#my opinions may not be entirely correct or accurate but as a person who has been consistently watching mostly cub for like a year now | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

ank01-fan · 2 years

Text

Bitcoin Is Not Stored Time, Energy, War - Bitcoin Magazine

This is an opinion editorial by Stephan Livera, host of the “Stephan Livera Podcast” and managing director of Swan Bitcoin International.There are metaphors and analogies for Bitcoin that you may have heard on podcasts or read from various articles or books — and this is not meant to criticize the entire practice of using metaphors or analogies to pique people’s interest in Bitcoin — but having a bad framework for understanding Bitcoin can cause errors in how we reason about it from there. If people take the metaphors too literally, they inevitably make mistakes in their reasoning about Bitcoin. First, let’s consider this quotation on whether all metaphors are wrong:“For it would be an absurd undertaking to banish from the language of economic theory every manner of speaking that is not literally correct; it would be sheer pedantry to proscribe every figure of speech, particularly since we could not say the hundredth part of what we have to say, if we refused ever to take recourse to a metaphor. One requirement is essential, that economic theory avoid the error of confusing a practical habit, indulged in for the sake of expediency, with scientific truth.” –Eugen von Bohm-BawerkSo, clearly, not all analogies are harmful. But when striving for accuracy, the metaphor can’t be confused with the real scientific truth.

‘Bitcoin Is Stored Time’

The popular notion that bitcoin can “store our time” is an overly loose and imprecise metaphor. It typically comes up when Bitcoiners are talking about the injustice of fiat currency (this part is correct), but then it goes awry when the metaphor is stretched too far into suggesting that we should “store our time” in bitcoin instead of fiat currency. The “store of value” concept can arguably apply to Bitcoin if we consider longer time frames, but it’s really not storing time. As the saying goes, time waits for no man. We speak in loose terms such as economizing time or “saving time,” but really, time itself is not what we economize, it’s how we spend our time. The preference is in the doing. Or, as my podcast guest Conza recounted from a conversation with Konrad Graf, “Go ahead, try not to spend some time and save it for later instead.”Even when equivocating bitcoin as purchasing power which may be the spirit of the analogy, it is important to remember that there are no guarantees here. Bitcoin’s purchasing power has gone down over selected time frames, which is where thinking of bitcoin as stored time can really lead a person astray if taken too literally. Now, a shout out to my friend Gigi, who has written on the concept of Bitcoin as building out an arrow of time. This concept does make sense and it helps to explain why Bitcoin is designed the way it is — by keeping time using blocks instead of seconds and not relying on a centralized time keeper. This is distinct from the incorrect metaphor of “bitcoin as storing your time.” So, a more accurate framing would be that bitcoin keeps time (using blocks, not seconds), but it does not store your time.

Bitcoin As Energy/Battery

Some people speak of Bitcoin as digital energy or as though it is a battery. But remember, while Bitcoin miners use energy, Bitcoin still does not allow anyone to store or transport energy. There is not some central counter that we can go take our bitcoin to and redeem it for a set amount of energy. Yes, energy could be priced and sold for bitcoin, but that’s not the same thing. The price of energy will fluctuate and bitcoin will not even metaphorically store the same amount of energy over time.What error can this lead to? It can mislead people on where the value is coming from. This metaphor leads people toward a kind of cost theory of value, effectively putting the horse before the cart. Instead, we should reason from the subjective theory of value:“The value of a good is not determined by any inherent property of the good, nor by the amount of labor required to produce the good, but instead value is determined by the importance an acting individual places on a good for the achievement of their desired ends.” A related cousin of this is the notion that bitcoin is “backed by” energy. Typically, this comes up when a nocoiner says, “But Bitcoin isn’t backed by anything.” So, in some cases, a well intentioned but wrong Bitcoiner may say, “No, Bitcoin is backed by energy!” But this is wrong. Generally, when something is “backed by” something else, it implies that it somehow has the support of some other entity, like a government. Historically, people say the U.S. dollar was “backed by” gold, and people could historically redeem notes for gold, but no such thing exists with Bitcoin. So, perhaps a better question to ask is, “What’s gold backed by?” Only then are we getting to the truth of the matter: it was all subjective valuation all along. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

