#literary critique can be so funny

[padfootastic]

Say it with me: Sirius hates Death Eaters, but not Slytherins. Informing the trio that Snape hung out with a gang of Death Eaters was informing the trio that their teacher at one point was totally chill with murdering blood purists and called them friends (you know, totally relevant info with Voldemort on the rise, one person in the trio being the Boy-Who-Lived, a Muggleborn in the group, and the other member being relayed to a family well-known as blood-traitors. It’s rather important for them to know who believes in blood purity and who doesn’t, esp in light of everything occurring in GOF), and explained how he knew them as they were in the same house. And, whether one likes it or not, Slytherin house has the highest number of blood purists that we see, that’s simply canon. We can debate about why this is the case all day long, but the facts remain that Slytherin house has a slew of baby bigots and adult bigots as alumni.

(Also, some people are really weird about insults to the Hogwarts Houses. It is fiction, you will never be in them and while you might have traits of one house, normal people have traits of every house)

ha one of the things i find funniest is when people got mad at j*r for being mean to the slyths as if there’s some overarching moral code that says authors can’t do that lol like,,,,i love those lil fuckers (in all generations, across characterisations and magical alignments) but you HAVE to admit the nature & nurture is sus in that one.

also +1 to everything ur saying about sirius. u know i love ur arguments, anon.

[kirimoochi]

bookworm of a man.

₊˚ ᗢ alhaitham x gn!reader, modern au.

⤷ what is he like in college?

It comes as no surprise that the man is extremely studious. He spends most of his time in the library, his nose stuck in a few literary books. He’s the type that stays there all day and night. The same kind that would on occasion, pull all-nighters and take naps with a book laid out on the table. It takes a lot of restraint to keep you from barging into the library and pulling him by the ear just for him to go home.

He can be a little arrogant at times. His tongue is sharp but it’s unintentional. He’s straightforward and always feels the need to talk for himself. He doesn’t like misunderstandings and makes it a habit to clear up any that arise. It can be frustrating at times when you get into arguments with him. He always wants to prove himself, and he knows deep down it’s his way of trying to show that he cares about something. He tries to add a few trendy words in an attempt to come off as “in-tune” or aware (there was a moment in your life where he couldn’t stop using ‘bombastic side eye’ whenever his roommate did anything troubling). 

He is a linguistics major, so he takes the time to create his own language. As requested by his professor, he’s been trying it out in front of you. While many people shrug off his commentary, such as Kaveh, you are fascinated by his language. Most of the time you don’t understand what he’s saying. A lot of what he explains flies over your head, but seeing you so immersed in trying to learn makes the edges of his lips curve into a small smile. He takes the time to write on sticky notes about a few words and pronunciations, hoping that eventually you and him might hold a conversation in his language.

He would read all kinds of books, whether it be a physics book tucked away in the obscure corner of the room, or a cheesy romance novel about two teenagers pining for each other. Whatever it is, he has most likely read it and will give you his review. It comes in handy when you ask him about a reading you had for class, he always has something to say. If you need to rent a book, you could always come to him, and get Al-Haitham’s annotated copy. Flipping through it, you can see that he has written on the margins a few comments (some are critiques, others are question marks). His favorite color to use for sticky notes and tabs tend to be teal and ocean blue. 

Although he is well-off, he chooses to live in the student dormitory. His reasoning for doing so was rather strange and uncharacteristic of him. He believed that by choosing the dorms, he might be able to find an equal to his rambles. However, what he was stuck with was a boisterous, blond architecture major named Kaveh. They bicker night and day. It gets so heated that their other roommates have filed noise complaints against them. It’s a rather funny thing, you still laugh at it to this day. Al-Haitham’s attempt at making friends was to simply live in the dormitories, and that lead him to find not an equal, but his polar opposite. 

For someone who is engrossed in literature and language, Kaveh makes it a point to call him out on his physique. He says it’s unfair: how could someone as lazy and unenthusiastic as Al-Haitham have such a nice, toned body? Perhaps it was the fact that aside from studying, he goes to the gym to clear his mind. It was an easy place to wear his headphones, and play some obscure playlist you’d created for him. No one goes out of their way to bother him unless it's about the machine. And you find it rather endearing that whatever song you put in the playlist, he would always listen to. He even goes as far as to give you his analysis of the song lyrics, even if they are extremely straightforward.

While he may live with his roommate Kaveh, that doesn’t stop him from inviting you over to his place. He says it’s nice to have a conversation with you when it’s not so loud outside. It has gotten to the point where Kaveh expects you to be home. He thinks it's a blessing in disguise because while he has to deal with Al-Haitham’s snotty comments, he is at the very least, in a better mood. Was that your charm working wonders on the man? Did you finally wear him down? You’ve broken him, Kaveh says, he never cooks (you’ve come to learn from this moment on that Al-Haitham has been living off of dining hall food for half a year), look at him now, making pasta for you. 

“Today’s reading?” He hums, resting his chin against the palm of his hand. He looks up to you with an amused smile. “I read it back when I was in middle school. If you want me to send you my notes, you just have to say please.”

[cumscrotesailboat]

I finished Citrus, the "infamous" GL that i keep hearing about and as far as i've seen, its only the anime thats insanely weird. The manga is super different from the anime adaptation. There's a lot to critique with this series BUT the argument i hear saying that it caters primarily to men is not quite accurate. It was made by a sapphic woman, of which the story was inspired by a real experience she had, published by a company that caters to QUEER women. It certainly wasn't made with men in mind.

