#like she does fit into those very generalized 3 tropes but

[angeltism]

✍️ for whatever fandom would treat you yhe weirdest

OHH . This took some THINKING but def the bn.ha fandom . but maybe that's just bc my s/i existing there would fuck shit up sooo much like . she's kinda a Mary Sue,, (which I mean is great and amazing and she's wonderful and I'm wonderful) but maybe they'd be chill ????

Wait fuck fuck nevermind wait hold on I'm in the middle of writing this and I realized nawt only would she be treated weirdly for her flawlessness (maybe? I haven't reviewed her writing and backstory in years idk if she's actually Flawlessly Flawed But It's Kyute Tho™) but I have a feeling she'd be over t-rexualized (CRYING I'm talking like a YouTuber crying to nawt get demonitized it's almost 12am cut me some slack let me be silly and weird w how I sat things) or her relationship w my husband would be or both . and nobody would get her nuance right because she's a girl and we all know ppl love watering down fem characters into either mother, girlboss, whore or [literally irrelevant forgotten about] oh god . yeah ok idk how I didn't think of this but OHHH yeah she'd be treated so weirdly oml 🫥

[mdhwrites]

So, any theories on what Sasha's parents are like? Like I doubt they were perfect considering Sasha's behavior (remember when she outright stated in True Colors that she was okay never going back home and having zero problem with smashing the box, plus the fact she never shows signs of missing them even after her redemption in season 3). And considering how other redemptions are with their flawed relationship with family like Pacifica on Gravity Falls, Amity and Hunter on Owl House, Andrea on Ghost & Molly McGee, Zuko on Avatar the Last Airbender, Eddy on Ed Edd n Eddy, Catra on She Ra 2018, Lena on DuckTales 2017, Ludo on Star vs the Forces of Evil, and Helga on Hey Arnold, it's hard to believe Sasha had the best relationship with her parents. Granted Sunset Shimmer from the MLP FiM spin off Equestria Girls is a redemption character who also never had her family brought up or ever had an onscreen reason for why she was an evil and mean bully in the first movie (aside from probably just being an arrogant power hungry spoiled brat) so maybe Sasha's kinda like her in a sense too.

So this is a question I actually LOVE. There's a LOT you can glean off of a parent by their kid in general, let alone with any references to them. However... Them being redeemed doesn't always say anything about their relationship. Hell, for Amity since you listed her and I can comment, the speed of her redemption versus how much of a mustache twirling villain Odalia is ACTIVELY CONTRADICT EACH OTHER. It's REALLY bad.

Sasha's redemption says literally fuck all about her parents. Mostly because they don't mean anything to Sasha. Very little means anything to Sasha besides herself and her two best friends. Arguably not even Marcy.

The rest of her context to being willing to see the box destroyed and not return is critical here because she does actually explain herself. "Why rule a school when I can rule a world?" Her priority is self aggrandizing. It's not about freedom and it's not about safety. In fact, Sasha has cared very little for other's freedoms or her own safety. What matters is that Sasha is winning. Even Battle of the Bands made it clear that she is used to doing whatever it takes to be on top and getting her way.

Which to me doesn't mean abusive parents like you want to imply just through saying a lot of other shows did the trope of blaming abusive parents for bad behavior... It just means parents who thought the best way to make their daughter happy was to never tell her no. They let her live a life that had no consequences and where she didn't have to worry because if she skipped school or needed fifty bucks for gal pal time, they'd give it to her. This fits a lot more with Sasha's arc too because her arc has nothing to do with rebelling against her parents. She CHOSE to be a bad person. To not care about others. It's only by realizing that what she does hurt people with her actions and deciding they matter that she becomes a better person.

And to me, that's MUCH more compelling than trying to scapegoat what someone does onto their parent. It's not like everyone is evil just because their parents are shit. It devalues their choices as a character and is honestly a trope I'd like to see LESS. Or, bare minimum, not have standing up to their parent be like flipping a switch and making them automatically a good person because those scars last and their parents couldn't have made them do EVERY bad thing they did. Just look at Amity who decided "I'm going to make my ex-friend's life hell for YEARS despite only having to tell her we're not friends anymore to make my parents happy." That's not her parent's fault, that's her decision to be a monster.

At some point, the blame is on you for what you do. Narratively, for me, that's also more compelling and satisfying because it means you are the only one to blame for your gains too. People always have the choice to do good. It's their decision if it's too much work or relies on caring about others too much.

That to me is what makes Sasha so compelling and why anyone who wanted to see her parents I think are just asking for a categorically weaker story.

======+++++======

I didn't mean for the two blogs to be on a theme today but I decided on this anyways since I had both typed up. For anyone curious why I thought the previous one was dumb but this one was fun, it's simple: One asked if it belonged in the narrative. This one is just nice old character analysis.

I have a public Discord for any and all who want to join!

I also have an Amazon page for all of my original works in various forms of character focused romances from cute, teenage romance to erotica series of my past. I have an Ao3 for my fanfiction projects as well if that catches your fancy instead. If you want to hang out with me, I stream from time to time and love to chat with chat.

And finally a Twitter you can follow too!

[sylvanedadeer]

If I remember correctly, you have mentioned that you are a big fan of literary tropes. Can you tell us what are some of your favorite tropes, least favorite tropes and what tropes you'd like to see more?

This one might be fairly long:

Anyone who knows me fairly well knows I'm literate largely because of comics. It's what my dad had around, so naturally, I'm a bit superhero/fantasy/fiction brained, but my dad is also a latin teacher, so I've been reading Homer, Livy, Herodotus, and Plato for probably longer than I should be. So, genre-wise, I tend to stick to writing/consuming fiction, usually fairly grounded in reality, with superhero stuff tending towards the top of the list.

Some of my favourite literary tropes are "The Self-Chosen One", "The Power of Friendship," and "The Sacrificial Lion".

"Self-Chosen Ones" are kinda self-explanatory, but have some chunky nuance to them. The archetypical "self-chosen one" is Sir Gawain, who chooses to take a challenge that would've otherwise fallen to his king, which ends up roping him... into a bisexual throuple? His isn't as chunky as like, Luz Noceda, who chose to take responsibility for her mistakes and for the people she empowered, or Moana, who rejects her destiny on the basis of destiny and chooses herself to prove TO herself that she can.

Marco, from Adastra, is an interesting instance of this, because the specifics of his "being chosen" were structured in such a way that he super WASN'T necessary. With Luz and Moana, there was... a remarkable lack of people hanging around to solve the plot, so by the Rules Of Stories, they kinda had to take things upon themselves, because otherwise... there's no story. Of course, Marco also had to go forward because PLOT, but 1. Not without grappling with the decision 2. At the detriment to his own health (his near-decapitation) and 3. They clearly outline why he made the choice he did, and also kinda... leave it tenuous on purpose. Very good way of using the trope for a tragedy.

"The Power of Friendship" is less of a trope and more just a reflection of the truth, that humans work well on their own, but will always work better, be happier, and thrive best with other people around them, helping and supporting them. The more direct invocations of this, like in MLP or Yugioh are kinda one of those guilty pleasures, even though I'd argue against the guilty part.

But less overt instances of it, like in Castlevania, when Alucard goes Fucking Nuts because Trevor and Sypha leave. The Avatar Gang and their whole "do you ever wonder if friendships can transcend lifetimes?". There are several instances of "you hurt my friend, time to die" in Invincible that honestly do a lot to keep me going despite the horrific nature of some of the fight scenes.

The most notable one that really got me was the "Loner realizes he has friends and allies" arc in TOTK, because I've clocked. About as many hours on BOTW as I have breathing, and it really does FEEL LONELY AND EMPTY, and that never FELT that way until TOTK came along and my nephew (Tulin) gave me the whole "We're stronger together" bit. I cried.

"Sacrificial Lions" are a little less obvious as to what they are, but the general gist is "a character who exists in the narrative as a heroic bastion of hope, who will be killed or die to further the narrative". Rose Quartz, Pyrrha Nikos, and most versions of Leomon I know about fit this category, as well as, like. Jesus lol.

I've... always liked heroic sacrifices it seems like the best way to really end a heroic character's life, and while I've reexamined that SPECIFIC point, I'm still a lover of the idea. Altruism is a very worthy thing, but I also like how these characters can haunt the narrative, almost always, to the point of making the cast Really Change. Rose is, of course, the inciting incident to an entire show, as her death lines up all of the pins that Steven has to kick over now.

Idk, I'm a fan. I also love it when narrative foils kiss.

[pastelcryptid]

something that I’ve personally not seen other people talk about exactly before re: Nope (despite talking in general about neurodivergency in the characters, some offhand jokes about being gender non-conforming) is that

as someone who loves a lot of action movies, save-the-world movies I am very aware on some level when I watch those films  (I mean, movies in general are like this but especially those genres) that they are taken up by (white, cis, straight) men. And as much as I might love those movies and the characters and the tropes, there is a fatigue that comes with experiencing such a high percentage of films where the cast is dominated by men. Sometimes there might be only one woman in the main cast, and you’re lucky if she’s treated well (this is obviously improving slowly), to say nothing of NB people. However, I noticed at some point that, huh, Nope is still a majority male cast. Yet I don’t feel that fatigue when I watch the movie. Why? 

Of what I consider to be the key players, four are men  - OJ, Angel, Jupe/Ricky and Antlers. Even with Otis Sr., who has about 3 minutes of screen time, he is a figure that looms large over the story. He established the ranch, its reputation (that in itself inspired by his great-great grandfather).

Apart from Emerald (appropriately named as she is a fucking gem) there are only a few female speaking parts in the film and they get a handful of lines. I would say that the most important women in the film aside from Em, in terms of how they fit into the themes of the movie, are Amber Park and Mary Jo Elliott. Amber has doesn’t have a huge part, and then she dies horribly. You could say Mary Jo also doesn’t have many lines but actually, when I was writing this I realised... Mary Jo doesn’t have any. The only time we hear her speak is when she’s saying Haley’s lines, the rest is barely intelligible begging as she’s brutalised. Adult Mary Jo never says a word, and then she also dies horribly. She never gets to speak for herself, Jupe takes all the attention, and she is consumed. This obviously fits into the whole thing, and I feel like you could write a tonne about Mary Jo alone, but this isn’t what I came to talk about exactly.

so, if it’s so male-heavy, why does it almost not feel that way? I think one of the most interesting things about this film, and something I love about it, is that it has such varied, interesting portrayals  of masculinity. Even in their mildly problematic to incredibly reprehensible moments, the men in this movie do not feel like cookie cutter sticks of bravado. The same ones we have been exposed to decade after decade, especially in Westerns.

firstly, you have OJ. I’m not saying anything new in talking about the fact that he is very spectrum-coded. He dislikes eye contact, finds it hard to pick up on social cues, he comes across as awkward or blunt to those who don’t know him well, likes his routine, and prefers to spend his time alone, working with the horses. He’s also speaks very little, in fact as a side bar, I would say Daniel Kaluuya has made quiet characters into an art form. He has played many roles that are not loud, or overly talkative, and yet they all feel incredibly distinct from one another.

I also find it important to note that another very good post by tumblr user @soupbi​ pointed out that, while I consider the autistic tones to OJ’s personality to be undeniable, there is a history of Black men having to avoid eye contact with white people in order to protect themselves from racist abuse/murder. I’d say this definitely factors in during the commercial shoot, particularly given Bonnie’s reaction to his name and everyone’s general rudeness to him that can’t be handwaved as general “well everyone in LA is rude af”. OJ’s Blackness is also relevant because his presence is not just another example of white masculinity and heroism. OJ is a hero, but he is allowed to be one not in spite of his lack of - for a better term - conformity, but because of it. His family’s place in film history is intertwined with Black history. His knowledge, his care, his skill, his love, his reluctance to Look, are all things that help to figure out how to deal with Jean Jacket, and keep his sister safe. And despite his difficulty relating to others, he accepts Angel pretty easily despite the fact that Angel has incredibly contrasting traits.

