#literary husbands

[apfelhalm]

For the ship ask: Schoethe

What made you ship it?

Reading "Goethe und Schiller. Geschichte einer Freundschaft" by Rüdiger Safranski. The book is a little dry in parts, but boy does it ever sell their beautiful friendship and how special it was to them and their work. At the very latest after I read about Goethe's reaction to Schiller's death, I was losing it: "I thought myself lost and lose now a friend and with him the half of my existence." I MEAN?!?!

What are your favorite things about the ship?

That it's literally the enemies to friends (to lovers) trope but IRL. And that they brought out the very best in each other. Goethe was having a bit of a writer's block when he met Schiller and Schiller had been a begrudging fanboy for years and they just hit it off right away. THEY WERE WRITING BESTIES and they were inspiring each other and being silly together and starting beef together and their company just meant so much to each other, I'm getting emotional just thinking about it. Also: HEIGHT DIFFERENCE.

Is there an unpopular opinion you have on your ship?

Idk, the fandom is so small that I have yet to encounter an unpopular opinion?

[flowers-and-fichte]

I like to think that Goethe and Schiller were secretly married.

[ineffablyruined]

Aziraphale + Bad Literary Jokes (2/?)

[bugbugboy]

Doing some foreword thinking

My college art project next year will be based on a story and of course Good Omens is my go-to. This is my list of themes in the story (book and show)

Are there any more that I've missed? Or any input/ideas I can work with next year?

[ibrithir-was-here]

Apotheosis of the Queen of Carcosa

[letters-from-saturn]

The world doesn’t give things, you take things.

The Seven Husbands of Evelyn Hugo (Taylor Jenkins Reid)

[forestfiresandfics]

Foils and Mirrors

Another oft misconstrued literary technique is that of the foil. It may just be me misconstruing it though, considering I have to periodically look up the definition because I’ve gotten it confused again. Character foils are two characters who interact and by their interaction, their differences are highlighted. TV tropes describes it as ‘the foil behind a jewel to make it shine brighter’ but another way to look at it would be the way yellow shows up better on a black background compared to white. Foils are defined by their differences. Mirror characters are defined by their similarities. 

While I don’t think it’s wrong to call 3rd life Grian and Martyn foils per say, I think a more interesting reading is them as mirrors. And really, the two aren’t mutually exclusive. I’m getting ahead of myself. 

Third life features a lot of parallels, both in plot and character arc, and the Desert Duo and Renchanting are often pointed to when it comes to discussions of this. I think it’s worth also including Flower Husbands in that list as well. And every day I consider adding Cleo and Bdubs to that list as well, but I haven’t quite decided how well they work, so for now I’ll focus on just the three groups. I will often in my writing and musing and comments and stuff refer to these three pairs as the ‘red-green’ pairs, because they spend a protracted amount of time where one of them is on their green life and the other is on their red. Scar and Grian are the most extreme example of this, spending 5 and a half episodes like that. But the timing of it aside, what’s maybe more important is that each of these teams entered into the battle of the red desert as one red and one green each. A pivotal moment in the story where we also see everyone mirroring each other. 

I think it’s fair to view Desert Duo and Renchanting as mirrors, with the flower husbands acting as foils to the others. Each share enough in common that it’s worth discussing all three groups, but while the desert faction and the kingdom share basically the exact same plot lines and traits, the hobbits serve as something of an alternative option—what they ‘could have been.’ Also fun, is that the Flower Husbands spend nearly, but not quite, equal time with both other groups: doing their job well as foils in the context of contrast-via-interaction. They discuss their statuses and their plans, and as far as the reading of ‘desert duo: protagonists’ and ‘renchanting: antagonists’ go, the flower husbands are ideologically neutral for most of the series. They make friends where they can, call out bullshit where they see it, and it wasn’t until they were thrown into the war that they actually participated in taking sides. 

So what are the similarities between each, and what are the differences? The similarities come first. All three groups are red-green pairs. All three pairs have some kind of strong partnership, all three pairs have a scene where the red of the relationship offers fealty with a trinket (flowers for the husbands, flowers for the desert, and depending how you see it either the rabbit’s foot or the axe for the kingdom). As I suggested before, Desert Duo and Renchanting have even more in common. Both partnerships began because of a debt, both leaders are businessmen, both leaders are red and indentures green, both of the indentures are the “brains of the operation,” both indentures grumble their way through the partnership at first before becoming devoted, and both sit on either side of the server wide war—not just as participants but as the ringleaders. There is also literally even a scene where Martyn tells Ren to put his clothes back on (“me lord? Fancy putting your armour on?”). Frankly this is just scratching the surface, it’s insane how perfect mirrors they are. 