(Also, spoiler at the bottom if you have plans on reading it)

With that out of the way, the "incest" subplot of the series felt like it had little significance to the narrative of the story. The only time it was being mentioned was the Blonde MC's inner dialogue about how she can't possibly be with the Black haired MC because they're sister and that's it. At the end, their parents agreed to not get married so the two can legally be married. There was no push back on the parents or anyone they knew, it was just there. I can't tell what the author's purpose with it is. In another wlw series i read, the incest subplot was there to shut down the argument "If same-sex love is ok, then that should mean incest love is ok too bcs it doesnt affect anyone right?", but in here I can't be sure if its for drama or if its for the "spicy forbidden love awoogawooga" japanese anime fans seem to love. Personally, i think its the former. It's drama but very weak drama. I don't wanna write off the latter that fast either. Sapphic women can get weird with incest fantasies too. I personally am not into it bcs its incest, crazy take i know, but sure ig? This one I don't really care since it had such little effect on the narrative that you can just ignore it or even delude yourself with thinking it wasn't there at all and your understanding of the series would still be fine.

For the sexual assaults in the early chapters. I dont fucking know man, why did she do that? I mean, we know why, she was trying to push the Blonde MC away as seen in the letter but uhh.. 🤷🤷🤷? Sexual misconducts, harrassment, and assault just makes me feel uncomfortable so this is the one I dont like with the series at all. To give meaning to it (just bcs i dont wanna gloss over it that fast), the black haired MC did that as an impulsive act of selfishness, isolation, and fear of companionship. Early chapters has her shown as shackled by her family's legacy so she was cold and also fucked up.

Another thing are the supporting characters, there's this middle schooler that just fucking REEKS of trauma and the series just doesn't address that. It's so funny bcs you are 13 girl, don't talk as if you're in that grown up world you keep talking about. They're all great tho, even if they felt flat. One thing i keep noticing with nowadays consumption of literary is that every character has to be well-rounded, no it doesn't! its fine if the main cast are the only rounded ones! but yeah, that middle schooler has to be stopped. Please author, what the fuck is wrong with that kid😭☠️

Overall, its really not as bad as its reputation precedes it to be. Its weird yeah but not as weird as the majority of people say it to be. Its fluffy and drama and it definitely wasn't made for men. It's really whatever and only got its reputation bcs of that weird ass anime adaptation thats trying to cater to those freak ass "otakus". Saying that word makes me feel disgusted, jesus christ. I have mixed feelings if its a series I'd recommend bcs there are other series that are better but what i'm sure is its an okay read. I'm big to romance and drama and this series has that. It didn't make me cry but it made me feel tense and sad for the characters, and in my book thats a successful attempt at those genre.

My only gripe with it really is the unnecessary incest and SA, thats why its getting a low score for me. Everything else was fine

anw balls

[invisibleicewands]

Terry Pratchett would love the queer politics of Good Omens 2

Good Omens 2, the second season of Prime Video’s cult hit, will finally arrive on Friday (28 July), almost five years after the first season debuted and over three decades since the publication of Terry Pratchett and Neil Gaiman’s beloved novel on which it was based. Like the first season, Good Omens 2 is warm, inviting, weird, whip-smart, wonderfully diverse, very funny… and it’s really going to annoy the “anti-woke” brigade.

As with Gaiman’s other recent TV hit, The Sandman, this is a show with diversity and representation built into its DNA. Characters have same-sex crushes and no one bats an eyelid. There’s a completely open approach to casting in which the race, gender and physical characteristics of individuals basically don’t factor into the story in any way. There are characters with visible disabilities, black characters, white characters, old and young, women, men and non-binary – and none of these identities has any bearing on the story. Rarely is representation on this scale so elegantly done. For a story about the end of the world, it’s strangely utopian.

At the centre of the tale are Aziraphale (Michael Sheen) and Crowley (David Tennant), an angel and demon, friends, companions and technically mortal enemies for millennia. Sheen is fussy, well-meaning, pleasant and fastidious, while Tennant is wily, louche and sardonic.

And they love each other. It’s never stated aloud, though it bubbles close to the surface once or twice if you know where to look. The pair’s odd-couple, will-they-won’t-they chemistry, which is less obvious in the book, was the heart of the first season, and season two gives us even more. They’re a classic pairing: attracted opposites thrown together by fate. There’s a wonderful moment in season one where Crowley states that, rather than being agents of heaven or hell, they are simply on their own side, and another where Aziraphale tenderly uses his angelic wing, almost absent-mindedly, to shield his partner from the rain.

What the pair’s relationship hasn’t been, at least not yet, is overtly romantic, though Gaiman, the show-runner, has said many times that he regards Good Omens as a “love story between an angel and a demon”. It’ll be interesting to see how this unfolds as the season progresses. If it blossoms into a full romance, it’ll be another example of the representation baked into the show. Crowley and Aziraphale may be genderless angelic beings, but Tennant and Sheen are cis-gendered men, and any romantic scenes will unavoidably be viewed through a queer lens.

In a way, that would be deeply fitting. Good Omens is not an innately political book, but it is, like most of the late Sir Terry Pratchett’s work, intensely moral – something that Gaiman (alongside the show’s executive producer, Rob Wilkins, who is also executor of Pratchett’s literary state and his “representative on Earth”) has preserved in the new story: a two-season arc based on ideas he and Pratchett had for a follow-up they never had time to write. That morality, that anger at injustice, was an essential part of Pratchett’s writing. (“Do not underestimate this anger,” Pratchett once told his friend. “This anger was the engine that powered Good Omens”.) There’s a lot of that anger in Good Omens 2, mainly aimed at the contradictions and cruelties ordered by God in the Old Testament. The avidly atheistic Pratchett would certainly approve.

But even without the religious critique, Good Omens is innately political. It tells a story in which all characters, regardless of gender, race, age, physical shape or ability can be completely, authentically and – crucially – visibly themselves. It’s a very Terry Pratchett idea. A very Neil Gaiman idea. And an ineffably Good Omens idea.