So then you have Angel. Again, not another white dude. I think if he had been played by one, he would’ve been danger of coming off a bit creepy/incel. Angel does have some tendencies that are more in line with what you might expect from a typical tech/conspiracy guy in these movies - griping about his ex-girlfriend in the beginning, referencing the whole “probes up our asses” obsession that so many people seem to have with UFOs (that I have always felt comes from a similar place of fear to prison rape jokes because... why is that such a common thread in invasion stories/theories?), and apparently he mines cryptocurrency based on something he has in his apartment?? I don’t know shit about mining crypto and I don’t want to, but anyway.

All this to say, when you get down to it Angel is a socially awkward guy with a lot of fear played with incredible depth by Brandon Perea (we all know how much the movie got edited to accommodate his revamped character). A lot of scenes in the movie involve him being visibly and verbally scared. Incidentally, maybe the line of his I find most charming is when he goes off about forgetting to do the feed for Antlers’ camera because he was busy rigging the sky dancers and then says “Sorry. I’m scared.” Taking responsibility for his outburst, admitting his fear. And while he isn’t exactly avoiding attention, he is one of the characters that seems most disparaging of fame. Most explicitly in the dinner scene near the end where he essentially says, “we’re doing this for more than just fame, right? We’re doing it to help people?” He is also visibly more disturbed by Antlers death than him potentially sabotaging their efforts to film. He takes OJ and Em in very easily despite his tinyass apartment. He’s an emotional, fearful guy. But he’s also allowed to be smart, loyal, and ultimately indispensable.

So then you have Jupe. I’ve seen it stated that Jesse Plemons was actually Jordan’s first choice for this role, but had scheduling conflicts. I don’t know at what point in the negotiations it was established he couldn’t participate, but I feel as though this makes a lot of sense when you look at the way Jupe is written and his background. If only because Jordan addresses the role that race plays in all his movies, and yet I feel as though Jupe’s identity as a Korean-American is not addressed as heavily as you’d expect - especially in a story that’s about fame, conformity, fetishisation and the consumption of other people’s trauma and personal lives. There are references, obviously, but it makes a lot of sense if you imagine it was written for a white man.

That being said, I think this works very well in a way that may not have been 100% intentional. For starters, Ricky isn’t even known by his name, he’s goes by the name of his most famous character in an attempt to hold onto the fame he achieved through Kid Sheriff. We know very little about Ricky Park as a person, and it seems as though there is a black hole between Gordy’s Home and Jupiter’s Claim. I’m kind of reminded of Ke Huy Quan and how after Indiana Jones and The Goonies he spent decades largely off-camera (and at one time used a different name because of racism) until Crazy Rich Asians inspired him to return to acting, as he didn’t think there was place for him (I recommend listening to his episode on the podcast Feeling Seen).

When you take into account Jupe’s presence on the sitcom, I know there are American shows like Diff’rent Strokes and Webster which involved white families adopting Black children and that was a key element of the show (I’m English and I’ve never seen those shows come up on British channels let alone watched them, but I looked them both up on Youtube and I noticed the living room in Webster looks very similar to the one in Gordy’s Home). So you have the complexities of that at play. I don’t know enough about this and I don’t think it’s my place to really go into it, but suffice to say you have that as a complex element in Ricky’s background. He’s mostly known for token roles and he’s had to play up to them to stay relevant. A once famous dude having unresolved trauma and a desire for  - or need for recognition through - the spotlight which eventually costs him and/or others is not new.

But I think there’s something very different about the way Steven Yeun manifests that, and manages to keep it grounded and even charming. In at least fan reaction to Ricky, it’s a pretty consistent response that we are disgusted by the way he treats the Haywoods and gets everyone at the Star Lasso Experience (including his wife and children) killed and yet we are also fascinated and even endeared to him. He’s not the guy punching holes in the wall, or refusing to open up to his wife, or going around stabbing people to death. He’s an Icarus, and we see his vulnerability. We were under the dinner table with him, we were there when he was alone with his wife, and we were with him as he stared into Jean Jacket and knew he was about to die. This isn’t meant to be a defense of his actions, obviously, just an observation about how he is presented as a man, especially one who literally cosplays as a cowboy (while he feeds the horses of the real cowboys to a flying saucer).

And then finally, you have Antlers. Antlers is the character I feel I least sympathise with and least understand, which is a personal thing (I’ll be interested to see what the Bluray special features affect this actually), but I think is also tied to the fact that he is what you would expect the most, historically, from a film like this. He is an old white guy. He’s sort of the old guard of cinema, and he’s very stoic, selfish, and keeps his cards close to his chest. Not to mention he has such a typically “Western” accent it took all 5 of my watches at the cinema to parse all of his lines. On paper he is the picture of traditional masculinity… except he’s actually not the picture of traditional masculinity. In every scene, he’s either wearing a dress or a skirt of some kind, and the bracelet on his wrist even goes against what you would consider traditional masculine jewellery. If he was a young man, the dress code might almost be read as a piss-take of “quirky” young filmmakers and thereby making a derogatory statement re: AMAB people who wear gender non confirming clothes. But this is a much older man who is clearly making a choice of expression and comfort. It’s not extravagant – in fact on my first watch I didn’t even realise Antlers was wearing a skirt.

All this to say, it’s incredibly interesting to have such diversity in storytelling and representation of gender through it, and that it doesn’t always come down to “there should be more women in this.”

Anyway guys did you notice there’s a big cloud mural on the wall in the Fry’s store? This movie is batshit

[simlit]

2, 3, 4, 5, 8, 10, 11, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 23, 25 for Yehl

What architectural or design aesthetic would best suit them?

rococo; especially light or pastel colors, grandiose designs inspired by nature and the pure drama of baroque architecture: one | two | three

If your OC likes art, talk about which piece they would love best.

The Kiss by Klimt is my personal favorite as a representation of Yeryn. Something about the pose just gets me. Both firm and tender, and there's a desperation to the way they hold each other, as well as a deep romance I adore. As for what Yehl's personal favorite would be, I ordered up something sensual, preferably with nudity and lots of drapery and The Cryptid led me to these: Sleeping Hermaphroditus | Undine Rising from the Fountain

What character from myth or fairytale best represents them?

Rapunzel; There are a wide variety of "maiden in the tower" stories, but share similar themes. A young, beautiful woman locked in a tower, usually due to the selfish purpose of others or to keep her virginal. Yehl's younger years are contained. He's only able to go as far as his father allows, making him feel perpetually trapped. Even though he lives well and has everything he needs provided for him, he lacks freedom and agency. As cliché as it is, his story follows the damsel in distress trope, and like Rapunzel, he doesn't really earn his strength and independence until the arrival of the prince. They also both have incredibly long hair.

If your OC was a character in a novel from literary canon, who would they be?

Narrator | The Yellow Wallpaper; Yehl is my favorite character, and it's only fitting that I would choose my favorite short story for him. It's a very feminist piece of literature, but I think its themes are universal in today's world. In the story, the narrator is a woman likely experiencing some form of postpartum after the birth of her child, and her husband, following doctor's advice, takes her to a vacation house and keeps her there. It's more of the same thematic that led me to choosing Rapunzel, but The Yellow Wallpaper focuses in on the woman's deteriorating mental health as she is forced to stay locked in a single room. I relate this to Yehl's numerous unhealthy coping mechanisms for dealing with his life, which he feels he has very little control over. So, the things he can control are generally all just desperate cries for attention. As he grows older, that desperation becomes more pent up and corrosive, more self-destructive, to the point where he verges on the edge of a "snap" on more than one occasion, and in a constant battle with himself as to whether he should give up entirely or to carry on miserably just to spite those that wish him gone. By the end of the short story, the narrator does eventually suffer that mental break, and I just think it's a really tragic and all too real and human depiction of what happens when someone is deeply oppressed by a toxic environment.

If your OC were to live in some other time period, which era would they be best suited for?

Act I Yehl 1920s for sure. First taste of freedom and the falling away of old traditions and restrictions. An endless whirlwind of partying, breaking rules and peak luxury. Post-Taryn and Celaedian Yehl, would probably be 30-40s. The 20s, but more mature.

What piece of moody poetry or novel quote best encompasses your character?

"He wanted all to lie in an ecstasy of peace; I wanted all to sparkle and dance in a glorious jubilee. I said his heaven would be only half alive, and he said mine would be drunk; I said I should fall asleep in his, and he said he could not breathe in mine." - Emily Bronte, Wuthering Heights

What is their character theme song and why? If it has lyrics, which line best fits them?

Why'd you lie in the carnage with me? Why'd you gift me your fallout? You were right, it was on us to see we were holding out."Let Go" - Talos

Talos is one of my favorite artists because of his lyrics. They're not straight forward and he doesn't explain himself, which leaves so much up for interpretation. One of the things I think he does best is embody a feeling of pain and struggle in his music. "Let Go" is Yehl's theme because of how well it personifies that struggle. To me it reads as two people who stay together despite one suffering from extreme mental anguish or fatigue. Maybe it's depression, grief, guilt, who knows. But I think at the core of Yeryn's dynamic, Yehl is such a broken person and Taryn knows it deeply. Though at the beginning he wants little more to exploit that, he begins to take on Yehl's feelings, not internalizing, but simply in a state of constant awareness. Even though Taryn has struggles of his own, this one thing was true early on. He found Yehl's suffering beautiful and wanted to save him in the only way he knew how, by fighting his demons for him. And that line "Why'd you lie in the carnage with me?" resonates with me as Yehl trying to understand that Taryn could love him enough to bear his problems alongside him, regardless of their consequence.

Who is your muse’s muse?

Judine; Yehl always admired his eldest brother. Even from a young age, Yehl emphatically adored Judine. To him, Judine is the epitome of both kindness and strength. In his mind, he puts his brother on a pedestal, believing him to be perfect in every way, and worthy of love. I think the latter, most of all, is why Yehl wishes he could be more like him. As if, if he was just like Judine, he, too, could be loved.

What is a common misconception about your OC?

That he is flawless. As Celaedian, he doesn't lose any of the inner struggle or turmoil of his younger years, he simply matures to a point where he can better cope with them, and prioritizes things besides himself. Even his own son fails to recognize that Yehl isn't perfect. It's such a stark difference to his earlier life when everyone believed him to be a complete fuck up. Outside the context of the story though, I always think it's funny when people see pictures of Yehl without having read the novel, and assume him to be this fragile, precious little bun and Taryn as the dark, menacing force, when realistically their personalities were the opposite of expectation, though nuanced. Yehl has always been mentally fragile, but so many of his behaviors were more of the typical "villain" traits than Taryn's.

What sort of role do they take on in relationships, either familial, romantic or platonic. i.e. are they a defender, protector, nurturer, etc.

Nurturer, even though it takes him a long time to feel strong enough to do so. In his relationship with Taryn, and even with Zehel, he is a constant source of open, unconditional love, and will tell them so even if they can't. He is the softness and the emotionality they lack. They provide him with a safe place to be who and what he is, and he offers his love freely.

What is one thing that they only let those closest to them see?

How hurt he really is. Yehl denies for a long time that he suffered emotionally at his father's hands. He wants everyone to believe he didn't care, and that he was fine. He went out of his way to earn a reputation of being wild and reckless and carefree, but it wasn't who he actually was. He's incredibly fragile, but to him, letting others see him break was an act of surrender. He didn't want his abusers or the people who hated him to have the satisfaction of knowing what they did affected him. Taryn, Judine and Linaea were the only people who could see through him, but Taryn is the first and only person he finally lowered the mask for, and is still the only person he feels safe enough with to openly admit it to.

