaks directly through the radio to Crowley in S1, complimenting him on his work, it's safe to say that he was at least aware of and involved in the goings-on in Hell. The fact that he wasn't even an worry for Beelzebub in abandoning their post? Feels weird.

(Also if you know where that post is, I'll happy credit + link)

What is Maggie?

Look, I love cute lesbians in love as much as the next queer, but I don't like Maggie. I don’t think she’s a person. Contextually, she’s a plot device, but I agree with That Essay that she might be an actual Plot Device.

Her characterization is simple and relatively shallow—a bit of an airhead, ray of sunshine that’s supposed to remind you of Aziraphale. When she describes her past to Nina, it’s almost robotic (also, her story implies it was Mr. Fell who first rented to her ancestor, not Mr. Fell’s great-grandfather like Nina implied). Her emotions are over-dramatic and seem to be turned on and off at random (scenes with her crying to Aziraphale about her woes had my “manipulator” senses going off for some reason).

When asked about a song, she not only IDs the song, its singer, and its year, but how and on what it was distributed. (Honestly thought this would’ve been something interesting, because she’s been pretty ditzy so far, it’d be interesting if she had like... an insane memory for music history.) And then she’s the one that sets Aziraphale on his little investigation by giving him the transformed records, while also planting the seed about her love troubles with Nina. Later, her advice to Crowley is... not awful, but feels insincere and a bit too forward, given her own self-proclaimed lack of relationship experience.

I don’t know what she is (a demon, hastur with amnesia in disguise, a literal plot device inserted by the current storyteller, etc...), but there’s something not right with her.

(Also the joke of “who listens to records anymore, it’s so old fashioned” just doesn’t land, lots of people buy records, and I’m saying this as somebody who has worked at a record store before.)

What's going on with Aziraphale?

There’s something Off about Aziraphale, and it’s not his choices at the end of the season. That makes total sense if you read him as somebody with severe religious trauma getting dragged back into the abusive system because other people need him and he’s been promised the ability to change things.

But I do think something is happening to his memory. Nearly all the flashbacks are from Aziraphale’s point of view and retelling, which means that they’re less reliable than God’s version of events in the previous season. Many of them don’t make logistical sense (post-church scene in 1941), depict Crowley as meaner or more sinister than we know he is, or frame events... weirdly. The scene with him trying food for the first time feels Really Bad, especially when the series has previously established that he’s a) prim and proper and b) his interest in food is one of the beautiful things that connect him to humanity, not some kind of gluttonous sin. Also he turns down alcohol.

Their meet-cute at the  start of the universe also doesn’t line up with their reactions to each other in Eden, or the fact that knowing each other Before has never come up or been hinted at anywhere ever. I don’t know what’s causing this to happen, only that Aziraphale repeatedly looks pensive when coming out of flashbacks, and Crowley is never there afterwards to corroborate said memories.

His actions also seem pretty inconsistent with what we know of him—i.e. I refuse to believe he would ever mistreat his books, even if they’re just old encyclopedias. Also, he feels a bit too...forceful in trying to get Nina and Maggie to fall in love? I mean, he didn’t exert that much direct influence on even Warlock, when he was actively hoping that the boy would turn out angelic rather than neutral.

I don’t think this removes his agency in that last decision, so much as explains how he was in such a vulnerable place at all. He still needs to apologize and fix things, because he messed up, and even if he hadn’t he still seriously hurt Crowley.

What's going on with Crowley?

There’s something Off about Crowley. The most obvious thing, of course, is his memories. At multiple points in the present day, characters state that they remember him or have met him before, only to be met with confusion. This is especially concerning given that he has a nigh photographic memory for faces (something mentioned in the book when he immediately IDs Mary Loquacious, 11 years after a 30 second conversation).

Overall, he seems to be better known by other supernatural entities this season, in ways that often tie him back to his angelic identity (i.e. saying they fought together in the war, Aziraphale stating he knew the angel he used to be, etc...). This doesn’t feel right, because S1 we see that Hell is largely apathetic towards his schemes, and definitely does not defer to him at any point in any capacity.