[artificial-condition]

I recently ordered The Imperial Radch trilogy. Can you tell me how you find it similar or comparable to The Murderbot Diaries?

*cracks knuckles* oh boy can I ever

Okay so first off the main similarity is having an AI protagonist. Although they differ in many ways, one way they are similar is how the protagonist has a deep understanding of systems that regular ol humans do not understand nearly as well. Such as technology and other AI systems (both novels have AI systems heavily incorporated into daily life in the form of stations, ships, etc). Both protagonists have different capabilities than humans, so they can tap into different systems in order to see things through other cameras/eyes, as well as replay things that happened in the past.

Another way they compare is that the protagonist has a very strong sense of justice and feels compelled to help humans who have been wronged. Both of them are like “why am I doing this” to a degree but help nonetheless

Another thing is they both take different approaches to gender. In Imperial Radch different societies have different gender constructs/systems, but the society the protagonist is from doesn’t differentiate genders. Everyone in the society is referred to using she/her pronouns. In murderbot, gender varies across different societies as well, and everyone uses whatever pronouns they like, displayed in their profile that others can see when meeting them, and no one has beef with it. Murderbot goes by it/its pronouns because it is not human and doesn’t want to be

Oh yeah! Another huge similarity is the setting! A lot of it is in space! On different planets! On space stations!

On to the more literary similarities. Both have themes of what it means to be a person and struggles of defining personhood, especially around AI. Both protagonists struggle to a degree with societies that do not automatically grant them personhood, which is so deeply tied to humanity and acting “human”. Both books critique/comment on different systems of society, imperial radch primarily being imperialism and murderbot primarily being capitalism.

I will say there are a lot of ways they differ. Reading imperial radch, I see how it inspired murderbot in some ways and how murderbot decided to go in complete different directions with some things. A big difference is the tone; imperial radch is much more serious than murderbot, less funny/sarcastic moments. It’s also much longer so it feels like a different type of read for sure. Although some of the content may be similar, they are both distinctly different books (and I love them both)

So glad to hear you ordered imperial radch!!! Thanks for the ask and I hope you enjoy :)

[uniquelyuncanny]

The Hate on Hazbin Hotel

A little thing I wanted to say my piece on is, the hate on Hazbin Hotel.

First off, if the subject matter, story line, character design, or general premise of the show, doesn't appeal to you, then just don't watch it. NO ONE is forcing you to engage with a piece of media, it's your choice to do so, but please, you've got far better things to do with your time than hate watch something, or watch it purely so you can give an 'informed critique'. The second thing, a 'critique' used to mean (and I'm taking the direct definition here) a detailed analysis and assessment of something, especially a literary, philosophical, or political theory. But moreover, it's supposed to be a fair judgement, meaning you weigh BOTH the positive and the negatives of something, and deconstruct why that may be (usually including a little self analysis if you want to get extra credibility points.) A critique DOES NOT mean, I'm going shout from the rooftops about this thing that I don't like, go out of my way to spread my negative opinion on the show everywhere, and vilify anyone who disagrees or who doesn't outright agree with my opinion.

The thing here is, it's new, and the marketing team has done their very best by putting it everywhere to get people to watch it. That's their job, they wanted to expand their audience for the premiere of this new show that's been in development for around 4 years now, in the hopes of making it's launch a success. Blood sweat and tears have gone into this show whether you find it appealing or not, and it's changed a lot along the way from what it used to be, both for better or worse.

Now, I'll admit, I'm not a down in the trenches fan. I watched it, I thought the songs were nice, I enjoyed the show but I'm not overwhelmingly invested in it. But I am a fan of animation, heck I even did a degree in it cause I loved it so dang much, and what I hate is for people to claim 'bad animation' cause it 'didn't click' with them, or they think it's an eyesore/ugly.

You watched, you didn't like it? Good, now you have a better understanding of what you do and don't like, move on. Cause regardless of anything, the context for what makes something good, is typically very subjective and often agreed upon after the initial fanfare has died down.

Let those who DO enjoy it, do so without your burdensome criticism. You're not beholden to engage with something you don't want to, if you do, THAT'S ON YOU not the shows creator, not the animators, the advertisers, the voice actors, the music writers, the score composers, the spreadsheet managers, the pre-production crew, the overly pushy streaming service you're watching it on, or even the team behind Spotify marketing management. Just you. The rest, are doing their jobs, the least you can do, is let them do it in peace without making it all about you, and your negativity.

The other main 'booing' point I've seen is 'bad writing', and I'm sorry but that's so funny to me cause like, they JUST released the first season. THE FIRST SEASON. As in, hopefully, the beginning of a story. Not a complete story, more like a chapter, a starting point, a general introduction if you will, of where the development team (writers included) get to set up the ground work for the REST of the story to play out in. (While also hoping that it gets renewed so they actually have a chance to continue it). You can't KNOW that it's bad writing, cause you don't know where the story is headed or how it's planned to play out. How many shows or books, that were presented as being the first of something, have you indulged in, where after you have finished the first season or book and gone, well that was a completely satisfying experience and all the story line points were perfectly executed and made complete sense in a delightfully fascinating manner that kept me engaged with the thrilling story? Cause I know I haven't, and I'd love to have more stuff like that, (so if you genuinely have any recommendations please do send them my way).

The thing is, if you don't like the ultra brand spanking new show animated show Hazbin Hotel that's currently being talked about on social media, that's perfectly okay. Wait a month, there'll be something new for the internet to fixate on to a nauseating degree soon enough. There's nothing wrong with you if you didn't like the humor, or the characters just didn't do it for you, or the character design made it a bit chaotic to get invested in. Those are all perfectly valid points and opinions, and you are welcome to share those opinions in spaces where people have similar opinions as you. But for the love of all things good, don't spread that kind of nastiness onto people, or into spaces where people clearly do not share that opinion.