How would their life be different if they had never met their partner?

I think the sad part is that Yehl really would have been worse off if he'd never met Taryn. He sort of did need someone to come along and save him, because he really couldn't help himself, and even if he could, he'd been so beaten down he'd more or less given up. He would have wasted away on the chain his father had given him. Never loved or been loved, never seen the world. He would have lived his false charade of a life until he faded away, and very few people would have ever known him well enough to miss him.

What was the moment at which they knew they were in love, or was it a slow buildup?

It was a slow buildup, but he felt the physical attraction first. It wasn't until much later when he realized Taryn had the capacity to be gentle with him that the emotional attraction began.

What was it about their significant other that made them fall in love with them? Was it a single eye-opening experience or many gestures over time?

It was Taryn's willingness to listen and actually hear him that Yehl fell in love with. Taryn was the first person he could truly talk to, and honestly, Taryn is a really good listener. Being able to confess things openly was both terrifying and deeply liberating for Yehl. And when Taryn begins to offer more in the way of protection and defense, giving Yehl the space to be weak and vulnerable, as well as a strong force which Yehl could rely on, he can't help but to fall for him.

Which “tortured artist” does your OC share the most similarities with?

Virginia Woolf; Virginia suffered several severe depressive episodes, eventually leading her to take her own life. I think, unchecked, Yehl might have met the same grim fate. Like Virginia, I think what Yehl was passionate about, keeping his mother's memory alive, tending to her garden, and keeping up his walls in spite of everything, kept him going, allowed him an escape, and he was able to outrun his own distress until he found his "cure", so to speak. Unfortunately in the real world, it hardly ever works that way.

What does your OCs handwriting look like? 

[disney15ish]

Be-Cool Scooby-Doo is the most entertaining 2010′s series in the franchise

I’ve been on a Scooby-Doo mood recently because of the newest DTV coming out, and have watched episodes of the last 3 shows. For some reason, Mystery Incorporated has now gathered a resurgence on some reaction channels on Youtube. I had stopped watching Be Cool because I had no idea which episodes I had seen and hadn’t and wanted to refresh my memory. Guess Who, I hadn’t seen much of other than one off episodes since it premiered so I wanted to check it out.

Watching episodes of these iterations back to back, Be Cool was the one of them that I most wanted to keep watching

First, Mystery Incorporated, there is a lot to say about this that’s unpopular 

It’s hard for me to get into because there’s way too much romance focus for the gang that takes away from the interesting overarching story. Knowing that story culminates in any bad thing that anyone did was because of an evil entity controlling everything makes the story feel pointless. Since the universe completely reset, nothing that happened in the show matters. It tried too hard to be an edgy-teen romance show that it stopped being a Scooby-Doo show. All the drama at the beginning makes you wonder how exactly they even became a team in the first place at all.  

People say it gave them personality, Fred loving traps to a basically romantic level is not a personality, Daphne being head over heels and overfocused on Fred is not a personality. The Velma/Shaggy stuff is horribly written and I’m not gonna excuse it because of an instagram comment made a decade after the show aired. Velma is completely controlling and toxic towards Shaggy asking him to choose her or Scooby. When Shaggy does choose Scooby, the show frames it as if you should be feeling sad for Velma. Any tension between them in the season frames Shaggy in the wrong for breaking it up. And instead of referencing how Velma acted was wrong...they just never mention it again in S2

Then for Guess Who?

It has the opposite issue of being too safe. It has some fun moments but it’s basically just The New Scooby-Doo Movies with modern stars and in half the timeframe. When only one character is talking, the rest of the characters just stand in poses almost creepily still. Most of the designs are fine, but for some reason Daphne’s model seems weird to me. In those pose moments, Daphne will either look like she has a very wide smile or for some reason agitated.

One big issue is that this show focuses so heavily on the guest star and chase sequences that it doesn’t have time for the actual mysteries. One thing I do appreciate about this show is the unique takes on the Scooby-Doo Doors trope. They do it every episode and you can tell it’s the part the crew had the most fun doing

I will say I did enjoy the meta episode of them meeting their voice actors. You can tell the cast had a realy fun time with that one and the last line of Scooby thanking Frank Welker for everything is a really sweet note to end on. 

Finally, Be Cool

This show does a really good job of keeping the episodic formulaic nature of the franchise, but keeping it fresh and funny for the modern day. Having a more wacky humor fits the very different art style it has. For me, it’s impossible to have come out of watching one of these episodes and not having enjoyed it in some way.

They do the Fred idea way better in this one, where instead of being obsessed with traps he’s obsessed with mysteries in general and the obsession doesn’t go to the weird romantic level MI does with Fred. But besides the obsession, he isn’t stupid and is the leader of the team Daphne being the wild card in the group is a lot more entertaining to watch then her MI counterpart. Scooby is kept to saying like 4 or 5 words for one-liners and it really works in his favor.

Shaggy and Scooby are at their best in this show as well, especially with the moments where they trick the creature. You can tell the writers had a really fun time with that trope.  

To me this iteration feels like a real group of friends that care about each other even if they get annoyed at each other. 

You can tell the crew of this show the franchise and is important to them to stay true to the original roots while still being able to be poke fun at the conventions of it, but it’s never done in a demeaning way.

The art style does take a little getting used to it, but everything else about the show makes up for it and you might even like the style. Also compared to Guess Who stock poses, the other characters actually react to people speaking instead of just standing there still. There’s always something you didn’t notice the first time around when watching these episodes. 

All 3 of these shows had 2 seasons and 52 episodes, but Be Cool, Scooby-Doo is the one that I personally think deserved a longer run. 

[child-of-hurin]

do you like.....idk, obscenely vain, self-loving, egotistical, greedy characters AND does your interest vary a lot based on gender? i've noticed that for all of tumblr's avowed support for characters being Hubristic and Rebellious, they basically only bear this out if like.....there's a secret sad backstory of fundamental insecurity or self-loathing? (and that only if they're male. if they're female they don't actually get to be liked for hubristic traits at all)

My interest in any type of character seems to vary based on gender, yes! If you follow me you might have noticed I tend to be more interested in female characters than male -- although I' don't think I'm not sure it varies by a LOT, I still am interested in a lot of male characters too...

Other people have proposed that maybe the fixation with the Tragic Backstory can be a way to alleviate the current need to moralize your fandom/fictional tastes, and it rings plausible to me! Although in all fairness, sometimes it is super compelling. When you started describing the type of character you're talking about, I immediately thought of Cersei, who's a top fave of mine, who's villain (if not an antagonist), and who both has a sad story (rampant, virulent misogyny) and doesn't (she killed her best friend when she was what, 12?? and out of jealousy?? icon)

Being very honest with u, I have a lot of trouble pinpointing what tropes, types and archetypes appeal to me in a general way, because I often find out it varies wildly by context. Like, when I think I have reached the conclusion that I like characters who X, I immediately think of so many exceptions it makes the rule useless; same thing for when I think I don't like characters who Y 😝 it really depends on the execution and the context I think. That said, I definitely like a bunch of characters who fit those descriptions, and for self-loving vain egotistical and greedy I think most of them are women! On the hubristic side I can only think of one woman tbh, but I also think I might be using a different sense of Hubris than the one you mean? I'm thinking of the godly element of Hubris, like, thinking you can challenge/defy the gods; my top fave Túrin fits like a glove, but the only woman I can think of for that is Dante, from FMA 03, whom I love dearly <3

[armandjolras]

Dumping an extremely long writeup of my thoughts about the IWTV series here. In case anyone does read it, tw for domestic abuse and rape, because it seems that’s the story we got 💀

The show overall

I absolutely loved the inclusive representation and how naturally the story supported the changes. I’ve distanced myself a bit from the books and film because I’m increasingly uncomfortable with their problematic elements, so it was great to experience the story without those. I loved how gay it was, at last!!! The use of Covid in the new framing story feels very 2021 lol but I think it’s an interesting idea, and the Dubai flat is soooo Armand (/neg).

That being said, if I had to look at the show objectively I would say it’s not very good. I don’t know enough about tv production to say what the issue was, but both the writing and direction felt awkward to me. The climax was too drawn out, and ending the show by revealing Armand’s identity will surely be underwhelming to anyone who hasn’t read the book or seen the film. I really disliked how desaturated and brownish the colour palette was, and I don’t think the mood matched the books. It wasn’t very gothic, but instead had a sort of sterility that reminded me of what I’ve seen of Hannibal. And finally, a lot of things seemed very silly to me. The way they hissed at each other was straight out of What We Do In The Shadows, and wasn’t that mind-reading scene, where everyone is thinking about food/sex, from Twilight??

Maybe this is overly pessimistic, but I have a feeling the show won’t be renewed for series 3. I really would love a decent adaptation of books 2 and 3, but maybe it is for the best, as the books get increasingly sillier, and because of the way Lestat was characterised so far💀

The characters

Jacob is so perfect as Louis. It’s refreshing to see Louis as he originally was, before he was flanderised in later books, and while I don’t think Brad Pitt is as bad as most people do, Jacob fits the character exactly and brings so much energy to the role.

I’m sooo obsessed with Bailey as Claudia, she was so much fun! I was never a huge Claudia fan before, but I love how her personality was portrayed in this, and how prominent of a role she was given, I cared about her so much. And Bailey masters that very creepy wide-eyed stare. I’m glad we got an adult actress as Claudia because of the intensity of the story (even though I did have to suspend my disbelief a bit when the show focused on how Claudia will look so young and 14 forever when she could easily pass as a grown up)

However, I HATED the rape plot. It served little purpose and could be replaced with some other plot point, and it’s such an upsetting, lazy trope to have a female character raped (especially a girl of colour). And I was excited to have an early fang gang cameo before that happened 😭

I’m a bit meh on Eric and how Daniel is written in general. I just think he’s too much of an asshole, and Eric delivers his lines in such a mean way. There’s definitely shades of Daniel’s personality there, and I COULD see Daniel growing up to be like that — I just think he’s a good guy, nicer than we’re shown here. And I really didn’t like the brief appearance of young Daniel, I don’t think he had the right energy at all.

And the new framing story means almost certainly no devil’s minion, but I doubt the show will make it that far anyway.

He was barely in it but I’m already obsessed with Assad’s Armand, his demeanor is perfect, and he really looks like an Armand! So excited to see more of him in series 2.

The minor characters were good, I especially liked having a bit of Louis sister’s arc in there!

I saved Lestat for last because I have a lot to say 💀. I thought Sam did a great job all things considered, so I don’t blame him, just the writing. Even before episode 5 i didn’t love this depiction of the character. There were some things I did like — he was fun, annoying, and impetuous, as Lestat should be. But I didn’t get the sense that he loved humanity, which is one of Lestat’s most important characteristics. Of course that wasn’t in book 1, but the framing story is supposed to be a revision of the original interview anyway. He enjoyed partying with people, but never seemed to care about any mortals. They could have given screentime to that, instead of the abuse. Or maybe they decided to base his characterisation on later series Lestat who does seem to abuse the people he loves /j

Initially, I didn’t know why they made him so abusive. From my perspective, the hard part of adapting IWTV is balancing Lestat’s abusiveness in that book with who he becomes in later books, blending the character attributes, so the audience will like him later on. So WHY would they make him MORE abusive??