Bitcoin As Violence Or A ‘Weapon’

Some people want to frame Bitcoin as a kind of “digital violence” or, more recently, frame it as a weapon and part of a “soft war protocol.” But this is a gross misrepresentation of what Bitcoin is. Bitcoin is more like cryptographic messages being passed around and validated on a network. Surely that is closer to “speech” than a “weapon.” Or, more accurately, bitcoin can be thought of as a rivalrous digital commodity (the first of its kind), operating on an open-source monetary network. If the pen is mightier than the sword, would it be appropriate to call a pen a weapon? Not really. Also, this whole line of argument is clearly blurring a line between what’s voluntary, and what is initiating aggression (which is the part that’s wrong). How is running a node, adopting bitcoin as a rivalrous digital commodity and participating in the network a form of “weaponry”? This is just gross mischaracterisation. Words mean things. Some of the analogies and metaphors used in relation to “bitcoin as soft war protocol” relate to miners competing to secure the “chain of custody.” But do they? Or is it really more like Bitcoin nodes are what secure Bitcoin? Miners can’t make invalid transactions appear valid to those who are running and verifying transactions with their own Bitcoin node. So, isn’t it more relevant to think of it like nodes secure Bitcoin? The job of miners is important, but their job is more related to finality of transactions, not security.

So, What Is The Real Truth Then?

So, as mentioned earlier, economically speaking, bitcoin is more accurately characterized as a rivalrous digital commodity. Bitcoin is the commodity itself — it’s not a claim on something, it is the commodity itself. When people ask what it is backed by, this indicates they haven’t quite grasped what it is. If an analogy helps a new person get into Bitcoin and start going down the rabbit hole, that’s great! But as that person advances their knowledge about Bitcoin, additional precision about what Bitcoin is will help us all. Thanks to my friend Conza for inspiring this article and providing feedback. This is a guest post by Stephan Livera. Opinions expressed are entirely their own and do not necessarily reflect those of BTC Inc or Bitcoin Magazine. Read the full article

0 notes

kendrixtermina · 2 years

Note

Hey, I see you're into the enneagram and like Big Hormone Enneagram's content. They seem like the only people who actually know what they're talking about, I love them. Are you going to get typed by enneagrammer? The people running BHE run a typing service on there. Your aesthetic and posts makes me wonder what they'll tell you.

Well. Since you asking my opinion: While I do agree that they have good content & are pretty funny, too, I would hardly say that they are the only ones, and I would caution against blanket subscribing to any one source rather than making up your own mind according to what makes sense to you personally. I agree with them on a bunch of things; I think the supposed "controversy" seems largely overblown, but I also disagree with them on some things.

One being the efficacy of visual typing & their tendency to think their intuitions and "body impressions" or whatever are somehow exce,pt from the problem of perception.

I understand that they're doing this as a backlash against USA society which is highly dismissive of feelings & intuition.

It also has to be considered that they believe in esoterics as their religion/spirituality. They do not hide it and is their good right to have an opinion, but it has to be kept in mind that this causes them to invest their conceptions of "vibes" or "energies" with a certain sense of objective reality.

Basically, I personally do not subscribe to this "Only the guru knows and you need them to tell you" mindset. "You know nothing & need to be saved".

And I want to make it clear that I'm not saying this is any problem specifically with them or declaring them "problematic" or anything like that - complaining that the esoterics ppl are doing esoterics would be as nonsensical as deliberately walking into a Mc donals and then ranting about how it smells of friend chicken.

I'm just having a philosophic disagreement, under the base assumption that adults can agree to disagree without flinging mud.

My disagreement is not even with these specific people, but with the basic premises of religion/spirituality, where you're often expected to take something on faith that is said to be inaccessible to you.

And if you discount such "you must believe in it to experience it" doctrines, then an expert is just somebody who read a lot of books, did some observing & accumulated some experience. Anyone with the time, the energy & the nerve for it could become one.

There is never any magical line or special property that is conferred upon you.

The truth is, in theory, accessible to everyone. You may have to learn to "pay attention to it", but it is accessible to you right now.