This similarity between the two main groups on the server really highlight the tragedy (lowercase t) of the death game, how these two groups ended up mortal enemies simply because of the world they live in, despite having more in common than differences. And the flower husbands as foils in my opinion ALSO make it sadder. While renchanting and desert duo are messing around with complicated hierarchical relationships and testing loyalty and ordering their partners around, the husbands are working together out of trust and respect. Scott starts out with his fellow greens in rejecting the partnership at first, but he demonstrates what mutualistic relationship should look like, not to mention a relationship that doesn’t make itself the whole server’s problem.

This is already getting long so I won’t get into this next bit too far, but while the red-green pairs foil and mirror each other, each pair also serves as a foil for themselves. Scar is confident while Grian is timid, Ren is trying to do a lot all at once while Martyn is organized and keeps him in line. Jimmy is friendly while Scott is matter of fact. All the reds end up acting as cloudcuckoolanders with the greens to bring them back down to earth and on track. They are all somewhat odd couples, they are very different from one another, and the juxtaposition of these differences highlights each other’s traits as well as their strengths and weaknesses. These partnerships are all advantageous, and they can each fill in for the other’s weaknesses. All three partnerships wouldn’t have made it as far as they did without each other. Not that this makes them idillic partners, they each have their flaws as well, but that’s not really the point. They each help the other shine, like the backing of a jewel. 

Masterlist

[deer-daughterx]

The lovers

He is half of my soul as the poets say-

[thekats]

Season 2's Crowley and Aziraphale trying to get Maggie and Nina to date plot is a commentary on online fan behaviour and a statement that no amount of pushing, prodding, theorizing and fanfiction writing is going to bring a ship together by force send post

[hoplessartist]

So i started watching hannibal...........

[compacflt]

what dog would icemav get?

im guessing no mangy devil chihuahuas or rescues (compacflt can't be seen with anything but a purebreed) golden retriever might be too on the nose, how about a malinois or a german shepherd maybe an english bulldog (ugly)

idk. i don’t really have a dog in this fight (i don’t care) (pun intended). but it definitely would have to be like a Real Dog. yeah nothing smaller than 70 lbs. a Real Dog. other than that i don’t have any opinions. could be a mutt or a rescue! but it would have to be, you know, handsome and upstanding and like, a Real Dog that you can, like, do stuff with. it is very cliche and on the nose and maybe im only saying this bc i, like, don’t care at all about dogs but ice does seem like the white lab/golden retriever guy and mav strikes me as a german shepherd guy. there are many reasons i don’t think they would ever have a dog (what would they do with the dog?) but not being able to agree on the breed might be one reason they never get a dog. arguing and bickering etc

[flowers-and-fichte]

Schoethe raising a child headcanons

Okay, so @poesia-storica and I came up with this Schoethe concept in which Goethe and Schiller were secretly married and they (again, secretly) adopted Schiller's son Karl.

Goethe and Schiller only adopt Karl because adopting all of the Schiller children would draw too much attention.

They raise Karl very well, sometimes a little too well.

Charlotte, of course, is completely oblivious to the fact that Fritz is secretly raising Karl with Goethe. So when Karl runs up to his mom yelling that he has two daddies, she looks at him in utter confusion.

Cue Schiller saying that Goethe is the godfather, and nothing more.

Everyone else (except Christiane) knows the truth. And they're fine with it.

Karl does tend to run off. A LOT. So his dad and stepdad naturally came up with a solution: a leash child safety tether. Which of course both JoWo and Fritz are adamant about, but it's for the best.

Karl definitely tries to drag whoever is holding the tether along with him. When that thing's on, he pulls. Hard.

Also that kid just straight up runs off if neither of his fathers are keeping an eye on him in a public setting.

Everyone in Weimar thinks that these two men just running around and looking for this small child is completely normal.

Karl is definitely one step ahead of his dads. He is a manipulative little shit yet he is very adorable and sweet.

And by manipulative he will do that thing where small children lie and the parents believe them.

He also swears. @poesia-storica had this thought of Karl hearing Schiller cursing and deciding to use the word. All. The. Time. Poor Goethe has no idea what to do anymore.

So one day...

Karl: Scheiße.