A little bit of consideration for the people who actually like and enjoy the show, especially those who worked hard to get it out to world, would be lovely, cause again, no one is forcing you to be here or indulge in this media, you're making a conscious choice to be an asshole if you deliberately spread overtly negative opinions about something to people who clearly love it. It's nasty human behavior, and is reminiscent of adolescent bullying tactics and the need to present yourself as 'cool' and 'different' simply by hating the newest 'popular' trend.

It's actually sad, boring, and overall, uninteresting discourse that I'm honestly over seeing pop up in fan spaces.

My end point is, this kind of behavior? Not new. I remember hearing and being flooded with the same discourse over, The Simpsons, Futurama, Teen Titans, Young Justice, Bojack Horseman, Cowboy Bebop, (and many others I won't waste time naming) and literally every single animated show that managed to get a chance in the spotlight over the years.

So you don't like Hazbin Hotel? Good for you, don't watch it, don't talk shit about it, leave it for those who actually like it and find something that brings you joy that you actually like to spend your limited time on earth with. It costs you nothing to be kind, and not every opinion needs to be heard by the masses, it's actually okay if you don't talk about something that's popular, I promise. Rant over.

[bellshazes]

@lie-lichen replied to your post “honestly a lot of people who espouse death of the...”:

I haven't studied the humanities before, what's a formalist/new critic?

​well i'm definitely more of a lapsed scholar than authority. but formalism is an approach to reading focused on the formal structure of a text, its literary devices, etc. and often is explicitly anti-anything outside the text (author biography, historical context, anything not on the literal page). it's your language arts teacher making you diagram sentences or doing a whole lesson on rhyme schemes.

the New Critics were a group of critics (obvs) who took this approach, concentrated in the beginning of the 20th century. i found them via t.s. eliot's poetics & particularly his landmark criticism "hamlet and his problems," but the mid-century contributions of other critics like Wimsatt & Beardsley's "The Intentional Fallacy" (reconstructing the author based on the text) also shaped criticism to come after. close reading as a standard component of literary education is very much their legacy.

barthes' "death of the author" essay is pop culture famous because it's funny and pithy and has a name that you can read and assume you know what it's about, even if you're going to be wrong in so many of the details. the essay is not concerned with the author as active, present word of god dictating the interpretation of the text after releasing it unto the world; he very clearly states his objection to the idea that "[t]he Author, when believed in, is always conceived of as the past of his own book," a historical origin which produces the text - not an authority figure professing edicts. he actually makes a bunch of jokes about how the new critics were bad, because this is firmly espousing the Birth of the Reader - and so, the birth of reader-response criticism, which i think was a net negative for culture. tbqh.

if you read the damn thing you begin to wonder if this is not one big joke, as well, or at least a very contemporary modern joke as it ends with him claiming that Readers are "without history, biography, psychology; he is simply that someone who holds together in a single field all the traces by which the written text is constituted" - a statement so boldly uninquisitive and contradictory to the level of logic being applied in the paragraphs before that it has to be, in its deliberate obtuseness, a commentary on other commentaries.

so my beef with people whose entire comment can be "Death of the Author!!! QED" is that they think it's a material fact and not a historically-produced and dialectical position in a larger centuries upon centuries long argument about how we read and derive/make/produce/wot ever verb meaning. the petty infighting of critique movements is fun and historically informative i prommy. this is not abt word of god i swear

[22degreehalo]

So there's that popular post about 'bitism' (i.e. how much a work commits to the bit) and I've been wavering over whether to reblog it because it's sort of vague and I'm not sure how much I actually agree with OP.

But something I really, really respect in works, that seems related if not perhaps what OP was going for initially, is this: how much does the work follow up on elements it introduces? Even the weird ones? Especially the weird ones?

It's one thing to have a world where some people have cat ears. But how do the ears work? How are the people with cat ears treated in the world? What are the societal, the economic, the literary implications?

Some of my favourite works are ones where the authors introduce aspects that appear strange or handwavey or obviously just thoughtless fanservice or whatever, and then just... don't stop thinking about them. Like, what are the consequences of this? What weird emotional states can the characters be brought to over it? What does this world value? How far can this rabbit hole go?

I've seen works that I feel would fail the 'commit to the bit' test but are still very funny or very worthy in other ways. Sometimes works can just be silly and be fun for it!

But... I have so much goddamn respect when it feels like authors are really trying to make something Good, even when they're veering very far off ordinary rails. Even when they're deconstructing or critiquing a genre: that they're not just ranting at the audience and expecting them to be impressed by how smart they are, but still trying to tell a good, emotional, moving story.

When authors don't try to set aside their comedic, silly, absurd elements during serious moments. When they even make those elements the focus of their serious moments, without losing that which made them funny.

I love stories that don't try to make everything Normal and Relatable to make us feel for them. When they can present improbable, or even impossible situations, and let the audience react to it through the strength of the characters' reactions and the internal realism of the world itself.

I don't know if I really want to give specific examples here? Homestuck was very good at both things. I love Fire Emblem Genealogy of the Holy War for being a deconstruction that also stands on its own dramatic merit. They're all too disparate. It's not something I could put on a checklist. I personally disliked Barbie for precisely this sort of reason; creating a world, and then refusing to engage with it in any meaningful way. But this is all very, very subjective. It's just a vibe, you know?