Then there’s the issue of his power level. It’s always been speculated that Crowley was a powerful angel prior to falling, when he mentions in S1 his involvement with star making, his seemingly unique ability to freeze time, and creating a pocket universe for Adam before the confrontation with Satan. He also has a tendency of breathing life into inanimate objects, like his plants or car. He also has the regular demonic skillset: miracles that can adjust physical appearance; the ability to change inanimate objects (like paintball guns into real guns); the ability to manifest clothing and similar items; and summon hellfire to his fingertips. This, plus the way he monologues to God with a degree of familiarity rather than reverence seems to indicate that he was Somebody Powerful and Important Before.

But in S2, his skills are significantly expanded upon. The miracle he and Aziraphale summon sets off alarms in heaven and hell, and it’s powerful enough to mask Gabriel from the Archangels. He summons a miniature sun to rain fire on Job, which is way bigger and flashier than anything we’ve seen him summon in S1. (If he needs fire, he alters the course of a dropping bomb, without creating one himself.)

Yet he’s able to cloak his presence so well he goes wholly unnoticed in heaven, or in front of heavenly agents on earth (i.e. the Job flashback). Muriel can’t clock him as a demon, or even as another supernatural being, despite their auras usually being pretty significant, such Aziraphale immediately sensing the archangels when they arrive.  He’s able to interfere with files that Muriel claimed required clearance (although I feel like that might just be a snark about Obeying Without Thinking? I would really need a Narrator to know.)

I might be misremembering, but I don’t think we’ve seen angels or demons transmogrify living beings before either. In the book, Crowley brings Aziraphale’s dove back to life after the failed magic show, and occasionally sinks ducks, but he doesn’t alter them? Not even Adam demonstrates that skill in S1. But he has no trouble turning Job’s children into lizards, however temporarily. Boy that would’ve been convenient during the flood. Or when the guard stopped then from getting to the air strip.

I might be misremembering, but I don’t think we’ve seen angels or demons transmogrify living beings before either. In the book, Crowley brings Aziraphale’s dove back to life after the failed magic show, and occasionally sinks ducks, but he doesn’t alter them? Not even Adam demonstrates that skill in S1. But he has no trouble turning Job’s children into lizards, however temporarily. Boy that would’ve been convenient during the flood. Or when the guard stopped then from getting to the air strip.

I don’t have any real issues with his characterization in the present day parts of S2, but there’s something weird happening with Crowley.

Where's all the people?

I really like a lot of the new characters, but how were there only like, 2.5 new humans named in the present day? Flashbacks don’t count bc the humans are all dead and can’t affect the story.

As much as I like Nina, she and Maggie don’t drive the story beyond being an occasional and awkwardly inserted plot contrivance? Both are actively robbed of their agency at several points, forced into situations that they could not have avoided or escaped. I’m not really sure what growth they’re expected to experience other than deciding not to date each other after everything. I literally can’t tell you anything about Nina other than that she remembers her regular’s orders, runs a coffee shop, and has a textbook abusive partner we never see. The only meaningful interactions they have are between those two, or in conversation with Aziraphale and Crowley.

Compare that to S1, where Anathema gets hit by Aziraphale and Crowley, but her primary relationships are with Newt, Adam, and Agnes Nutter (I think that counts as a relationship). We know that she’s got a wealthy family back in Puerto Rico, and that she was literally raised to save the world, and that she isn’t happy under all that pressure. Newt on the other hand is connected to not just Anathema, but Shadwell and Madame Tracy. He never even directly interacts with Aziraphale and Crowley. We know about his hobbies, his struggle to hold down a job, and his almost supernatural ability to destroy any electronics he touches. I don’t necessarily like how their relationship came together, but they were both very, very well fleshed out characters with unique backstories and goals. They weren’t just... waiting around to give Aziraphale and Crowley a new questline.

And while there’s no requirement to include a large cast of human characters that are exerting influence over the story, the lack of it is another aspect that makes this season feel not like Good Omens.