I do wonder if it’s because they made Louis/Lestat an explicit romance. It’s a lot harder to believe that Louis would be complicit in Lestat’s death when he’s happily in love with him than when it was Brad Pitt acting numb and miserable. I wonder if they added this graphic and violent abuse to convince the audience, as well as Louis and Claudia, to hate Lestat in the span of one episode. And if so, that’s so lazy! They could have focused more on Lestat’s psychological control, convincing the others that they’re helpless without him, or Louis’s self-loathing about being a vampire and his resentment of Lestat.

And to be honest, while the beating scene was awful, I was more upset by the traincar scene with Claudia. I just watched The Shining last weekend and Lestat bursting into the train with the severed head of the conductor was so Jack Torrence. And if I didn’t misunderstand, i think he threatened to rape Claudia, and told her that if she let that happen, it would upset Louis. Please correct me if I’m wrong! Because that is horrendous.

i don’t think there’s any coming back from this for the character. In the series, the characters are willing to forgive anything over time because they’re all immortal, but I can’t see the audience forgiving. So if they do make it past series 2, it will be interesting to see what they do. (And maybe it’s for the best if not, not only because of Lestat, but also because I’d rather not see any screen time dedicated to Marius lol)

[bardicious]

I don't like to compare movies and tv/streaming shows the format are different. on tv or streaming, you have more time to explore characters and I feel spock and chapel stuff has been handled poorly and not well written in a mature way that is fitting for star trek.

i have seen some on reddit compare the spock/tpring/chapel love triangle to a CW show and I get why. on cw shows the plot points of romance tend to move very fast and feels rushed and the characters get new love interest like every 3 episodes and this is were we are with the spock/chapel/tpring stuff.

episode 5- spock sleeps with chapel after he takes a break from tpirng. This is CW writing from the good old days of gossip girl.

episode 6- they are dating secretly but cannot agree on when to go public with their romance. clearly they see a lot of things differently. we dont even know how chapel feels about dating spock when he is on a break with tpring. I think this should have been discussed in episode 6. Chapel is kind of like his official mistress. I feel this is worse than the tos version.

Spock = John Lenon?

Tpring =Yoko Ono?

Chapel= May Peng?

episode 7- Bolmier tells her she may be a phase and he will get back to his normal self

its like the show did not and could not even give them a chance to date openly for a long while for their relationship to have stakes so they can matter, even to the haters.

spock and chapel feels it was set up to crash and burn even before it took off

I think this is where I favour AOS Spock/Uhura more if I was to pick a spock het, they are written more like an adult couple that was built to go some distance and less of a phase and they try to make it work even by beyond.

They are not going to make spirk canon in any time line, AOS spock/uhura felt more saner and less problematic than SNW spock/chapel and SNW spock/tpring.

Also Uhura has always been a better female character than Chapel and Tpring, I think this is why in SNW they upgraded chapel and kind of downgraded uhura. it does not take rocket scientist to point out that snw uhura looks and feels nothing like TOS Uhura and the actress who plays her lacks the charm and beauty of Nichelle Nichols.

The fact that I cannot see AOS Spock sleeping with two women in one week like SNW Spock makes AOS Spock closer to TOS Spock, who will barely even admits he likes girls.

We can argue SNW Spock is becoming more like TOS Spock but I kind of disagree because they are not even sexualising SNW Kirk but SNW Spock is hyper sexualised. Spock gets more sex than kirk and pike in snw and he gets it from 2 women in tos he does not seem to give a crap about. you dont say.

If I was to rank mu spock

TOS Spock> AOS Spock > SNW Spock.

SNW Spock also suffers a lot for modern day extreme feminism writing where they make men into clowns to make the women appear stronger. to many make trek fans, they think the show has made him into a joke. a criticism you dont see with aos spock. so it is kind of like a loose loose scenario with both genders.

Many male fans hate or dont care about the romance triangle of spock/chapel/tpring because men dont really care about this stuff in sci-fi shows

many female fans hate it because they are mostly spirk shippers

I can see your point with the writing from those terms, but honestly? It doesn't bother me. And there's no real angst on Spock's part with either relationship to Chapel or T'Pring. That's why I particularly don't feel the whole love triangle thing. To me, its more like they're playing with the love triangle trope, but everyone and their mom knows no one in this triangle is invested AT ALL.

T'Pring having her own Vulcan duties and agenda, Spock wanting to be more human, Christine seemingly being in "love" with Spock, but feels more like she has unresolved issues in general. So it's more like three adults, have their own issues, and aren't successfully communicating any of them. Not the same as teenage angst, tho I can see the similarities you're drawing from.

From what I gather, you see SNW as more childish, but for me AOS is worse, cause the defining traits I remember from everyone is smugness and anger. That may have changed by the point of their third film (I did hear it was one of the better ones, but I personally just don't care about it either) but in the first and second, it was all about action and revenge and just... so not anything to do with star trek.

At this point tho, I gotta assume you're trolling? Because saying Celia Rose Gooding lacks charm and beauty is just a downright lie?? lmao.

Spock is being sexualized because he's Spock, and Ethan Peck is hot. Spock is the poster boy for Star Trek and lots of people have always been attracted to him. And I'd wager Zachary Quinto didn't escape sexualization in the modern era of Trek either. Also, Trek has a history of sexualizing both men and women, following us way back to the sixties.

You're last few paragraphs... I just full stop disagree. And genuinely doubt men OR women dislike SNW at all, actually... the negative views are the minority and if it's cause of ridiculous arguments like "SNW suffers from modern day extreme feminism writing" than good riddance?

Sorry, I don't think I can take these asks at face value anymore. It doesn't sound like you want a conversation in good faith? If you want to rant about whats wrong with SNW, you'll have to do it on your own posts. And by all means, interact with people who think similarly. Our views diverge too much. Good luck though, nonnie!

[mayobedo]

Initial thoughts on the Natlan characters now that I've had the day to simmer on them

Disclaimer: I am white. I figured I should make that clear. I just want to get my thoughts out there.

In general, I think the more modern look is very unique and something we haven't seen in Genshin Impact before, but they do feel kind of safe. They're very vibrant too, which fits all the color we've seen from the Natlan previews. Unlike a lot of the Fontaine designs initially there's few I actively dislike, but perhaps they'll grow on me, like many characters have. They just sorely need some melanin given the cultures Natlan takes inspiration from.

Ranking each character we've seen individually based on my initial impressions, from best to worst, under the cut (pictures included).

1. Xilonen

Out of everyone in the teaser she immediately caught my eye. The jaguar (or possibly other big cat) theming (as well as being a proper catgirl) and image of her lounging in a tree, bathing in sunlight gives off a sense of power. Kind of like a real big cat! But you guys probably know I tend to like the tall women a lot.

2. Mavuika

I think a lot of people, myself included, expected the Pyro Archon to be a Himeko expy and/or light-skinned. And well, she seems to be both of those. The leaks of the Pyro Archon in a conquistador outfit did have me worried given real world history, but I'm very relieved to see that isn't the case.

Seeing her in a bodysuit when I first opened YouTube did have me puzzled at first, but seeing the full outfit really brings it together. Hoyo does put a lot of research into things, so I'm interested to see any analyses on her design, too!

And the sunglasses are peak. From what I've seen it's a controversial design element, but I think it really adds to her character. She really seems like a friendly archon all around. I wonder how "war" plays into all of this.

She's also the first archon without dark or white hair--it's just straight up red. Which makes me hope she'll change up the common tropes archons tend to have (please i don't want the two archons plotline for the 4th nation in a row). is really I really liked the flame hair concepts from her leaked designs, so it's nice to see we still got that in some form here.

3. Kinich

Kinich has a pretty cohesive design, and the color palette is pretty pleasing to look at, too. But I can definitely see the Xiao comparisons. I hope his personality makes him stand out from him.

The most perplexing thing about him though is how his design focuses a lot around pixels--Ajaw is a pixel dragon. The Sumeru Dendro characters do have their computer/tech themes (Alhaitham and Nahida especially, the latter of which is Irminsul's avatar), but this seems a little...much. Even when considering Natlan characters have more modern designs.

Taking the "Teyvat is a simulation" theory (and similar) in mind, I feel like Ajaw is going to play into that. Or they're just a pixel dragon because Hoyo thought it would be cool.

4. Mualani

Her design makes me think she was originally designed with a darker skin tone, but late in the development process someone told the designer to make her skin lighter, so we got the tan she has today.

Honestly her and Kinich are pretty close, probably interchangeable. But the main thing that bothers me are the orange highlights on her hair. They're a little off-putting.

But overall, I think her design is cute! As a character I get the impression she's going to be chill. Like "girl next door" vibes.

5. Iansan

I really don't have much to say given we've seen her before, and I didn't have much to say back then either. I do hope they give her a good amount of focus given she is a Teyvat Travail character, and I think they will, given it's a pattern they haven't broken. But Hoyo does like breaking patterns... I'd rather be optimistic, though.

Iansan is, however, the first character on this list we don't know the element for. I remember thinking initially she would be Geo, but now we know of two Geo characters, surely they won't have three Geos in the Pyro Nation, right?

I think she's most likely to be Pyro, but I've seen people throw around Electro too since I heard she's named after a lightning spirit. It would make sense--she has a lot of purple in her design. But I'd like to throw out my wild guess that she's Dendro. Why? Well, her eyes are the Dendro green, and if she isn't, then it's impossible for every element to be represented by a Teyvat Travail character. And I highly doubt Pulcinella is going to be Dendro.

6. Ororon

yeah that sure is a genshin character. cool cape though.

He's probably important given he's with Capitano of all people. Maybe he's a Fatuus, but I don't see any Fatui symbol on him. It would be nice to have more playable Fatui.

One thing I'm noticing just now is that he has heterochromia. Hoyo doesn't give out heterochromia willy-nilly. Definitely a mysterious character for sure.

As for element I'm pretty sure he's Anemo with how prominent teal is in his design. If that's true, he'll be our first tall Anemo man! Only took four years...

I am curious about his name, though. It every other language his name is Olorun. I wonder if the misspelling in English is intentional, or if it was just a localization error.

7. Kachina

She's cute...but that's really all she has going for her. I will say, though, the big fluffy ears are unique.

but basically melanin would've saved her

8. Citlali

The only reason she's at this spot is because of what we've seen of her personality so far. I can't think of a particularly hot-tempered female character in Genshin, and I think she might fulfill that niche.

But her design... I think the main thing that bogs it down is the dull pink color used for her hair. With the light skin tone she has it's kind of clashing. It's nice to see another character get colored eyelashes, at least.

I...really don't know how to put my dislike of her design in words. I don't think she's the worst design in Genshin, but she's far down there.

9. Chasca

I'll be honest she just feels like Natlan Clorinde. She stands out from her as a distinct character, but they still give off the same vibe.

I like her design better than Citlali, I will give her that. She just feels kind of boring compared to everyone else.

There are a few small details that are neat--the shoulder mole, textured eyebrows, elf ears... But yeah. She'd really have to impress me to make me want to pull her.

~

So yeah, those are my thoughts. I think this will be fun to look back on later down the line, when Natlan's story is done and we've gotten to know these characters better.

I am excited to see where the story goes, but honestly I'm more excited for the exploration than anything else. It looks super fun, and I can't wait to finally get my hands on the Saurians.