[thisfireflyandaphoenix]

on the delight of Goncharov

Generally, this is spectacular that everyone is accepting aspects of lore and building from there. It all starts with the Scorse-isms that would 100% be in this potential film. I love how it can even be slotted into a generic and demographic canon quite quickly, as well as the clock/watch interpretations. The specific scene ones are funny but hard to link them all together. I especially love 'When Goncharov’s theme is played in minor key’ because it’s such a knee-jerk and a universal Film Thing. (John Williams is silently weeping because we’ve reduced his career into a single meme that isn’t even explicitly ABOUT HIM)

As a collective art project, it simultaneous reveals and ridicules the inherent levels of film criticism, especially in pop culture. This is more obviously in the levels of detail in the faux Letterboxd articles, but its more within the various forms of websites. It’s amazing to see that everyone agreed that to make a film legit, it needed to proliferate all of these online forms; Letterboxd (usually ‘higher’ and encourages a higher level of interpretation and discussion), Tumblr (mid – both ‘lower’ memes and ‘higher’ longer text articles/observations) and hints to higher academic sources (highlighted parts of faux papers as well as the Criterion Collection fake box, which really made me chuckle). 

I often debate that all three circles are usually inhabited by the same people and actually feed off each other, and honestly this really proves that.

This tapestry of commentary also built itself around the concept called ‘Filmic Literary’, even if I don’t think this was intended. This can be seen in how the Film Dudebros interpret the main character as an aspirational masculine figure vs the film critic’s interpretation of a tragic hero. Same text, but different literacy (how angles, symbols, score, etc influence meaning). The faux essay slotting it in within the Dude Bro but Secretly Deep academic discussion niche along with Fight Club is such a pointed observation about this clash between how different audiences interact, read and critique media. Also sort of a classist ‘This is actually deeper than it looks I swear’ that I find troubling yet fun as someone who mainly wrote about genre cinema later in my degree.

Then this takes us to the queer readings. These are phrased like relative newcomers to the discussions of the film. There’s allusions to the text (aka any mentions of the scenes Katya and Sofia) but poses a new queer interpretation of these scenes. Queer theory only really entered film theory in the 90s and was fully accepted in the 2000s. So this gives any formal queer discussions this uneven and ‘retro-fitted’ quality to anything made before this time. This makes the ‘I rewatched this and am amazed at the gayness’ posts on tumblr and letterboxd have an efficacy that aids in the authentication of this inside joke. There’s also something to be said about the queerness and debate of its function/existence in relation to the homosocial Dude Bro cinema, but that is a separate can of worms. But the fact it hits all of these nerves as a JOKE is so rewarding.

In conclusion, I am in this photo and I both love and hate it.

[vacantgodling]

Olay I got a weird idea i have to ask writeblrs I like: So you're writing paramour right now. What would those characters be an alternative universe? Any type you want, but I would love to hear in like completly different setting like... zombie apocalypse or modern setting

TRUST ME this isn’t weird at all lol. modern aus for hya and amon are extremely fucking funny to me, but tbh any au where hya and amon are closer to equals than they are hya having power over amon are FUNNY to me because amon is horny in canon yeah but the full depth of his nonsense can be ACTUALIZED when he has the ability to approach hya on equal footing pff

so in a Very General Modern Au where nothing crazy is going on: 

hya -> would be a financial analyst who is both a fashion collector and connoisseur and literary critic on the side. he runs his own business where he buys and resells high end clothing and gets custom pieces ordered quite constantly, and he has a website for his book reviews and critiques. he’s quite harsh lmao. the simon of books pfff. 

amon -> studied sociology in college but probably ended up dropping out because $$. i can’t decide what he would want to do and probably because he wouldn’t know either; he just kind of hops around from job to job crashing at knox’s. he’d kinda end up becoming a lowkey sugar baby to hya but shh that’s fine

in terms of aus that are more… fantastical… i don’t think i’ve thought of them in any tbh. truthfully i’m the kind of person where if i’m gonna imagine my ocs in a different au and i get invested in it then i’m probably just gonna make another wip 💀 however, the most prominent aus i do have for paramour are literally just “same universe but switch the roles around” — so role swap au is close to my heart, amon is rich & hya is his butler. then there’s the fiancé au where both of them are rich—and amon is High Key intent on marrying hya and that au is so fucking FUNNY to me fbdjdjdjr. then there’s the rough & tumble? au? i haven’t named this one really but it’s the au where both of them grew up in the slums lol.

[bereft-of-frogs]

I should really be love this whole Goncharov thing rather than feeling a mild grumpy irritation about it because

1) it’s just fun I should feel absolutely 0 irritation, and a lot of the posts are really funny. it’s the kind of collective tumblr creative movement that I normally find really fun

2) I love House of Leaves and deep critical analysis about things that are completely fictional and I cannot believe that they got Danielewski to comment

3) I know how annoying I was at the start of the Dracula Daily stuff

and yet

1) I think when you start off outside of the joke and take a while to get in on it, it’s hard to shake this feeling of being an outsider. the inception of this meme started literally overnight and a lot of the early posts were indistinguishable from real posts I might see (literary analysis about fictional characters named Andrey are...not actually that uncommon given the types of blogs I follow), so it took me a long time to figure out what was going on, and it’s left me feeling...idk a bit shut out in the cold and unable to get as excited about the meme as I should be

2) After the last year of ‘it’s not that deep’ ‘symbolism isn’t real’ ‘shut up about media criticism’ I know I should be excited that people are getting on any sort of film critique train (and I know it’s probably not by and large the same crowd who are making and sharing these posts as were making all the ‘why would you watch a black and white serbian film from the pov of a pigeon when you could watch the mcu instead’ tiktoks this summer) but I’m left with this feeling of...ah ok symbolism and motifs and themes are real when it’s part of a joke, when it’s not real, but ‘it’s not that deep’ when we’re trying to be sincere? Which just contributes to feeling like I’m drowning in seven layers of irony.