They don't have access to any evidence that I do not. It makes sense to ask for help if you're new to the system & want fast results or if you're stuck (so the expert can help you interpret the evidence or point out some possibilities you may not have thought of), but why would I pay for help when I'm not confused or in doubt? At most I'd do it to study their method in action.

How much requests do you think they get? How much time do you think they have for every person? & does it really save me work, if I have to decide & assess whether what they said is well founded? What you'd be getting/paying for is the best guess of an experienced person, nothing more, nothing less. Sure has a higher rate of being correct than a random guess or that of a newby, but even 99% accurate tests in medicine produce so many errors there are entire branches of statistics & techniques in science for dealing with the random false positives/ false negatives of highly accurate tests.

The best thing an expert can do is make you realize why X is true, so you can prove it to yourself for yourself and need not take anybody's word for it.

From what I've heard they're not good at convincing / arguing with ppl, lots of kafka trapping, goalpost shifting etc. that does not convince anyone even if they are correct, &even if they're well intentioned & taking a lot of time to explain stuff.

Simply cause they're experts at enneagram, not rhetorics, & most ppl don't know how to argue productively if they are not trained. (again, this is not at all intended as a personal indictment of them; No one is born knowing everything. I sure wasn't)

I think a better policy to have would be, like... “The doctor knows about diseases, you know about your symptoms”, if you get what I mean.

So like, why immediately think "what would they say to x"? Decide for yourself what your opinion is. Use the eyes in your skull. If you got it wrong, you could still correct it later as more data is gathered.

What would *you* say?

Though, I’m going to say upfront that I am not at all interested in debating that, boring, thankless and unproductive activity, I do not care to prove anything about myself to anyone; You can all think what you want, since I cannot stop you anyway.

I’m mostly interested in this as an intellectual curiosity because I like to wonder about “what is consciousness even”, how does motivation work etc. much as this may be explored through art. etc.

My own type only matters in the sense that I’d like to think I’m proficient enough at this skill to determine it.

I know what I am like; All typology can do is give me some word for certain parts of it. Vocabulary to explain it to others, be able to better understand their different points of views by knowing where I am relative to them, or think about it systematically for the purpose of cultivating self-awareness.

1 note · View note

qqueenofhades · 2 years

Note

HEY. i wanted to ask you what you thought of Kathryn Warner as a historian?

I haven't personally read enough of her work to have a particular opinion on her narrative style or use of sources, but I know that she is a big member of the Ian Mortimer Club in re: Edward II, wherein they basically act like all historians who don't accept their Superior and Enlightened Theory about him secretly not dying in 1327 are total idiots who shouldn't even be given the time of day. (Mortimer himself is infamous for being a dick about this, and he wrote the forward to Warner's biography of Edward II, so yeah.) And yes, all historians have pet theories and speculations and niche hypotheses with varying levels of support or textual evidence, but if you constantly insist that yours is the Only Correct Reading and everyone else is just unwilling to appreciate your genius, that's not really a healthy attitude.

If you're an academic historian, you have to be open to constructive criticism, you have to be willing to read and interpret sources in multiple ways and to acknowledge the obvious fact that we don't know everything and are working with limited and subjective sets of evidence, and since the actual proof for Edward II's supposed not-death in 1327 is flimsy and circumstantial at best, it strikes me as being in the same vein as the Richard III apologists (such as the ones discussed earlier this year) who try everything to "prove" that he didn't actually kill the Princes in the Tower. If lots of other people have examined the same evidence and don't necessarily agree that it supports your position, given that old "extraordinary claims need extraordinary evidence" rule of thumb, it doesn't mean that obviously you're right and they're just wrong and stupid. Instead, it means (at the least) that you need to take a better look at it yourself. But since people like the Ricardian Society and all the other Plantagenet-era revisionist historians have staked their entire careers on "proving" the experts wrong (even if they never actually do), they don't do that.