[sunnytastic]

ok ok I know this long overdue (but in my defense, I am a college student currently drowning in midterms and definitely not writing this while procrastinating my anthropology essay) but here it finally is: my analysis of The Lost Hero

first, I think the decision to remove percy from the first book and instead introduce three new characters was extremely necessary. we already know and love percy but by including him the first book it would have caused us to pay less attention to the new central characters. heroes of olympus is not about percy. its about seven different characters who all have different motivations and responsibilities, of which percy is one of them. by starting with different characters, it is clear from the beginning that other characters will be just as important as percy in the this series. the new characters also allowed for a more seamless shift between first person and third person rotating narration. having percy go from first person to third person without any introduction would have been too jarring and would have probably alienated a lot readers. rick was also really smart for not including percy in the first book because it generated even more anticipation and excitement for the son of neptune.

secondly, jason gets too much hate. or at least for his character in the lost hero. while the amnesia plot line is recycled with percy in the next book, I think the lost hero does it more effectively with jason. for starters, we already know percy and his history, and yes, it is still very interesting to watch percy figure out life without his memories. but jason is entirely new character, and to introduce a new character while also not being to provide a character history is a much better use of the amnesia trope. it makes the readers more invested in the character because we are also trying to piece together his past along with him.

and I think it was a very ballsy move on rick's part because amnesia in a new character means the author really has to focus on showing vs telling jason's character traits because the readers have no context to explain why he is the way he is. and I think that rick really did pull it off because it is very clear from the beginning that jason is a natural leader who knows when and how to support those on his team. especially when compared to percy whose obliviousness often prevents him from noticing when others are upset. this not to say that percy is not a caring guy, I just think jason is more observant and this helps him lead effectively.

piper is always been a really appealing character for me. her powers are more subtle than the others and one of my favorite parts of heroes of olympus is watching her develop her abilities and grow more powerful. and the daughter of aphrodite turned rebellious tomboy who could care less about her looks definitely works for her character. and I really like that despite her attempts to hide her beauty, every character still acknowledges how attractive she is. (also, piper, please, ur too good for jason. you should be with me instead <3). I can't wait to read more of piper and im especially excited to see her interact more with annabeth.

ok now on to my baby leo valdez. I would do anything to be able to wrap him in large blanket and bake him some edibles (leo high would be hilarious and I would pay so much money to see that). and I adore how rick alludes to leo having a potty mouth. it fits his character perfectly and its shame we don't get to hear him say "god damn it" or "motherfucker" every other sentence but I'll settle for little lines that imply that he does. I mean, this is a kid's book.

leo also is a very important character to me because I can relate to him on many levels. as a hispanic american with severe adhd that causes me to talk too much and results in social mistakes that when corrected, I perceive as rejection (gotta love that rejection sensitivity dysphoria). this being said, while I definitely agree that leo has adhd, I cannot ignore how heavily he is autistically-coded. His sense of isolation goes beyond his perceived social rejections. He struggles with identifying how people feel and becomes uncomfortable when he is expected to comfort him. He also mentions several times that he prefers being alone with his projects to avoid and recharge from social situations. And while he is still a son of hephaestus, he seems to be more invested and finds more meaning his work than his siblings. One could even say that it is his special interest. His creations are also the only way he connects with his peers and often relates and describes them using terms associated with machines (like abed from community with tv shows). im disappointed that rick never touches on leo's autistic traits because I don't think you can write a book celebrating neurodivergence and then not make an effort to include autistic people (especially when they are already present and just ignored)

however, as much as I love leo, the lost hero is not his best book. it might even be his worst. compared to jason and piper (especially as this book follows the development of their relationship), leo just kinda takes a backseat and doesn't show as much of the personality that I've come to love. sure, he's fixes festus but then festus almost immediately gets destroyed. and then he really only supports jason and piper as they go along their own journeys. im very much looking forward to leo take a more important role in the rest of the series and become the glue that keeps the seven running. and im very interested in watching him evolve from goofy prankster to hero who understands that the future of humanity is in his hands. in both great prophecies, the fate of the battle rests in singular choice made by a singular hero (first, percy. second, leo) but in pjo, percy only carried that weight of this responsibility for a week before it resolved. on the other hand, leo finds out at the beginning of his journey and it strongly impacts the emotional development of his character.

I honestly can't say much about the plot of the lost hero. it follows the same script as previous percy jackson books though with the uniqueness of the new characters. the characterization is what really stands out in this book but again, piper and leo still are better characters in other books in the series. overall, not a bad book, definitely necessary and a decent introduction to the series.

anyways, this is way longer than I thought it was going to be and I very desperately need to go back to my anthropology essay (seriously, its due tonight). But I did say that I would be analyzing the heroes of olympus more closely and what kinda of person would I be if I didn't keep my word. I have no idea when I will be able to finish son of neptune or when I will be posting my analysis of it but stay tuned because it is definitely coming.

oh, and one more thing, thank you for all the notes and reblogs on my posts. it truly means a lot and im happy to find more percy jackson lovers

tldr: the lost hero is a good book, jason gets too much hate, piper is amazing, leo just needs a hug and some soup, and I need to write a goddamn essay

[strangerthings4theories]

The algorithm introduced me to your meta, and I've got to say, I'm loving it. It's very satisfying to see someone else articulate how frustratingly bad Billy's character arc is if season 3 is the end of him. (I'm less optimistic than you about season 4, but aargh I want to believe)

Imo there's one extra bit of supporting evidence for why season 3 shouldn't (in terms of narrative technique) be the end of Billy. Or at least it's something that's been nagging at me since I watched season 3. Basically, the show (and discussion of the show in interviews/the media/fandom at the time) seemed to frame Billy's death as a redemption for his acts, in a way that absolutely contradicts the shows previous in-universe moral philosophy about possession. It's going to be long, sorry.

See, redemption narratives generally rest on the idea that the heroic acts/sacrifice are proportionate to (or very slightly greater than) the "sins" before — I'm going to use the language of sin because there's something very religious about this trope. The ur-example in western thought is obviously Jesus dying as a scapegoat to redeem the sins of absolutely everyone on earth. If the sacrifice is hugely disproportionate then the story comes across as farcical even if the person genuinely needs to redeem themselves. (Say Alice runs over her neighbour Bob's cat: if she then burns her car before knocking on his door and offering him the deed to her house and all her worldly goods, the overreaction would take you out of the story and make her a comic character).

I think people would generally agree that you have to do really very unusually bad things to deserve death as redemption. And the thing is that until he gets possessed, Billy really hasn't done anything that bad on screen (I've not read the books). He's kind of a prick, a high school bully, and casually racist (potentially — I think he probably is at least at some level, given that he's a white kid in 80s America, and the son of a bigot). He throws his weight around to cow people he thinks are weaker, is cowed by those who are stronger (eg his dad), and one time he goes way too far in a fight with a kid his own age and size. (A fight triggered by finding his sister in a stranger's home with Steve, which doesn't seem unreasonable to me: I'm a small woman so probably wouldn't pick a physical fight, but I'd be pretty fucking angry if I found one of my kid siblings hidden away with a guy my age without me or my parents knowing). It's not admirable behaviour, but if it's evil it's a very prosaic and unimpressive kind of evil (and pretty realistic because of it). There are multiple kids like that in every high school, and none of them deserve redemptive death.

Which means that in order for season 3 to be a good redemption arc, Billy's behaviour while flayed tends to get brought up. (Despite any Christ-imagery, I don't think the show frames how death as a scapegoating for the sins of the community, so they have to be his). And that doesn't fit with the internal philosophy of the show: the show already established (with Will in season 2 and with how the other characters treat Will in season 3) that flayed people are not responsible for what the mindflayer does with their bodies and minds. If they were then Will would arguably be partially responsible for Bob's death, for example, and no-one calls him on that — because he couldn't prevent it, and didn't consent. Thing is, neither did Billy. So if Will isn't morally responsible for the tragedies in season 2, then it's bad and incoherent writing at best to hold Billy responsible for those in season 3.

So yeah, as things stand season 3's Billy arc is bad writing because it completely contradicts what season 2 established about being flayed. The most annoying part is that even if Dacre had to leave that season for another job (my first theory at the time, seems untrue based on him not having done any major new project recently afaik) this would have been easy to avoid. Literally all you'd need would be 30 seconds extra at the steelworks in which Billy consents to being flayed (like in a Faustian bargain trope: promise Billy revenge on/safety from Neil or something).

But now you've almost convinced me it might be a build up to something bigger and satisfying, and if that came true it would be incredible! And even if not this is really cool and detailed meta, so this is a you-appreciation-ask I guess. A verrrry long and rambly one: I forget how to be concise when it's late.

I... I have nothing to add to this. Seriously. Absolutely nothing. You've just articulated some very important points and I AGREE WITH ALL OF THEM. Altogether, I think they make a solid case for one of two things: (1) the Duffers flubbed Billy's storyline completely, OR (2) they're not done with him yet.

My entire meta is geared toward proving why #2 is true and not #1. Unfortunately it's also woefully incomplete! There's a lot of info I wish I could share, but simply can't yet. I'll probably end up sharing it as part of a retrospective where I explore Billy's complete character arc.

Thanks so much for the fantastic ask, it was brilliant! And I'm glad you found my meta satisfying :)

[thedeadhandofseldon]

The Anti-Mercer Effect

On the Accessibility of D&D, Why Unprepared Casters is so Fun, and Why Haley Whipjack is possibly the greatest DM of our generation.

(Apologies to my mutuals who aren’t in this fandom for the length of this, but as you all know I have never in my life shut up about anything so… we’ll call it even for the number of posts about Destiel I see every day.

To fellow UC fans - I haven’t listened to arc 4 yet, I started drafting this in early August, and I promise I will write a nice post about how great Gus the Bard is once I get the chance to listen to more of his DMing).

Structure - Or, “This is not the finale, there will be more podding cast”

So, first of all, let’s just talk about how Unprepared Casters works. Because it’s kind of unusual! Most of the other big-name D&D podcasts favor this long, grand arcs; UC has about 10 hours of podcast per each arc. And that’s a major strength in a lot of ways: it makes it really accessible to new listeners, because you can just start with the current arc and understand what’s going on!

And by starting new arcs every six or seven episodes, they can explore lots of ways to play D&D! Classic dungeon delve arc! Heist arc! Epic heroes save the world arc! Sportsball arc! They can touch on all sorts of things!

And while I’m talking about that: Dragons in Dungeons, the first arc, makes it incredibly accessible as a show - because it lets the unfamiliar listener get a sense of what D&D actually is. (It’s about telling stories and making your friends feel heroic and laugh and cry, for the record). If I had to pick a way to introduce someone to the game without actually playing it with them, that arc would definitely be it.

And I’d be remise not to note one very important thing: Haley Whipjack and Gus the Bard are just very funny, very charismatic people. Look. Episode 0s tend to be about 50%(?) those two just talking to each other about their own podcast. It shouldn’t work. And yet it DOES, its one of my favorite parts, because Haley and Gus are just cool.

And a side note that doesn’t fit anywhere else: I throw my soul at him! I throw a scone at him - that’s it, that’s the vibe. The whole podcast alternates between laughing with your friends and brooding alone in a dark tavern corner - but the laughs never forced and the dark corner is never too dark for too long.

Whipjack the Great - Or, the DM is Also a Player!

I think Haley Whipjack is one of the greatest Dungeon Masters alive. The plots and characters! The mechanical shenanigans! The descriptions!

Actually, let’s start there: with the descriptions. (Both Haley and Gus do this really fucking well). As we know, Episode 0 of each arc sees the DM reading a description - of a small town, or the Up North, or the recent history of a great party. And Haley always strikes this tricky balance - one I think a lot of us who DM struggle with - between giving too much description and  worldbuilding, and not telling us anything at all. She describes people and events in just enough detail to imagine them, but never so much they seem static and unreal - just clear enough to envision, but with enough vagueness left to let your imagination begin to run wild.