I really hope that this meme catches on and inspires people to actually watch and critique older or more complex films and I really hope that I can find some energy to be excited about the genuinely funny and creative posts...ugh I hate feeling irritable like this...

[crosscut-drifter]

I don't wanna reblog a post I just saw only to bitch in the tags, and I also don't wanna reblog it with no commentary, so I'm gonna bitch here, instead, lmao

To wit, if you can't tell the difference between "best friend character who is gay" and the Gay Best Friend version of that character

(yes this is about Dorian Pavus)

then that's on you 🙄

and it isn't just a character meeting specific stereotypes that puts them in the GBF slot, that's disingenuous af. it isn't being a sidekick, or a good friend.

it's the objectification. the *accessorization*. dragging the gay guy around like a purse or a doll, a part of your/the cis girl MC's outfit. the ... voyeuristic entitlement to the GBFs every emotion and his relationships. positioning the MC(/yourself, because GBFing happens IRL!! It isn't just a literary trope issue!) at the complete epicentre of his entire existance, putting that relationship on the same level as or above any intimate relationships he can have with another queer man. the desexualizing of his sexuality (or, conversely, the fetishization of it, to the point of being literal sexual harassment). the utter flattening of character or personhood into just being a cute, funny, *sassy* (gag me, oh my god) yes-queen for the MC/straight girl. the entitlement to physical intimacy. (gods, the *handsiness*. or, re characters, portraying relatively poised or not-super-touchy characters as especially touchy-feely.)

(are people probably slinging accusations around too liberally? oh probably! i don't actually read a lot of fic, tbh, nor do I follow any dorian-centric blogs, these days. and, to be fair, possibly because I curate my dash well, I also haven't seen GBF!Dorian crop up in, like, years.)

idk shit all about OP of the post i'm reffing, so this isn't directed at them personally, but i have never -- in the near decade some DAI released -- seen major sustained or popular critique OF the GBFification of Dorian. like, I can't be everywhere of course, but the only time i have ever seen someone other than me call it out, it is always another queer man. so a post pushing back against this criticism is gonna get my hackles up, especially because *queer men* are very distinctly a minority in transformative/creative fandom.

[doux-amer]

My favorite books of 2022 in no particular order (well, book cover aesthetics so that this post won’t look lopsided visually)!

Babel, Or the Necessity of Violence: An Arcane History of the Oxford Translators' Revolution by R.F. Kuang

I go back and forth on how I feel about this book. I do think there is merit to the argument that it’s incredibly didactic and it doesn’t trust its readers as much as it should (but then again, you look at the world around us so maybe the heavyhandedness is necessary)—BUT I also liked it despite the things that made me ambivalent about it and I firmly believe it’s THE book of 2022. It’s the most important book of the year and more than any other novel I’ve read recently, it speaks to the truth and the times. Even if it’s not revelatory to you because, well, the subject matter is your lived experience, you feel seen and R.F. Kuang puts what you know into words so elegantly.

If you love words, if you’re fascinated by translation, and you love history, strikes, and searing critique about racism, colonialism and imperialism, etc., read this. R.F. Kuang is brilliant. Wow. What a dazzling, whip-smart mind and strong command of prose. The term “dark academia” is bandied around a lot, but this is what it should be. A disquieting look at the rot and the heartbreak that comes with loving a place that will eat you whole.

Plus, you have to read it for Ramy. I’m begging you. And if you don’t weep over the simple beauty and tragedy of [redacted] at the end of the novel, you have no soul! Just saying!

Blood, Sweat & Chrome: The Wild and True Story of Mad Max: Fury Road by Kyle Buchanan

If you love Mad Max: Fury Road, which you should, you need to read this. There are hundreds of entertaining and insightful interviews with cast and crew and you get an intimate look at every step of the production over the two decades it took to get made. When you watch MM:FR, you have no idea how it got made. Once you read this, that feeling will only deepen because HOW THE HELL did this get made and how did they all survive and not lose their minds?

Detransition, Baby by Torrey Peters

What a banger of a debut! Super provocative (not an exaggeration as you can tell by the strong reactions to it), romping good fun, and lots of heart even if everything that unfolds makes you channel Marie Kondo and exclaim, “I love mess!” Just look at the summary. It’s soap opera-y, and you know what, we should have queer drama like that too, all while carefully examining gender, motherhood, sex, family, etc. 

A Gentleman in Moscow by Amor Towles

This is my favorite book of the year. There’s apparently a theme between this and my 2020 favorite, Piranesi, and to a lesser extent, if you really want to stretch it, my 2021 favorites. They’re about people stuck in one place in one way or another; in the case of A Gentleman in Moscow and Piranesi, literally trapped in one place. But it’s not depressing! I put this novel off for years because I thought it’d be your usual overhyped literary fiction fare that isn’t anything special and is, rather, staid and bland, but it’s SO fun and it’s funny. I love protagonists who are silly but are aware they are. Rostov is just so full of it, but he’s well-intentioned, aware of his shortcomings, and willing to learn. I wanted to be whisked far, far away and I was with Amor Towles’s witty, sparkling prose and his lovingly and intricately crafted world. This is about a man sentenced to house arrest for life in a hotel! You stick with him through decades as Russia, and by extension the world, changes dramatically beyond the doors of the hotel. They’re exciting, turbulent times and you’d think you’d be more interested in what’s going on out there, but no, the world inside is much larger and richer than you’d imagine it to be. A comfort read that I’ll return to over and over again.