Also, it's just. Really weird to me that the events of S1 aren't really referenced at all? Like, Adam isn't mentioned, nor is Warlock. I don't expect them to keep track of the humans they met on the airfield for 20 minutes, but none of it is ever specifically referenced as far as I can tell, beyond Crowley threatening Gabriel. Like, I get that it's been a few years, but the pair caused a big enough disturbance that you'd expect some kind of ripples in their supernatural communities.

Promised by the Narrative (Obvious Chekhov's guns that I will be legitimately upset over if they do not go off)

A sincere apology from Aziraphale to Crowley that doesn't come with the expectation that Crowley will come back to him, but because he deserves an apology, even if the choices Aziraphale made were done with good intentions. Aziraphale does not expect forgiveness, and is shocked when Crowley grants it without hesitation.

A clear declaration of love from Aziraphale, which can't be rationalized away by either of them.

An "I'm Sorry" dance between Aziraphale and Crowley, but with greater sincerity and gravity. The most important piece is that they end up dancing together, which signifies a mutual apology and dedication to come together.

Since kissing is on the table, I expect an actual joyful, mutual kiss between these two assholes.

A shared cottage in South Downs.

Predictions/Theories (just some fun thoughts I've had)

When Adam declared that Satan was not his father, he didn't make himself not the antichrist, but accidentally crowned his human dad the King of Hell. Nobody knows this, because Adam doesn't have a good measure for "normal" supernatural situations, and Mr. Young because he's so "normal" that he explains away all the magical bullshit that's started going down.

When Adam declared that Satan was not his father, he erased Satan altogether. However, this left a vacuum in both power and reality. The defection of both Gabriel and Beelzebub only widens that crack. In an attempt to Fix things, reality is warping the story. Crowley has become leagues more powerful between S1 and S2, as the narrative is trying to force him into the role of his previous boss. Aziraphale is unknowingly being pulled into a similar version on the Other Side, perhaps to replace Gabriel or perhaps to replace God herself, who has been fairly absent in all this. The alterations to their memories or past have come about to keep the narrative running smoothly.

When the Metatron asks Nina whether anybody has ever asked for death, he was actually referring to Death, the sole remaining rider of the apocalypse.

If Maggie is indeed a Plot Device, it would be a fascinating exploration of Free Will to see her become aware of this (cue existential crisis), and then fall in love with Nina on her own terms, rather than because she was written that way.

Hastur will be back. Somehow.

The reason why S2 focuses so much on the supernatural characters is because S3 will be about how the events in S1 have changed the political landscape of heaven and hell. Angels are questioning their roles, demons are yearning for something more. It's scaring upper administration, and then the two most reliable folks in employment run away to alpha centauri. Recruiting Aziraphale and getting him back in line prevents him from becoming a martyr, control the range of his influence. The series reasserts its theme of choice and agency by highlighting that Aziraphale and Crowley aren't that special, they've just had the chance to live and grow, and that the others have free will too, if they want it.

The reason why they wanted to separate Aziraphale and Crowley, is not to get Aziraphale on his own, but to get Crowley on his own. He literally stopped time and made a pocket universe in front of Satan last season. He's powerful and dangerous and somebody wants to see that reigned in.

Wishlist (stuff I desperately want to see)

Crowley getting an audience with God and an opportunity to ask his questions, only to refuse to do so because he's found his own Answers and he no longer needs hers

Aziraphale and Crowley growing more into their book incarnations. Aziraphale becomes confident in his sense of morality, which he developed the hard way through millennia on earth besides humanity. He slowly learns what it means to be loved, unconditionally, but also is better at asserting and maintaining his boundaries. Crowley, still anxious and unwinding, works through his fear of abandonment, providing him opportunities to be kind and gentle and nurturing--all traits that he's aggressively hid since being a demon.

Hand holding. I know that Gaiman was referring to Ineffable Bureaucracy, but I still feel like we'd benefit from meaningful hand holding, especially since that got cut from the adaptation of the book.

Shifted focus away from the supernatural shenanigans, and back onto the humans that actually drive the story.

Cameos from S1 characters (if not a more substantial appearance).

The Four Other Riders of the Apocalypse.

Cursed Thoughts (why I shouldn't be allowed a social platform)

Ineffable Bureaucracy turns up in season 3 because Beelzebub got Gabriel pregnant somehow.