While I’m thinking about arc 3’s party, let’s talk about a really bold move she made in that arc: letting the players have ongoing control of their history. Loser Lars! She didn’t try to spell out every detail of this high-level party’s history, or restrict their past to only what she decided to allow - she gave them the broad outlines, and let them embellish it. And that made for a much more alive story than any attempt to create it by herself would have - but I think it takes a lot of courage to let your players have that agency. Most Dungeon Masters (myself included) tend to struggle with being control freaks.

And the plots! Yeah, arc one is built of classic tropes - but she actually uses them, she doesn’t get caught up in subverting everything or laughing at the cliches. And it’s fun! In arc 3, there really isn’t a straight line for the players to follow, either - which makes the game much more interesting and much trickier to run. And her NPCs are fantastic and I will talk about them in the next section.

Above all, though, I think what is really impressive is how Haley balances mechanics, and rules as written, with the narrative and rule of cool - and puts both rules and story in the service of playing a fun game. And the secret to that? She’s the DM, but the DM is a player, and the DM is clearly having fun. Hope Lovejoy mechanically shouldn’t get that spellslot back, but she does, and it’s fun. The changeling merchant in Thymore doesn’t really make some Grand Artistic Narrative better, but wow is it fun. And she never tries to force it one way or the other - the story might be more dramatic if Annie didn’t manage to banish the demon from the vault, but it’s a lot cooler and a lot more fun for the players if Annie gets to be a badass instead - and the rules and the dice say that Annie managed it.

Settings feel like places, NPCs feel like people, and the narrative plot feels like a real villainous plot.

Anyway. I could go on about the various ways in which Whipjack is awesome for quite a while - she’s right, first place in D&D is when your friends laugh and super first place is when they cry - but I’m going to stop here and just. Make another post about it some other time. For now, for the record I hold her opinions about the game in higher esteem than I do several official sourcebooks; that is all.

Characters - Or, Bombyx Mori Is Not an Asshole, And That Matters

Okay, I said I would talk about characters! And I will!

Just a general place to start: the party! All of the first three parties are interesting to me, because they all care about each other. Not even necessarily in a Found Family Trope sort of way, though often that too. But they generally aren’t assholes to each other. The players create characters that actually work together, that are interesting; even when there’s internal divisions like SK-73 v. Sir Mr. Person, they aren’t just unpleasant and antagonistic all the time. Listening to the podcast, we’re “with” these people for a couple hours - and it isn’t unpleasant. That matters a lot. (To take a counter-example: I love Critical Role, but the episode when Vox Machina pranked Scanlan after he died and was resurrected wasn’t fun to listen to, it was just uncomfortable and angering and vaguely cruel).

All of the PCs are amazing, and the players in each arc did a great job. If you disagree with me about that, well, you have the right to be incorrect and I am sorry for your loss. Annie Wintersummer, for one example: tragic and sad and I want to give her a hug, but also Fuck Yeah Wintersummer, and also her familiar Charles the Owl is the cutest and funniest and I love him. And we understand what’s going on with Annie, she isn’t some infinite pool of hidden depths because this arc is 7 episodes and we don’t have time for that, but she also has enough complexity to be interesting. Same with Fey Moss: yeah, a lot of her is a silly pun about fame that carries into how she behaves, but a lot of how she behaves is also down to some good classic half-elven angst about parenthood and wanting to be known and seen and important. (Side note: if your half-elf character doesn’t have angst, well, that’s impressive and also I don’t think I believe you).

There are multiple lesbian cat-people in a 4-person party and they both have requited romantic interests who aren’t each other. This is the future liberals want and I am glad for it.

Sir Mister Person, the human fighter! Thavius, the edge lord! Even when a character is “simple,” they’re interesting, because of how they’re played as people and not action-figures. And that matters a lot.

In the same way: the NPCs. There really aren’t a lot of them! And some of them come from Patreon submissions, so uh good work gang, you’re part of the awesomeness and I’m proud of you! The point being, the NPCs work because enough of them are interesting to matter. It’s not just a servant who opens Count Michael’s door, it’s a character with a name (Oleandra!) and a personality and history. They’re interesting. Penny Lovejoy didn’t need to be interesting, the merchant outside the Laughing Mausoleum didn’t need to be interesting, but they ARE! And Haley and Gus EXCEL at making the NPCs matter, not just to the story but to us as viewers. I agree with Sir Mister Person, actually, I would die for the princesses of the kingdom. I actually care about Gem Lovejoy of all people - that wouldn’t happen in an ordinary campaign! That’s the thing that makes Unprepared Casters spectacular - and, frankly, it’s especially impressive because D&D does not tend to be good at making a lot of interesting compared to a lot of other sorts of stories.

And, just as an exemplar of all this: Bombyx Mori. Immortal, reincarnating(?), and described as the incarnation of the player’s ADHD. I expected to hate Bombyx, because as the mom friend both in and out of my friend-group’s campaigns, the chaos-causer is always exhausting to me. And yeah, Bombyx causes problems on purpose! But! She is not an asshole.

And that’s important. Bombyx goes and sits with the queen and comforts her. Bombyx gives Annie emotional support. Bombyx isn’t just a vehicle to jerk around the DM and other players; Bombyx really is a character we can care about. To compare with another case - in the first couple episodes of The Adventure Zone, the PCs are just dicks. Funny, but dicks. Bombyx holds out an arm “covered in larva” to shake with a count, and robs him of magical items, but she also cares about her friends and other people! She uses a powerful magical gem to save her fertilizer guy from death! Yeah, Bombyx is ridiculous, but she’s not just an asshole the party has to keep around for plot reasons; you can see why her party would keep her around. And one layer of meta up, she’s the perfect example of how to make a chaotic character like that while still being fun for everyone you’re playing with, which is often not the case. And I love her.

The Anti-Mercer Effect - Or, “I think we proved it can be fun, you can have a good time with your friends. And it doesn’t have to be scary, you can just work with what you know”

The Mercer Effect basically constitutes this: Matthew Mercer, Dungeon Master of Critical Role, is incredible (as are all of his players). They’re all professional story-tellers in a way, remember, and so Critical Role treats D&D like a narrative art-form, and it’s inspiring. Seeing that on Critical Role sets impossible standards - and people go into their own home games imagining that their campaigns will be like Critical Role, and the burden of that expectation tends to fall disproportionately on the DM. And the end result, I think, of the Mercer Effect is that we get discouraged or intimidated, because our game isn’t “as good as” theirs. (And I should note - Matt certainly doesn’t want that to be our reaction).

So the Anti-Mercer Effect is two things: it’s D&D treated like a game, and it’s inspiring but not intimidating. And Unprepared Casters manages both of those really freaking well. Because they play it like a game! A UC arc looks just like a good campaign in anyone’s home game. They have the vibes of 20-somethings and college students playing D&D for fun because that’s who they are (as a 20-something college student who plays a lot of D&D, watching it felt like watching my friends play an especially good campaign). They’re trying to tell a good story, sure, and they always do. But first and foremost, they’re trying to have fun, and it shows, and I love the UC cast for it.

And that’s the other half of it: it’s inspiring! It’s approachable; you can see that Haley and Gus put plenty of work into preparing the game but it also doesn’t make you feel like you need hundreds of pages of worldbuilding to run a game. Sometimes a cleric makes Haley cry and she gives them back a spell-slot from their deity! That’s fantastic! It’s just inspiring - listening to this over the summer, when my last campaign had fallen apart under the strain of graduation, is why I decided to plan and run my new one!

That quote from Haley Whipjack that I used as the title for this section? That’s the whole core of this idea, and really, I think, the core of the podcast.

The Mercer Effect is when you go “that’s really cool, I could never do that.” But Unprepared Casters makes you look at D&D and go “wow, that looks really fun. I bet I can do that!” And I love the show for it.

And I bet a lot of you do too.

[impalementation]

spike, angel, buffy & romanticism: part 3

part 1: “When you kiss me I want to die”: Angel and the high school seasons

part 2: “Love isn’t brains, children”: Enter Spike as the id

* 

“Something effulgent”: Season five and the construction of Spike the romantic

Prior to becoming a romantic interest, Spike is everything I discussed in the last section. He is an id and a mirror for Buffy, he’s prone to both romantic exaggeration and cutting realism, and his liminality suggests ambiguity. But outside of “Lovers Walk”, the writing doesn’t actually delve too deeply into Spike’s nature as a romantic. If you stopped the canon at “Restless”, you’d probably think that Spike’s love for Drusilla was intriguing, but that the show hadn’t really gone anywhere with the implications of it, and for all you knew, that might not be an important part of his character anymore. So one of the most interesting things about season five to me, is that in this season in which the writers first consciously, deliberately decide to explore the sexual and romantic tension between Spike and Buffy, they also emphasize Spike’s romanticism more than ever. The choice to define Spike by his romanticism is a choice that follows naturally from everything established about his character, but it was also not an inevitable choice. Therefore, it’s a choice worth looking at in some detail.

Consider everything that “Fool For Love” establishes about Spike, especially the things that contradict what was supposedly canon at the time. It makes Drusilla his sire instead of Angel, meaning that he is sired by a romantic connection, and as a direct result of heartbreak. It makes him a poet living in the middle of the Victorian era, an age at odds with his previous ages of “barely 200” and “126”. Meaning that the writing specifically decides to ignore its canon in order to associate him with an era in which passions would have been repressed (rather than the Romantic era of the early 1800’s or the modern energy of the early 1900’s). Moreover, the episode reveals his entire aesthetic and personality to essentially be a construct. But most tellingly of all, it reveals him to be an idealist. Spike is not just a performance artist; he yearns for the “effulgent”, for something “glowing and glistening” that the “vulgarians” of the world don’t understand. In other words, he yearns for something bigger and more beautiful than life: something romantic. Later, he chases after “death, glory, and sod all else.” Spike may be a “fool for love”, who has a romantic view of romantic love specifically, but the episode is very clear about the fact that he is also a romantic more generally. When Drusilla turns him, she doesn’t tempt him by telling him she’ll love him forever. She tempts him by offering him “something…effulgent”. (Which, in typical Spike form, the episode immediately undercuts by having him say “ow” instead of swooning romantically). The fact that “Fool For Love”, Spike’s major backstory episode, is so determined to paint him as a romantic--and in particular, a disappointed, frustrated romantic--that it is willing to contradict canon to do so, tells you that this choice was important for framing Spike and his new, ongoing thematic role.

I’ve talked in the past about how season five is all about the tension between the mythical and the mortal--between big, grand, sweeping narratives, and the reality of being human. Buffy is the Slayer, but she’s also just a girl who loses her mother. Dawn is the key, but she’s also just a confused and hormonal fourteen-year-old. Willow is a powerful witch, but she also just wants her girlfriend to be okay. Glory is a god, but she’s also a human man named Ben, and finds herself increasingly weakened by his emotions. And Spike embodies this tension perfectly. He’s a soulless vampire with a lifetime of bloodshed behind him, but he’s also this silly, human man who wants to love and be loved. He wants big, grand things, but every time they are frustrated by a Victorian society, a rejection, a chip, a pratfall, or dying with an “ow”. Furthermore, his season five storyline is all about the tension between loving in an exalted, yet often selfish way, versus loving in a “real” or selfless way. 

There was a fascinating piece a ways back that discussed how Spike’s attempts to woo Buffy in season five almost perfectly match the romantic narratives of Courtly Love. In the words of the author:

The term "Courtly Love" is used to describe a certain kind of relationship common in romantic medieval literature. The Knight/Lover finds himself desperately and piteously enamored of a divinely beautiful but unobtainable woman. After a period of distressed introspection, he offers himself as her faithful servant and goes forth to perform brave deeds in her honor. His desire to impress her and to be found worthy of her gradually transforms and ennobles him; his sufferings -- inner turmoil, doubts as to the lady's care of him, as well as physical travails -- ultimately lends him wisdom, patience, and virtue and his acts themselves worldly renown.