Honorable mentions:

Atonement by Ian McEwan - beautiful, but I watched the movie before right before reading it and it’s the rare movie that is surprisingly a very faithful adaptation so I wasn’t as invested in it 

Beautiful Country by Qian Julie Wang - the prose is mediocre, but I can’t tell if that’s due to the inexperience of the writer or the deliberate decision to write from her child self’s perspective. Nonetheless an important read! I also kind of feel it goes into sad immigrant story territory, but it’s a disservice to reduce it to that when this dismantles the myth of the American dream thoroughly. It also gave me a doorway to a Chinatown and New York I’ve seen or only heard glimpses of but never saw (for clarity, I’m a native New Yorker who’s Asian American and I grew up with immigrant friends, relatives, classmates, and acquaintances who struggled financially, but this was beyond that; Qian highlights that difference within the immigrant/first to second gen community well)

Tanqueray by Stephanie Johnson - if you read the HONY posts, you know you’re in for a wild ride. Is it the best written book ever? No. But it’s the most fun one I read last year and Ms. Stephanie has the BEST voice. This is the rare book that made me want to listen to the audiobook and I’ll have to do it sometime. She twirls and rewinds the clock and you can envision New York in all its splendid, dirty glory back then.

[okayair]

Review: The Shoebox Project (Wolfstar + Jily)

Fandom: Harry Potter

Ship: Wolfstar (with some Jily)

Title/Link: The Shoebox Project

Authors: Lady Jaida & Dorkorific

Length: 35 multimedia PDFs -- unsure on word count, but it's definitely a full length fic

Content Rating: Mature (?)

Era: Hogwarts 5th Year to First War with Voldemort

Main Tags: Marauders Era, first war with Voldemort, get together, slow burn, friends to lovers, character growth, fandom classic, POV alternates between many characters but mostly Remus & Sirius, non-graphic violence

Summary: "The fic begins during summer vacation in 1975, when Sirius, Remus and the gang is sixteen ... The fanfiction depicts not only depict Sirius and Remus falling for each other, but shows James turning from a rich kid asshole into the courageous leader of a resistance. It gave Lily Evans, Harry’s mother, depth, and gave context to Peter Pettigrew’s eventual betrayal. In my mind, the fic wasn’t just a derivative work. Reading The Shoebox Project made more sense than Harry Potter’s actual canon at times. It healed a wound in my thirteen year old heart." (Description taken from this article)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

My Thoughts: I first encountered and read this fic in early January of 2021 (a late bloomer, I know), and I just now reread this article about the project and felt like I was going to cry. Figured that meant it’s time for a review.

It’s The Shoebox Project. What do you even say? This is one of (if not the) definitive works in wolfstar fanon. It does a stunning job telling the story of the Marauders from the summer before their 5th year to the beginning of their dissolution in the face of the first war. It’s funny, heartbreaking, and beautifully crafted. The article I linked describes the piece much better than I can. Suffice to say, I can’t recommend this work enough. I’m sure I had more precise thoughts on it immediately after reading, and maybe small critiques, but sadly they have disappeared into the recesses of my memory. I just know I really loved it, and it's mandatory reading for all wolfstar and Marauder fans.

It also makes me ache for an era of fanfiction that I was too young to participate in, and for fanfiction community in general. I read so much fanfic, but I do it in near complete isolation. As I read author's notes and comments and such, I can see the vibrant fan community that exists around the works I care about, and it's odd and a little sad not really being a part of that. Maybe this blog is an attempt to rectify that loneliness. I'm also kind of a dick in my reviews, though, so I don't know if I'm actually creating anything here that could connect me to the communities I find myself observing and longing for. Only reading complete fics also feels like a division separating me from active fan culture. Lonely feelings and pining aside, The Shoebox Project is a testament not only to the vivacity and depth of the Marauders and their story, but to the devotion and literary accomplishment of fan communities and especially the artists and writers that form the backbone of networks.

Notes on the Smut: Honestly I even don’t remember how spicy or not spicy this fic is. That was’t really the point, and for once that didn’t bother me. It’s probably M, but I couldn’t say for sure and don’t really care.

My (Frankly Not Subjective This Time) Enjoyment Rating: 5 stars

Or, (out of thumbs down, thumbs up, two thumbs up), two thumbs up

[mlemedt]

Fake Dates & Mooncakes- Sher Lee

💛💛💛🤍🤍 (3/5)

I was first recommended this book in Waterstones Pride Collection, so I suppose I'm a bit late reading this. I'm usually up for anything Pride since the representation is just heartwarming, and encouraging the normalisation of marginalised groups is always a plus.

🥮

The novel follows the perspective of Dylan Tang, a 16 year-old helping out with his Aunts small takeout, and his romantic exploits with Theo Somers. However, it did very much feel like I was simply following him. Dylan was one of those characters were things sort of just happen to them, rather than him making active decisions. This wasn't the case all the time, it was just quite noticeable after coming off 'The Virgin Suicides' where the entire story is an active decision. It wasn't a huge problem but it stunted Lee's ability to show off his personality, so at times I wasn't entirely sure what his aspirations were.

---------------------------------Commentary------------------------------

I felt, surprisingly, there wasn't actually much commentary within this novel, which, as I said in my review of 'Psyche & Eros,' is not always a bad thing. A novel can simply entertain you and in this case warm you up a bit. I was just expecting at least some discussion on their sexuality and perhaps how that has impacted them, especially Theo being a part of such a high profile family, but alas there was not. I read 'Red White & Royal Blue' last year, which was fun and warming, but still had, granted a small discussion of how scary it can be to come out and be perceived fully, especially in high profile positions. It's an interesting decision to write a romance like this, and that not be a discussion point. It just would've added an extra layer, and also help make the characters feel more real. However, I suppose Lee may prefer passive representation, which is just as valid. Simply having more gay characters out there can do a lot for the publishing industry and society's perception of them too.