In short, if that kind of challenge happens to you, you could (and should) at least admit the possibility that your pet theory, or even just some parts of your pet theory, might be wrong, instead of doubling down all over again. If you don't do so, it becomes difficult to trust that you're actually interpreting other evidence correctly, or that I myself would do the same if I looked at it independently. If you're tying your entire identity as a scholar to one controversial argument, which you are in the distinct minority about making and which you won't accept any criticism of, ever, then you get relegated, at least in my mind, to the more conspiracy-theorist, contrarian lower level of historians, rather than people participating in serious and well-grounded academic practice that actually does want to exchange and engage ideas in good faith. That may or may not be totally fair of me, but still.

To some degree, all history is obviously "revisionist": there is not one solid and unquestionable narrative of "what really happened," and if you make your argument well, almost all good scholars are willing to accept it and to use it to critically update common narratives or widely accepted beliefs that may no longer be accurate. After all, nobody wants to be the idiot who's still citing something 30 years out of date, if the peer review process has produced something better and more relevant. But if your ideas have repeatedly been rejected by said peer review process, and you haven't modified them at all and just hurl insults at everyone who doesn't appreciate your genius, then yeah, you're not contributing to any of that, and people are justified in not really taking you seriously. This is directed more at Mortimer than Warner, but as she's in the same group, it does apply to her as well.

#anonymous #ask #history #medieval history

22 notes · View notes

caelestis-composition · 3 years

Note

killshot anon! YEAH i totally agree w/ your view on kaeya. it's so weird to me that people will blame him for his role in a situation he was forced into as a child through no choice of his own. that itself had to be traumatic, not to mention everything that happened later. i hate when people say he's untrustworthy - like yeah, he's lied, so has everyone? it's clear he does it mostly to protect himself. not to mention that (& sadism) can be symptoms of trauma. kaeya deserves nothing but happiness

take a seat folks it’s time for a “brynn should’ve been an english major” lesson! today we’re gonna learn some literary theory; specifically, we’re gonna apply psychoanalytical trauma theory to kaeya’s backstory and current character. killshot anon i bet you never thought this would result in a whole ass essay.

disclaimer one! you are allowed to dislike kaeya! i am not saying you need to like him or his character, you’re entitled to your opinion and i’m not here to change your mind.

disclaimer two! i am in no way an expert and this is all for fun! this is just my silly little analysis of one of my favorite characters as someone who’s studied literary theory and rhetoric and can also apply personal experience. seriously analysis is like a hobby to me and this is just an excuse for me to ramble about kaeya.

disclaimer three! this contains lots of spoilers! basically for everything we know in-game, general knowledge as well as stuff from his voicelines and character story. don’t read this if you don’t want spoilers.

since this is going to be filled with spoilers and is about to get really long, everything will be under a cut. for those who wanna read my dumb super informal essay: enjoy!

final note: yeah this is over 2000 words long can you tell i like analysis

⭒

let’s start by getting a quick rundown of trauma theory out of the way. to begin, what is “trauma?” in this case, trauma is going to refer to an experience that greatly affects and changes one’s life; attitudes, memories, behaviors, mental state, etc. while not all changes may be bad, per se, the overall effect of trauma is generally a negative one, which is why it’s so significant. literary trauma theory, then, explores these changes and the impact of trauma in literature. it analyzes the psychological and social effects of trauma, explaining what those effects are and why they happen. in the context of a specific character, trauma theory breaks down said character’s behaviors, feelings, and general mentality in relation to their past experiences; trauma theory hopes to explain to others the reasons for why a character may act or feel the way they do, all based upon the character’s experiences, particularly traumatic ones. our character today is the lovely kaeya alberich, with the “literature” being genshin impact. i’ll be referencing kaeya’s wiki page to ensure i get all details correct for his character story and voicelines.