You can see for yourself how well that description fits Spike’s arc. He fixates on the torturous, abject nature of his love, and has it in his head that he can perform deeds and demonstrate virtue, and this will prove to Buffy that he is worthy of her. But despite Spike’s gradual ennobling over the course of the season, I think it would be a mistake to see the season as using the Courtly Love narrative uncritically, or even just ironically. The same way it would be a mistake to see season two as using the Gothic uncritically. Spike is as much Don Quixote as he is Lancelot. He is a character that deliberately tries to act out romantic tropes, giving the writing an opportunity to satirize those tropes, including the tropes of chivalric romance. In particular, the writing criticizes Spike’s (very chivalric) fixation on love as a personal agony, something that is more about pain--and specifically, his pain--than building a real relationship. Over and over in season five, he is forced to abandon these sorts of flattering romantic mindsets in favor of a more complicated reality. 

So at first, Spike’s “deeds” tend to be shallow and vaguely transactional. He tries to help Buffy in “Checkpoint” even though she doesn’t want it (and insults her when she doesn’t appreciate it), he asks “what the hell does it take?” when Buffy is unimpressed by him not feeding on “bleeding disaster victims” in “Triangle”, he rants bitterly at a mannequin when Buffy fails to be grateful to him for taking her to Riley in “Into the Woods”, and he is angry and confused when Buffy is unmoved by his offer to stake Drusilla in “Crush”. While these attempts to symbolically reject his evilness are startling for a soulless vampire, and although Spike certainly feels like he is fundamentally altering himself for Buffy’s sake, none of it is based on understanding or supporting Buffy in a way that she would actually find substantial. Moreover, he lashes out when his gestures fail to win her attention or affection. He has an idea in his head of how their romantic scenes should play out, and reacts petulantly when reality fails to live up to it. 

But these incidents of self-interested narrativizing are also continuously contrasted with scenes in which Spike reacts with real generosity, or is surprised when he realizes he’s touched something emotionally genuine. When Buffy seeks him out in “Checkpoint”, his mannerisms instantly change when he realizes she actually needs real help (“You’re the only one strong enough to protect them”), rather than the performed help he offered at the beginning of the episode. At the end of “Fool For Love” he’s struck dumb by Buffy’s grief, and his antagonistic posturing all evening melts away. He abandons his romantic vision of their erotic, life-and-death rivalry in favor of real, awkward emotional intimacy. In “Forever” he tries to anonymously leave flowers for Joyce, and reacts angrily when he’s denied—but this time not because he wanted something from Buffy. Simply because he wanted to do something meaningful. 

This contradictory behavior comes to a head in “Intervention”, the episode in which Spike finally begins to understand the difference between real and transactional generosity. Up until that point, Spike has been reacting both selfishly and unselfishly, but he hasn’t been able to truly distinguish between them, which is why he keeps repeating the same mistakes. Although he touches something real at the end of “Fool For Love”, for instance, he goes on to rifle through Buffy’s intimates in the very next episode. And so “Intervention” has Spike go to extremes of fakeness and reality. He gives up on having the real Buffy, and seeks out an artificial substitute that lets him live out his cheesiest romance novel scripts. It’s important that the Buffybot isn’t just a sexbot, even if he does have sex with her. She’s a bot he plays out romantic scenarios with the way he played them with Harmony in “Crush”, allowing him to almost literally live within a fiction. But then he “gives up” on having Buffy in a way that’s actually real, by offering up his life. He lets himself be tortured, and potentially killed, for no other reason than that to do otherwise would cause Buffy pain. The focus is on her pain, not his. For the first time, he acts like the Knight he’s been trying to be all along. He performs a grand, heroic deed that causes the object of his affection to see him in a different light, and even grant him a kiss. Yet ironically, as part of learning the difference between real and fake, he ceases to press for Buffy’s reciprocation. Through the end of season five, Spike continues to act the selfless Knight, assisting Buffy in her heroism without asking for anything in return. Which culminates in his declaration that he knows Buffy “will never love him”, even after he’s promised her the deed of protecting Dawn, and even though she allows a kind of intimacy by letting him back in her house. He proves that he sees those gestures for what they are, rather than in a transactional light. The irony of the way Spike fulfills the narrative of chivalric romance, is that his ennobling involves letting aspects of that narrative go. 

In a Courtly Love narrative, the object of the Knight’s affection is fundamentally pedestalized. The Knight himself might be flawed, but the woman he pines after is not. She is “divinely beautiful” and “unobtainable”, something above him and almost more than human. This is why it’s so comic that in Don Quixote, which was a direct satire of chivalric romance, Alonso Quixano’s “lady love” is a vulgar peasant farmgirl who has no idea who he is. (Think of the way Spike asks if Buffy is tough in “School Hard” or threatens to “take her apart” despite “how brilliant she is” in “The Initiative”, followed by scenes where Buffy is acting like the teenage girl she is. Or how Giles in “Checkpoint” says that Buffy has “acquired a remarkable focus” before cutting to Buffy yawning.). Although it’s true that Buffy is beautiful, and supernatural, and profoundly moral, she is also very human, and the writing is very concerned with that humanity. Season five in particular, as I’ve mentioned, is preoccupied with the duality of Buffy’s mythic and mortal nature. Thus it becomes significant that Buffy is assigned such a heightened role in Spike’s chivalric narrative. Just Spike is at once Lancelot and Don Quixote, Buffy is at once Achilles, Dulcinea, and a coming-of-age protagonist. 

And part of the “lesson” of Spike’s arc is for him to see both sides of the roles they embody. One of my favorite things about the scene in Buffy’s house in “The Gift” is how adroitly it conveys the dualities of both Buffy and Spike with simple, but poetic imagery and language. Buffy stands above Spike on her steps, conveying her elevated role, and Spike honors the way her heroic status has inspired him by physically looking up to her as he explains that he expects nothing from her. But by expecting nothing from her, and promising to protect her sister, he also honors the fact that she is a real person with no obligation to him, and a younger sister she cares about more than anything. He also honors his own duality by at once making Knightly promises, and acknowledging that he sees through his former delusions: “I know that I’m a monster, but you treat me like a man.” In “Fool For Love” he tried to acknowledge the same duality of realism and romance, by declaring to Cecily that “I know I’m a bad poet, but I’m a good man.” But at the time, he was an innocent, whose desire to be seen, and whose romantic avoidance of “dark, ugly things”, left him unprepared to understand how Cecily really saw him (similar to Spike’s insistence in “Crush” that what he and Buffy have “isn’t pretty, but it’s real” just before Buffy locks him out). Spike is a character defined simultaneously by continuous disillusionment and dogged aspiration, which is why he makes perfect sense as a character to embody a season torn between the pain of being human, and the wonder of the gift of love.

Fittingly, the season ends with Spike’s most devastating loss of innocence of all. He fails to be the hero for Buffy or Dawn (note that Knightly language he uses on the tower: “I made a promise to a lady”), and he loses the woman he loves. He may have become more virtuous, but unlike in a chivalric romance, that virtue wins him neither Buffy, nor something flattering like “world reknown.” The climax of the “The Gift” is full of romance—a god, a troll hammer, a damsel on a tower, a heroic self-sacrifice, a vampire transformed into a Knight—but the end result is that Buffy is dead, in part because he wasn’t good enough, and all that he and the Scoobies can do is grieve. Stories got Spike nothing, even when reality finally lived up to them. It is a swan song to the myths of childhood, and on the other side of Glory’s portal, Spike and the other characters will have to confront a world where those myths have been left behind.

part 4: “But I can’t fool myself. Or Spike, for some reason.”: Buffy and Spike as a blended self

[belfrygargoyles]

*whispers* I would like to hear what you have to say on reader inserts in the SW fandom because I too have a problem with them and I feel like not enough people are calling it out 👉👈

I’ve made a few posts about it in the past but I think it’s high time I actually Do This and really get into it.

Before I start: 1) This will be in specific reference to fanfiction written for the Star Wars fandom, particularly tcw and the mandalorian eras, 2) A lot of the issues come down to racist fetishization of men of color by white women; I am white, so there is much that is simply not my place to make statements on. What I can speak most on is my take from the gender side of things.

I’d honestly recommend reading this post by @nibeul with addition by @clonehub first, as they discuss the core issue with reader inserts in the Star Wars fandom.

And 3) some of this will involve discussion of sexual acts (as they relate to fanfiction) and sexual fantasies. These discussions will be non-explicit, and no pornographic text or content will be displayed.

Also. I’m GNC and nonbinary. I’m also a very feminine looking person that falls under the generalization of “small and petite.” I don’t have dysphoria, I like my body and the traits I have, and treating them like inherently female sends me into a blind fury. This is, unfortunately, important.

For the sake of making sure I come across as clearly as possible, I will be writing as though the reader of this post has never read or is broadly unfamiliar with reader-insert fanfiction.

Without further ado.

Hey, Star Wars reader insert fic writers? Please get your shit together.

INTRODUCTION

I’ve been reading reader-insert fanfiction since I was a grade schooler waking up early to check Quizilla. I love it! It got me into fandom, kept me engaged, helped me make and develop some of my oldest OCs, and it’s just fun to read and write- it’s like a self-indulgent little gift you can give to a bunch of people all at once. Because who doesn’t like the idea of starring in their own little adventure, usually alongside some of their favorite characters? It can be fun, immersive, get you attached in ways other ways of fandom interaction may not, make you feel just a little bit special, or be a way to express some feelings you might have about canon and the way the story went.

Like any form of fiction, it ends up saying more about the author’s feelings than anything else, whether the author realizes it or not. For many, many authors of reader-insert fanfiction, the primary enjoyment comes from writing “themselves” into the story- before the readers, the author most often makes the “reader character” someone they, themselves, can relate to and substitute for themselves. They write to live out a self-indulgent fantasy they have, and their readers can come along for the ride.

Some writers do actually try to write as diverse or as vague of a reader character as possible- as few details about the body, identity, etc. as possible so anyone could superimpose their image without the narrative directly contradicting it. This is not the kind of reader insert author I will be discussing.

The kind of author I will be discussing is the one most common in the Star Wars tag on Ao3: White, AFAB, cisgender, gender-conforming, able-bodied women who assume all of their readers are also White, AFAB, cisgender, gender-conforming, able-bodied women. Yes, you can tell.

ISSUE: fetishization of men of color

Again, this post puts it in the best words, but there is a rampant problem with Star Wars reader-inserts, particularly those involving the clones, Boba Fett, and Din Djarin, fetishizing characters played by men of color as either “physically aggressive and threatening, hypersexual and dominant, big strong men who are scary because they do violence and fuck constantly when they’re not” or “completely inexperienced baby who doesn’t know anything about things and needs a gentle nurturing guiding touch to introduce him to the mere idea of a vagina.” The former is common across all of them, the latter most common among clone trooper fics or Din/Reader.

I went into the Boba Fett/Reader tag on Ao3, because I like him and hoped to find something alright. Here are some stats I tallied up (give or take some) based solely on tags, summaries, and warnings:

There are 284 works in the Boba Fett/Reader category as of the time of this post.

198/284 are rated E for explicit sexual content. 69.7% of all Boba Fett/Reader works are sexually explicit.

259/284 are in the F/M category. 91.2% of all Boba Fett/Reader works involve an explicitly female or AFAB reader.

