#j-s-r

[just-some-ronin]

This is perfect.

[anderwater]

LIL MURDA, seven pounds of pressure ♪

[rottin6]

art by artemisdragcn on instagram.

[littleoceanbabe]

i have been attacked. humiliated. demoralized. ASK THE MAN ABOUT THE DINOSAURS, PODCAST BOY 🫵

[padfootastic]

if you’re writing james & sirius in a way that atleast one person doesn’t ask ‘are those two dating’ then sorry but that’s actually two random OCs with familiar names

[axollungz]

luv thse fuunyy guys

[floridianfireflyfaith]

📖

[piano-hoarder]

One of my favorite things about JRR Tolkien and CS Lewis is they both look exactly how I imagined they would.

[impishtubist]

I think it's really telling that people see two people as devoted to each other as Sirius and James are and immediately call their relationship unhinged, deranged, and toxic lmao.

[artist-issues]

I know you have kind of commented on this topic in one of your posts, but what do you think of the fact that Tolkien hated Disney and thought of Walt as a "con-artist" (if I remember correctly) because of how much would be changed? Even though I very much love Disney movies, considering how Tolkien studied mythology, folklore and history from other cultures in-depth, particularly those of European background, I do understand why he was not fond Walt's work at all if we view it from his perspective. Other people seem to share a similar sentiment. I ask you because you often analyze Disney movies and their themes quite in-depth. This whole thing is interesting.

Well, I'll preface by saying I'm not much of a Tolkien apologist. I don't connect with him or his mentality as well as I might flatter myself by saying I do C.S. Lewis' mentality. C. S. Lewis had this beautiful way of blending genuine good-faith enjoyment of something and careful, intentional critical thinking. He could be a reasonable analyzer of media, and a childlike consumer of media, at the same time. Don't know if I've mastered that myself, or if I ever will, but I really admire it.

Which is besides the point, sorry! 😂

But Tolkien was different. First off, Tolkien said some things about interpreting the meaning of his own stories that I don't agree with. He keeps insisting he wasn't trying to "say" anything with Lord of the Rings, or infuse it with any particular "meaning." Truth of the matter is, though, that is not true of any good storyteller. What they believe about the world bleeds into what they create, if they're creating genuinely. So Lord of the Rings is about how small decisions matter, doing what you can with what you're given instead of trying to control everything matters—whether Tolkien likes it or not, whether he was always conscious of it or not, that's what his story says.

He also criticized weird things to criticize about Lewis' works. For someone who was Lewis' friend, I don't know how he could've looked at what Lewis was writing and been surprised, or disgruntled, at the hodgepodge of mythology in works like Narnia. I don't know what made him think a "children's story" would feel like anything other than...made for children.

But anyway. All that to say, I don't always agree with Tolkien, or feel like I understand him. His response to Disney movies is just one of those things I don't get. I can speculate, but I don't know.

Like I said, I think he was so used to thinking of fairy tales and literature in a way that is much...higher, and more layered, than how the everyday layman thought of them, that when a Kansas cartoonist started retelling fairytales without any apparent grasp of that layering, it really rubbed him the wrong way.

I guess it would be like if someone came along twenty years from now, pointed at Disney's The Little Mermaid, and said, "look! A cartoon about fish! I'm going to make an TikTok dance about fish and call it 'The Little Mermaid,' and retell it that way!"

First of all we'd be like "IT'S ABOUT SO MUCH MORE THAN FISH, it's not just an CARTOON, are you BLIND?!" And then secondly we'd probably go, "and what? A TikTok dance?! Are you kidding me? You want to take this beautiful pillar of traditional animation and living color and musical mastery and drag it down to the level of middle school girls flapping their hands around cringily??"

That's probably how Tolkien felt Disney was treating Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs. Because back then, the medium (TikTok dances, animation) was just associated with sort of lowbrow humor and silliness. Walt was still inventing the whole "animated film to be taken seriously" thing. And back then, Tolkien would've seen the comedy characters of the Dwarfs and their character development as very shallow in comparison to the mythos of Dwarfs in literary and oral-tradition history. He had the most background knowledge. So what he was comparing Walt's movies to was, for him, like comparing grape Gatorade to aged Italian Wine.

As far as Disney being a "con artist..." yeah, I think that's a little bit of a stretch. He was definitely selling something, but if you can look at Walt Disney's life and see dollar bill signs, instead of a guy who genuinely made what he liked because he liked it, you don't know much about Walt Disney. He didn't adapt fairy tales because he thought they could make him money. He adapted fairy tales because he adored them, just like he had a train in his backyard because he adored them. Ask his brother Roy how much Walter "Let's Invent Smell-O-Vision and Drop Flowers on the Audience of Fantasia" Disney was thinking about exploiting the public for financial gain.

Like I said, Tolkien was responding to Walt Disney because he was Tolkien, and it would've been like asking a Bird to relate to a Krill. They were way too different to ever understand each other on the level that either of them preferred being understood at.

[just-some-ronin]

"No, Johnny, I won't pretend to be a groupie. Now, let's just do the job and get paid."