it would be good to review kaeya’s backstory before delving into the actual analysis. though we don’t know much about his life before living in mondstadt, we’re told he was sent as an agent of khaenri’ah. and by “sent,” i mean his biological father abandoned him in a completely unfamiliar land to serve khaenri’ah’s interests and fullfil his mission—what this entirely entails hasn’t been revealed. mondstadt, however, welcomed kaeya “with open arms when they found him.” crepus ragnvindr took him in as his adopted son, with diluc as his adopted brother. kaeya and diluc were “almost like twins,” so close they “[knew] each other’s thoughts and intentions without a word.” he’d began a new life in mondstadt, one surrounded by friends and family that loved him; one that was completely shattered by crepus’s death. kaeya arrived at the scene of the disaster, and was led to believe diluc was the one who killed their father to “set his father free” from the effects of his delusion. there’d always been one big question in kaeya’s life: if it came down to it, who would he support? the nation that abandoned him, but he still felt loyal to, or the nation and family that took him in and really loved him? overrun with guilt, kaeya confessed his purpose to diluc, sparking a fight between the two brothers. in this fight, kaeya receives his cryo vision. though both brothers stepped away alive, they’ve never been able to make peace with one another. now, kaeya is the eccentric and charming cavalry captain of the knights of favonius; a man who gets his way by using any means necessary, regardless of whether or not it seems right.

kaeya’s not evil; he’s morally ambiguous, and that stems from what appears to be a general distrust of others. his life is one shrouded in secrecy. from the moment he stepped foot into mondstadt, he was surrounded by secrets. even now, he doesn’t talk about a lot of things, namely his past, vision, and feelings. though he’s always willing to get information out of others, kaeya never reveals anything about himself. he repeatedly tells the player they can confide in him, but whenever you try and pry into his life, he deflects your questions with some sort of witty comment or flirty remark. anything he does reveal is vague, or spoken in some sort of “code.” for example, his “interesting things” voiceline. he tells us about the owl of dragonspine, how it “seems to look right through you, while letting go of none of its own secrets,” and then tacks on a “quite fascinating, don’t you think?” it seems like an awfully accurate parallel to himself; kaeya does all he can to get information from others, but never gives anything about himself. now, this whole thing—his relationship with diluc falling apart and his need for secrecy—could have probably been avoided if he had just come clean about his mission years ago. so why didn’t he? to start, kaeya was a literal child. not only are children unable to properly tell the difference between right and wrong, but they’ll also typically follow their parents’ orders blindly. kaeya had just been abandoned, and he wouldn’t want to risk being cast out by mondstadt as well if he came clean right away. you see, there’s this thing about trauma, something that trauma theory states. traumatized people feel a sort of shame or guilt regarding their traumatic experience; they’ll keep quiet because they don’t want to cause problems or bother others with their issues. of course kaeya wouldn’t tell the truth about his past, he doesn’t want to destroy the genuinely loving relationships he’d built in mondstadt. his fight with diluc only proves what he was afraid of: if he’s honest, he’ll be abandoned again. and if kaeya’s used to all the lies, why should he bother changing?

another thing, if he’s not going to tell the truth, then why would he have initially gone along with his father’s plans? again, he was a child. he really had no choice, and was forced into a very wrong and cruel situation. there’s a good explanation for this, too, which is also stated in trauma theory; traumatized people will still do their best to please their abusers. especially if said abuser is a parent, that will drive traumatized people to work even harder to please them. although his father hurt him by ruthlessly abandoning him, kaeya still sought to make him and his homeland proud. he was willing to be used as a tool for their gain; that is, until he found people who actually cared about him. he was an impressionable child, of course he’s going to obey orders. but as he gets older, he feels torn. does he serve those who abandoned him, or those that took him in? his father—and arguably, khaenri’ah as a whole—hurt him, sure, but he still feels some loyalty and connection to his former home. instead of revealing anything, he lets the situation play out. that way, he can’t be blamed when things fall apart.