24/284 are tagged with or mention “Age difference,” “Older man/Younger woman,” “Innocence kink” or “Virginity kink.” 8.4% of all Boba Fett/Reader works are written explicitly with an age gap, with Boba Fett as the older party

26/198 E rated fics are tagged with or make reference to “Daddy kink” or involve the reader being called some variation of “little girl” by Boba. 13% of all E-rated works under Boba Fett/Reader are daddy kink fics, or allude to Boba Fett being a daddy dom/sugar daddy.

102/198 E rated fics are tagged as, make reference to, or suggest in the summary that Boba Fett takes a dominant sexual role with a submissive reader involving rough or painful play, or make reference to Boba Fett being frightening, physically intimidating, having a power dynamic over the reader, or being possessive or violent. 51.51% of all E-rated works under Boba Fett/Reader portray Boba Fett as sexually dominant and/or enacting use of physical force or pain play.

Just using this as an example, because it’s the easiest stats I can gather and also what made me realize there was a pattern.

The problem isn’t even necessarily that people write explicit fic about Boba- it’s that 1) over half of all fics in the category are explicitly pornographic, and 2) the way those pornographic fics are written. The two things compound on each other. They’re dominance fantasies projected onto a character of color in which he becomes extremely sexual, physically rough with the reader, possessive, and demeaning towards a reader character who is always written as White, AFAB, and petite.

This brings me to the next issue.

ISSUE: The way sexual relationships are portrayed.

Let me clarify so there is no chance of me being misunderstood: sex is good. Liking and wanting and enjoying sex isn’t bad. It is not bad if you are AFAB and have submissive fantasies. It is not bad to be sexually attracted to a man of color. You can write about sex even if you haven’t had it. Writing about sex can be a good way to express some more complicated feelings you could have about certain things. It doesn’t even have to be realistic. It has its time and it has its place.

This being said.

Sexual relationships as they are portrayed in the vast majority of E-rated Star Wars reader inserts are… not great.

The reader is always AFAB. I can think of maybe one fic off the top of my head where an AFAB reader was written with they/them pronouns and not just she/her.

The reader is almost always submissive, the dominant character is almost always portrayed as cis male. Even when the characters are supposed to just be having spontaneous casual sex, D/S or BDSM aspects will be introduced with no prior discussion or talks about it afterwards. Sometimes characters will start using dirty talk and it just does not fit at all, but it’s what the author thought was hot.

Sometimes, it just reads like a quick smutty oneshot. More often than that, it reads like the author doesn’t realize that sex… isn’t always a dom/sub thing. Or that someone can take the lead in sex and that doesn’t automatically make them a dom.

It’s not bad to be inexperienced. It’s not bad to have preferences or kinks or specific turn-ons.

But it gets… tiring to read, over and over and over and over, because that’s all there is.

That and… I dunno, it just has me a little worried? It doesn’t make me feel good knowing so many people can only portray a sexual relationship if it’s dom/sub. I don’t know why it makes me so uneasy.

Vanilla sex isn’t a bad thing I promise. It's this feeling of insistence that something "spicy" absolutely has to happen for it to be worth writing that gives... some weird vibes.

I’m going to move on to the next Big-

ISSUE: Every “reader” character is exactly the same

By which I mean the following:

Always cis AFAB female

If a character is written with gender neutral pronouns they will always be AFAB and written like Girl Lite

I have never seen an explicitly stated nonbinary/gnc reader character unless it was a request specifically for a nonbinary reader

I have never seen a gender neutral reader insert fic where the reader was AMAB

I have seen a grand total of 1 cis male reader fic and 1 trans male reader fic. The trans male reader fic was about dysphoria.

The reader is allowed to have one of the following backstories: slave/runaway, mechanic, medic, ex-Rebel, secret Jedi, bounty hunter.

The reader is allowed to have one of the following personality traits: throws knives, babysitter, completely civilian, WOMAN, says curse words.

The reader is never written with any narrative agency- things only ever happen to the reader character or around the reader character, they are never written to take charge and actually affect things on their own. Essentially the sexy lamp trope.

Remember when I said the majority of people writing Star Wars reader-insert fanfic on Ao3 were White, cisgender AFAB women who are gender-conforming and able-bodied? This is how you can tell.

It’s at this point where you can tell they’re really not meant to be reader-inserts, but author-inserts with the names removed- they were only meant for a very narrow selection of readers.

I’m nonbinary, I’m gnc, and I’m a very feminine looking person, generally speaking. I’m used to people looking at me and assuming oh, girl. I’m at peace with that.

I can barely stand reading some of these fics just because of how much the author emphasizes that the reader is FEMALE shes a WOMAN with BOOBS and a VAGINA and FEMININE WILES. There’s barely ever even a chance to give myself room to mentally vault over all the “she”s and “her”s because then I’m getting hit with Din or someone calling the reader “girl” or “the woman.” It’s unbearable, and I even fall into the general description every fucking fic author uses for their generic protagonist!

Even with the “gender-neutral reader” fics, it is just. Painfully clear that they just wrote a female character and changed the pronouns- no, there is no such thing as “male behavior” or “female behavior,” and I quite heartily rebel against the concept of gender essentialism. And honestly, I can barely even begin piecing together how I know it and what it feels like, because it’s just one of those vague conglomerates of cues and writing patterns I can’t consciously pick up on but I know it’s there- it’s frustrating, it’s demeaning, and it feels like you’d have to threaten these authors at gunpoint to get them to write a reader character who was any major deviation from the same three cutouts they use every time.

It seems like they can’t possibly force themselves to write a reader character who isn’t meek and submissive or has the sole personality traits of “mean and can hit things”- you can actually strike a balance between “absolutely no personality” and “fleshed out oc” you know? And you don’t actually have to tell the reader what their hair looks like or how full their figure is

It’s like 2:20 AM and I started this at like 8something PM but.

I’m someone who loves reader-inserts. I enjoy them. I still check for new ones regularly. I’ve been reading them for well over half my life now.

So many of these authors are just locked in on exactly one way to write things and it fucking shows. It’s like a self-feeding loop, they just keep writing the same things and the same dynamics because they see each other doing it and they never think about taking a step back.

It’s… exhausting. I’m exhausted. If you’re a reader-insert fic writer and you want to improve your reader character inclusivity and have also read this far, you can DM me or shoot me an ask.

[kuronekonerochan]

Hi...how are you? If you don't mind me asking what are your top 5 favorite danmei novels (until now)? And why? Sorry if you've answered this question before.....

Hi, sorry for being slow at answering!

In no particular order:

Ok, so I liked the 3 from MXTX:

 - Grandmaster of Diabolic Cultivation/ Mo Dao Zu Shi 

This one I loved but it has a particular style that ppl might not like in that it feels jumpy, confusing and with information gaps while reading, even though eventually everything that matters does end up being explained...in other works this would probably be just lazy writing, but here it is clearly an intentional choice bc 1) she doesn’t do this in her other novels 2) this is in WWX’s pov and dude has heavy ptsd and adhd, plus he tends to pretend to take everything lightly as a coping mechanisms...all this put together and it’s easy to understand why the story has such an unreliable narrator that even the other characters constantly point it out. I ended up loving this extra layer of storytelling.

 - Heaven Official’s Blessings/ Tian Guan Ci Fu

If you’re in the mood for a saga type long ass novel with a ton of interesting side stories and side characters with a main character who is a true cinnamon bun in sweet romance with a side dish of sweet sweet aaaangst.

- Scum Villains Self Saving System

The most entertaining out of all of them. It manages to be a parody of two genres, both danmeis and wuia/jianghu harem het novels (fighter of destiny style) with OP leads, while also being its own cute and funny story with a heart to it.

From other authors:

 - Meatbun’s 2ha/ Dumb Husky and his White Cat Shizun 

What if someone took a look at the parody that is SVSSS and said...”no, you know what? This really deserves to be an epic, long ass, and I mean, topping old classics’ length novel packed with angst, filled with pain and topped with despair...and then we’re sprinkling some funfetti on top to fool y’all”...and you know what? that’s some good cake. (If you’re into cdramas SVSSS is to 2ha what The Romance of Tiger and Rose is to Goodbye My Princess).

- Priest’s Sha Po Lang:

Steampunk China plus creepy voodoo tribal ritual magic, involved in internal and external wars over petrol (with a different name) and with our leads in Iron Man suits, fighting, among other enemies hot young(er) hands on, on the field, western troop General, the Pope, that I can only visualize in my head as Jude Law. I tell you all of this nonsense just to say that instead of the ridiculous fun this should be, it ends up being a very compelling romance with lots of scheming and heavy plot and some heartbreaking scenes.

- The Golden Stage:

This is a court drama type novel with friends-to-rivals-to-lovers that is just the right length and compelling with not too many plot twists but two main characters who are really great both individually and together and this is the one out of all in the list I feel like re reading the most. It really is a solid read and I feel like I’m selling it short, bc it really is good. It is similar to Sha Po Lang and To Rule in a Turbulent World, a simpler version of those but not worse for it.

(Since you said top 5 and I’ve said 6, I regretfully cut down Heaven Official’s Blessing bc even though I love it, unlike MDZS or SVSSS, it didn’t feel like a standalone novel because some of the several storylines of the side characters that I loved were left open ended (although the main characters had a complete story arc), as if this book was supposed to be the first of a series and those characters would have their own spinoff books where I’d know where their story took them...except this really is a standalone, and so the lack of resolution bothers me).

>> Honorable Mentions:

- To Rule in a Turbulent World

This one doesn’t go in the top 5 list yet bc it’s not fully translated, last time I checked (tho it’s very near the end). As an ongoing novel, I adore it. If the ending isn’t terrible it might be in my top 3. It’s similar to the two above in plotlines but it has a quality to it that it takes care to make every character in it multidimensional. There are no good and bad characters, even the ones on the opposite side are given something that makes them relatable and human. Plus, the characters all change throughout the novel, most of all the protagonists and the novel gives itself breathing time between events where you just chill with the characters and learn about random things like agricultural practices. 

- The Wife Is First

This one is just that light fluff feel good one that is great to pick up from time to time since it’s on going. Dumb Jock husband did everything wrong in his first life, gets a re-do and from then on it’s adorable respect the spouse juice and awe of said spouse smarts. Cute. Also, there’s a baby pet tiger.

>> Others I did like, just not in the top 5:

 -Faraway Wanderers and Lord Seventh/Qi Ye by Priest:

Qi Ye is similar to To Rule in A Turbulent World/The Golden Stage/Sha Po Lang. I really liked it still, just a tiny bit less than these. Since it’s the same author as SPL and I think it was written earlier, I have to say, the writing only got better.

Faraway Wanderers is a short read, but you’re only gonna like it if you’re ok with amoral main characters (I guess that is true for many on this list but it’s more obvious in this one bc the novel and the characters are unapologetic about it).

- YuWu by Meatbun - Still reading it, but is isn’t grabbing me like 2ha did.

>> I assumed you only wanted danmeis as in period fantasy bl novels, but if we go modern, fantasy or not:

 - Silent Readings by Priest:

I love crime fiction novels (love Ding Mo’s novels) and this is that type of conspiracy, murder novel with smart criminals and smart investigators. Little romance, but still there.

 - Guardian by Priest: 

Priest is hilarious and except the last part that gets a bit heavy on the lore this is just a joy to read. Also pretty short.

- Advance Bravely:

I read it a long time ago and it’s okayish, with some cute and some weird, problematic characters. 

- Addicted/ Heroin:

Also read it (this is 2 books) ages ago...and this one is NOT cute. It starts out as a pretty normal, but kind of toxic very typical oldschool drama/manga romance right down to the step brothers’ trope....and then it keeps escalating to new levels of WTF am I reading?!! All I have to say for this one is, that while I cannot recommend it per se, nor say it’s good, the title really is fitting, bc it is addictive as f.