However, I loved Lee's exploration into Chinese and Singaporean culture and what it's like to be mixed race, in a home away from home. I honestly wasn't expecting it but I can tell a lot of effort went into bringing Lee's culture to life. Furthermore, the detail of writing in the cooking scenes, actually made me hungry, and could encourage anyone to go out an try a new dish.

🥮

-----------------------------------Criticisms--------------------------------

I feel horrible critiquing a book like this because it was genuinely soothing and fun to read, but however at times it didn't read fantastically. For instance the two hit a major bump in their relationship, but their confrontation only lasts around a page, before they suddenly realised what has actually happened. The pacing was just a bit funny at times, the chapter begins with a major point but it sizzles out by the next page. Some instances also had quite unbelievable characters. I hate to make this comparison, but at points it felt like a Wattpad.

To be fair, I wasn't looking for anything high profile and it did it's job making me happy for them and bringing a smile to my soul. Anyway, I can't comment on the quality of writing when I am not a writer myself, I'm just noting some observations. Perhaps others felt different.

🥮

----------------------------------Conclusions------------------------------

This is one of my shorter reviews apparently, because it was simply fun to read and I don't have much to complain about. Perhaps not perfectly executed regarding character and literary detail, but fun nevertheless. And anyway, no piece of writing can be perfect anyway.

♥♥♥

-Gaia

⚠Content Warnings⚠

-Mild and Infrequent swearing

[catonator]

In Defence of Gatekeeping

Hey, remember when I said I’d write a story? Uh, oops. Anyway, here’s something that’s in no way extremely inflammatory.

I’ve had discussions with several people in the past few days, and most of them have ended up in a final point that usually goes something like “this is just gatekeeping, and gatekeeping is bad.” Funny that.

Gatekeeping as a concept dates back just about hundred years. The term was initially invented to describe the habits of journalists, where newspapers would filter out some stories from print. In some regards this tied to inherent biases within the organisations - during the red scare in the United States, many stories deemed “too red” were naturally left out of print. This made gatekeeping a rather important concept, since for many people, newspapers were the only source of information outside the immediate surroundings. Some stories not being reported at all end up shaping the worldview of the readership quite drastically.

In the 21st century, especially online, the term has taken up a new meaning in urban circles. I’ll wager a guess and say that the idea came from Reddit some 10 years ago, mostly because a misappropriation of a normally high-concept sociological or otherwise critical term usually comes from Reddit. Online, the term is more of a liberally applied critique of a “no true scotsman” fallacy. The idea was initially mainly levelled at people who define extremely strict rules to what constitutes as a true example of some kind of identity. This is extremely common in hobbyist circles, you’ve all seen it: “A true programmer uses C++,” “A true musician doesn’t use FL Studio,” there’s hundreds of examples of it. It’s a fair backlash.

So now we’re already quite a few steps removed from the original intention. Am I going to argue that gatekeeping is becoming a bludgeoning weapon against any kind of curation or meaning within a circle? Yes. The answer is yes.

Gatekeeping’s application to identity rather than access of information has made it a rather troubling tool for assholes everywhere. Group identity is a rather nebulous concept to begin with, and the past few years’ rapid expansion of what counts as a “community” hasn’t helped at all. The term is rather widely used to browbeat people or groups who try to keep up standards or secrets of some kind.

Ironically, gatekeeping itself is a victim of the process due to its origin; decades of exposure to the term either via literary circles, or more recently, Twitter, has flanderised the concept to a point where it just stands for “you don’t like my idea, therefore you are bad.” You can witness this for yourself on r/gatekeeping, the majority of the sub is rather basic applications of lines being drawn in sand.

Wanting to conserve an identity against a change isn’t always necessarily a bad response. I think a  rather good example is the mid-to-late 2010s, where for a while you couldn’t avoid hearing about a certain citrus-flavoured American gentleman. 4chan’s /v/ mostly turned to discussions of oranges, Ylilauta’s /b/ mostly turned to discussions of oranges, and boy howdy were all subreddits all about discussions of oranges. Especially if the original concept was about something rather benign, like memes or photography.

It's very easy for a community to fall to what I like to call the newcomer dilemma. Opening your gates too much can easily lead to a flood of newcomers to the scene, either overpopulating places that the native members praised for their quietness, or leading to most of the shared knowledge in the scene becoming food for beginners. This can easily cause issues of communication between the veterans, and will sooner or later kill any advancements in the scene. It's a case where a lack of curation leads to stagnation, not the opposite!

Corporations tend to prefer gatekeeping being frowned upon. Any limitations to who a concept could appeal to turns out to be bad for business. Someone doesn’t like <brand>? That’s a lost sale! Better change everything that defines it! If you’ve happened to wonder why the language of marketing with many Disney brands is rather similar to the language pushed forth by many online moralists, it’s because their ideals tend to be the same. The difference is, Disney has a much clearer reason for their goals.

I personally have never felt as lost as I do now, mostly because of the lack of any real defining individual traits in many communities, online or offline. Wanting to create a zone for the discussion of one idea has for a while meant that unscrupulous individuals would eventually attempt to twist the zone to the discussion of another idea.

And I don’t think I’m the only one. In the past few years as we’re advancing into the 2020s, many seem to be tired of the battle of meaning and how much of themselves they should be willing to give up for the acceptance of newcomers. A lack of standards is lethal to counterculture.

So how is gatekeeping done tastefully? Good question. I don’t have an answer for that. I’m fairly sure no-one does. Nothing will stay the same forever, no matter how hard you try to force it to. Even a very closed group, such as a real life friend group of yours, won’t stay the same. People will get new purposes in life, some of them will get married, the discussions and ideas will change. Resisting any and all change eventually just makes you a living fossil. Some scenes and groups will die on their own eventually, some will undergo large changes, some will stay the same and make a comeback. You never really know what the future will bring, but you shouldn't be discouraged from being who you are.