[wristglitter]

[orangechickenpillow]

Saw Halsin's romance scene for the first time and, uh, oh my god

[roxie-the-slug]

Forgot to post them

[padfootastic]

please say more about jilypad + diverging parenting styles... perhaps even a possible scenario >:) i imagine harry has very cunning tactics for using this to his advantage

helloooooo <3 thank u for this ask bc i love talking about these three and harry. i went looking thru the archives to find this post; my first foray into this side, and really, i’ve never looked back after that.

so i’ve talked ab this a bit before but i fully think that james was a very overprotective ‘mother hen’ type parent. i tend to read his behaviour in lily’s bday letter to sirius as being scared of his child on a broomstick and i fully, fully think he’ll never be able to let go of that as harry grows up. he’ll be anxious and suspicious and paranoid, and his first instant will always be to wrap harry up in cotton wool and hide him away. (i low-key connect this to his childhood as well; going from being spoiled and sheltered to dropped in the middle of a war, black & white thinking, living in extremes etc etc makes it v hard for him to be Normal about his child. as he shouldn’t be, really, but yeah) that’s why he thrives during the initial years; he never minds the hard parts of being a new parent, loves it in fact, and it makes it better that he can keep harry close to him at all times w/o coming off as a helicopter parent (not that the notion bothers him ofc).

it’s good, then, that he has two partners to even the scales, no? i think lily was the most…balanced out of the three. she had a relatively normal childhood, grew up in a working class family/neighbourhood and had to deal w adversity from a young age so she’s developed a nice, thick skin. she also has a sibling with whom she has a v rocky relationship so she knows that kids are, ykno, a bit unhinged. and a little bit of hardship is not a problem. i hc her as needing time to get used to parenthood, unlike james who stepped into it natural as breathing, or even sirius who loved harry on much on first sight that it made up for everything else. ofc lily loved her son, but it didn’t come w the same blinding intensity of her partners and made her feel really shitty in the beginning. but, i think she’d shine during his teen years actually, because she’s not overbearing or intense and becomes the quiet, calm strength that a hormonal, spotty teen boy would probably need.

and sirius <3 our poor baby falls in love with harry, perhaps even more quickly than james, with such startling speed that it shakes his entire foundation. he doesn’t regret it but he’s constantly discombobulated. i also imagine that…it takes him longer to settle into the role of parent, esp bc he’s not biologically one ykno? not like it matters to anyone, ofc, but it takes him a long time to truly accept his authority and place, to believe that he has just as much right as j&l to be there, to parent harry. this has the consequence of him always being more indulgent than the other two; after all, he considered himself a godfather before a parent and a lot of that thinking stayed. he lets harry get away with stuff the others might not (and the little mf figures this out later); some of it also comes from sirius seeing so much shit, and facing so much shit himself, that he rationalises a lot of stuff as ‘well, this isn’t the worst it can be, so what’s the harm’ (because his life has been such a roller coaster that he’s forgotten that not everyone’s like that, if that makes sense?)

its obviously not this clear cut but i imagine harry looks at it like this: if he needs unconditional love, he goes to james; rationality and logic, lily; acceptance and calm, sirius. when someone has to be beat up for hurting harry, james steps in. if he needs help burying a body, it’s sirius. dealing with some asshole boss/teacher/classmate’s mother who’s making harry’s life hell? lily. i can keep going but,,,u get the idea, right? this makes sense, i hope lol

i actually think harry’s first birthday is a great example. sirius pushes the boundaries by gifting lil harry a broom; james loses his mind running after him; lily places an industrial sticking charm on harry’s butt, leans back with a glass of wine, and enjoys the show. even as he grows up, lily and james act as the disciplinarian, and sirius is the emotional outlet. all of them fill in each other’s cracks so well, and it’s only when harry grows up that he realises how effortlessly they worked off each other to parent him.

also oh man o man. harry being cunning is,,,,,see, i’ve not considered it this far but it makes perfect sense. i think canon harry actually had so much manipulative energy and it’s often overlooked for his goofier traits but! this is the same dude who used his dead parents to trick slughorn into revealing sensitive info! imagine if that could be channelled into his jilypad interactions 😈

it’s like, it takes him a bit, because his three parents r so smooth, but once he realises that all of them have certain weak spots, he does NOT hesitate to exploit them. (it has the unintended consequence of truly strengthening the jilypad relationship into an unbreakable one bc one thing their kid taught them is to have ironclad communication going at all times so nothing they’ve said, or not said, is used against them). so like, he knows if he wants to sneak out to a party, it has to be sirius and in a specific way—‘i’ll be totally safe, papa, plus i really wanna see what it’s like and idk when it’ll get a chance to again’. if he widens his eyes to pitiful levels, pouts a little, and blinks faster than usual, then james is putty in his arms as long as he’s separated from the other two. divide and conquer becomes the main tool in harry’s arsenal, actually. lily’s the toughest nut to crack, purely bc she doesn’t run on emotions or irreverence, but harry soon learns that if he comes up with a solid, logical case that proves his argument has unbiased merit then he has a good chance of getting her to say yes. (this is good, bc u can arrange words in the correct order, but u can’t always control emotions)

so overall yeah, you’d think one kid + 3 parents would be an easy bet, but harry keeps them on their toes all the fkn time.

[inthetowerbelfry]

c!Wilbur: kisses c!quackity on the mouth (platonic)

c!Quackity: decks c!wilbur in the face (romantic)