the thing about claiming he’s untrustworthy is that hardly anyone in-game believes that. he’s adored by the older folks in mondstadt, and foes and allies alike find him easy to talk to. despite seeming lazy and uninterested in work, kaeya takes his job very seriously. in fact, his story states that crepus’s death was the “first and only time kaeya failed in his duty.” the “only time” is especially important, because it signifies kaeya still fulfills his duties successfully. he’s had a total of one slip-up, and hasn’t failed since. no, kaeya is not untrustworthy. rather, kaeya finds everyone else untrustworthy. it’s not unlikely that this is a direct consequence of being abandoned as a child. although it’s been established that kaeya and diluc were very close as children, when crepus dies, kaeya assumes diluc is the one that killed him. in order to jump to such an extreme conclusion against someone he was so close to, there had to be some underlying sense of distrust. furthermore, kaeya expresses feeling as though he doesn’t belong anywhere. he was abandoned by khaenri’ah, and then worried he wouldn’t be accepted by mondstadt. he is, but there’s still that worry. if you place him in your teapot as a companion, he tells you that your home feels like someplace he belongs, following it up with a “heh, who’d have thought…” kaeya still feels as though he doesn’t belong in mondstadt; despite the fact that he’s a high-ranking knight of favonius and rather popular, he still feels like an outsider. he doesn’t trust that anyone actually wants him around, and he finds joy in testing peoples’ trustworthiness. it’s noted in his story and through his voicelines that the beloved cavalry captain has a rather sadistic nature. he likes putting people into difficult situations, to see what decisions they will make. he does this to both opponents and allies, testing to see who’s going to back out and who’ll keep fighting; in the sake of allies, who can he trust? or who will turn tail and abandon their teammates at the slightest hint of danger? i mentioned it previously, but kaeya doesn’t care what measures he has to take so long as his job gets done and he gets the answers he wants. it’s a sort of self-preserving mindset, putting himself above the safety of others. kaeya’s trying to protect himself, which makes sense with all he’s been through. he doesn’t want to be hurt, and instead finds pleasure in threatening harm upon others. it’s twisted, sure, but it’s because he can only trust himself in a world that he believes is out to get him. he’s got as many enemies—if not more—as he does allies; of course kaeya focuses on protecting himself first, whether physically or through keeping his secrets, well, secret.

his most obvious traumatic effect is definitely his alcoholism. but he uses it as a distraction, not just to wallow in self-pity. this is seen again in his story, particularly in story 3. it’s found that when his favorite drink, death after noon, is out of season, mondstadt’s crime rate is decreased drastically. at face value, this just means kaeya spends more time working when death after noon is low in supply. but kaeya doesn’t skip work to go to taverns; it’s already been established he takes his job very seriously, so this means he actually patrols and tracks down threats while off work when he can’t indulge in his favorite alcoholic drink. he doesn’t get drunk simply because he’s depressed. if he did, there wouldn’t be a drop in incidents when death after noon is out of season. no, kaeya uses both the alcohol and fighting to distract himself. after all, it’s a little hard to think about feeling sad when you’re either drunk out of your mind or fighting for your life.

despite being so secretive, kaeya gives us glimpses of his true emotions from time to time. as previously mentioned, his flirty attitude is nothing more than a mask to hide how he really feels; and kaeya is terribly, terribly lonely. that may be why he seems so extroverted. constantly being around people should, logically, drive away that feeling, but it doesn’t work like that. when he talks with the player, he frequently expresses disappointment when you have to leave. each time, though, he dampens the weight of his words with playful or flirty language. he’s lonely, but doesn’t want you to know that, like he’s afraid of asking you to stay. he takes the seriousness of his feelings, and basically bends it into some sort of lighthearted joke. kaeya hides his true feelings—negative feelings, to be exact—so that he doesn’t bother anyone. which is, again, something that happens with traumatized people. he displays that hesitance to reveal his true feelings, because there’s a shame or guilt that comes with his past. he doesn’t want to bother others or hold them back, so he puts on a smile and amps up the charisma. one other very important thing—but very small detail—i would like to note is his feelings toward family. his fell apart not even once, but twice, and kaeya still holds familial relationships in high regard. we know he doesn’t exactly care how he goes about getting his work done. he doesn’t pay attention to what’s “right” or “wrong,” so long as he gets what he needs. but one of his informants, vile, notes that the cavalry captain has one exception: he won’t work with those who threaten others’ families. in fact, kaeya claims those who do should be hunted down and destroyed. even though his own families have caused him so much pain—and he ended up estranged from both—he still understands the importance of having people who love you in your life. because he didn’t get that.

kaeya’s not evil. ultimately, as a knight of favonius, his goal is to protect others, because no one was there to protect him. and because no one was there to protect him, because he’s been hurt time and time again by people who were supposed to love him, kaeya has taken to protecting himself. he hides any and all negative feelings with a charismatic, friendly façade, because he thinks it’ll drive away his persistent loneliness. any “bad” actions of his were hardly his fault; he was forced into a life of secrecy and lies, and then abandoned by the first people who truly loved him. kaeya’s a multi-faceted, tragic character, one that toes the line between good and evil, and that’s what makes him so interesting.