Goethe and Schiller: *gasp*

Goethe: Don't use that word, Karl.

Karl: What word?

Goethe: *gives Schiller a "please help me" look*

Schiller: *whispering* I think he knows which one.

Karl: You mean scheiße?

Goethe: ...

Schiller: *sigh* Yes. That one. But don't ever use it again. We can, because we are responsible adults who can watch our mouths and know when and when not to use it.

Karl: I'm responsible too...

Schiller: You just swore twice.

Karl: SCHEISSE

Goethe: Oh no. Child is broken...guess we messed up.

Schiller: He's grounded.

I can imagine them in some public setting or something and Karl just suddenly runs around swearing his head off and Goethe and Schiller are mentally facepalming.

That doesn't mean that Karl isn't a good kid; of course he is. And Goethe and Schiller love him very much. They're just protective.

Also whenever his dads have a fight, Karl just goes up to Fritz, hugs his leg (refusing to let go) and just says, "I think Daddy likes you as much as I do. Probably as much as I like pudding."

And Schiller just M E L T S

Karl is not only cute and mischievous, he's great emotional support.

Overall, our favorite literary husbands love their son way too much and he loves them back, perhaps even more.

Credit to @poesia-storica for some of these amazing ideas!

[ineffablyruined]

Good Omens + Bad Literary Jokes

[cometrose]

queen of tears was not perfect but to keep me waiting every weekend like a madman for the new episode it was wonderful i love how i grew to like all the characters except a few ofc though i deserved more baekhong kisses and another wedding and happiness yes not enough happiness in fact i deserve 6 episode miniseries about all the happy moments they have just all of them thanks no terminal illness or shooting involved thanks

[hyperlexichypatia]

Obligatory Disclaimer #1: Yes, there is a lot of misogyny in the way people talk about the "likability" of female characters. Women in stories can and should be complex, flawed, nuanced, and human, not (just) "likable" (or "sexy" or "mother" or whatever other one-dimensional trope).

Obligatory Disclaimer #2: Yes, I know that an opinion expressed by a character in a story is not necessarily being supported by the narrative itself, or the author, and that people with piss-on-the-poor reading comprehension get this wrong. Good reading comprehension means being able to tell the difference.

Now that we've got that out of the way.

Doesn't it seem like "Female characters don't have to be LIKABLE, you illiterate misogynist!" is often a Privileged Feminist way to silence criticism of... very mainstream bigoted attitudes being presented uncritically in the narrative by being put in the voices of designated "unlikable female characters"?

I love a complex, nuanced, flawed female character. I love an outright villainous female character. I love a character whose flaws and prejudices are slowly picked apart by the narrative. I do not love having the classism, sizeism, and ableism I deal with every day served back to me in Feminist Fiction.

I do not love trying to point out "Hey, this award-winning book you all love, I don't actually like the way the protagonist talks about the working-class fat man. Or the younger woman with anxiety. Or the acquaintance with a disabled child and, like, linoleum floors or something." (Why do I just have all those examples at the ready?)

And being met with "Female characters don't have to be LIKABLE, you illiterate misogynist. Try reading some Serious Literature instead of your fanfic romance YA smut beach reads!"

"Uh, okay, well, it's not so much about the character being likeable as about the way the narrative doesn't seem to challenge the character's, I must reiterate, very widely held prejudices, that makes it seem less like a depiction of a flawed character and more like an uncritical replication of those very widely held prejudices --"

"It's a LITERARY PERSPECTIVE, GOD, didn't you go to SCHOOL? Do you think Lolita is a love story? Do you think Fight Club is about how awesome fighting is?"

"Well, no, but, for example, the way the character was so emotionally abusive to her fat daughter and her neurodivergent son --"

"Uggggh, you don't understand ANYTHING, women don't have to be PERFECT MOTHERS, she's supposed to represent HOW REAL WOMEN FEEL in the face of UNREALISTIC EXPECTATIONS OF PERFECT MOTHERHOOD!"

"So... the unquestioned-by-the-narrative elitism, classism, sizeism, ableism, and ageism are supposed to be... going against societal expectations?"

"OBVIOUSLY! That's how REAL WOMEN REALLY FEEL!"

"I'm a real woman, and I don't feel that way."

"UGGGGGH, YOU ILLITERATE MISOGYNIST, FEMALE CHARACTERS DON'T HAVE TO BE RELATABLE!"

[worthlessandembarrasing]

Quotes from The Picture of Dorian Gray