#brynn yells #brynn answers #killshot anon #brynn's writing #genshin #genshin impact #kaeya #kaeya alberich #genshin kaeya

226 notes · View notes

rainbowsky · 3 years

Text

Did DLS Out DD During a DDU Recording and Make Him Cry?

This has been making the rounds on Twitter and YouTube and even Tumblr, for a while now. Fancam footage of DLS making a boyfriend joke and then leaning in to a supposedly upset DD and trying to smooth things over.

This whole thing is based on fancam footage taken during the recording of the DDU 20190825 episode. In this episode dating was being discussed using four beautiful young women, DD and QF along with two handsome young guests as a backdrop.

The subtitles of the fan cam present a scenario where DLS supposedly refers to DD as ‘not needing a girlfriend because he already has a boyfriend’ and then leaning into a supposedly emotional DD and apologizing, trying to calm him down; saying viewers won’t understand what was said.

Let’s take a look at the video:

undefined

youtube

The full fan cam footage that this out of context clip was taken from can be found here.

If you watch the episode and the complete fan cam footage, you’ll see that this happened during the segment where they were being asked to comment on various dating scenarios. An announcer would present each scenario in a multiple choice format, asking the women to choose between four options based on the type of guy they’d most like to date. For example:

How would you like the boy you like to invite you for a meal on the weekend?

A] Save your weekend for me. Do not say no.

B] You had breakfast at 7:50 this morning and lunch at 12:30. It’s already 7pm now. You have to eat meals on time. Why don’t I take you out for dinner?

C] I tried to explain my thoughts when I look at you, but I failed. So do you have time for dinner with me this weekend? Let’s talk about it.

D] Get out. Dinner.

My opinion

We should always, always be suspicious of anything that is presented without context. 99.9% of the time, when someone removes context they are doing so to mislead audiences. This clip is a perfect example of that. The video creator appears to have removed important context in order to make the clip better fit the narrative they’re trying to sell.

In this segment of the episode, the hosts and guests were seen commenting on the options as they were being read out. The comments DLS is making appear to be in response to something the announcer has said. I don’t think the comments have anything whatsoever do to with DD.

I also don’t think DD looks even remotely upset. Certainly not near tears. Some fans seem over-eager to claim DD is crying. We’ve all seen DD cry, but it’s exceptionally rare and only happens in very personal situations. This doesn’t qualify. It wouldn’t qualify even if everything the video creator claimed was true. DD would be more likely to get angry than cry in such a situation. He isn’t doing either of these things.

Whoever made this video simply doesn’t ‘get’ DD’s personality at all. The people who buy this are similarly unfamiliar with him.

I invite everyone to use your own eyes and your own judgment. Ignore what’s being claimed, ignore the framing you’ve been given of the scenario by me or the video creator, and instead just watch the clip. Does that look like a man on the verge of tears to you?

Second and third opinions

I asked the indispensable @potteresque-ire and @knivescharade what they thought of the clip. I didn’t tell them anything about my opinion, but simply sent the clip and asked their thoughts - are the subtitles correct, what do you think of the lip reading, etc.

@knivescharade

wow, for this person to put this analysis in i would say that lip reading is a very difficult skill. and to try and lip read someone like DLS, who speaks like a bullet train and doesn't really enunciate SUPER well (unlike Han-ge, for example) ... i would say the interpretation is only very vaguely possible at best.

i know both the cand int fandom have a major something for how WYB keeps swallowing around XZ, but honestly. WYB tends to get throat issues. i think swallowing has become one of his habits at this point. so... in conclusion... there are already lots of major, amazing, and irrefutable candies in the fandom already, let's not bother with such iffy ones :D

he is indeed saying that "this man has a boyfriend", but i cant quite remember which part of the show that was in. i watched that episode, it was something to do with love and having 4 guys paired with 4 girls or something like that, and listening to 'types of guys responses to etc etc' so DLS wasnt saying that WYB has a boyfriend - he was saying that 'this man', the one whose voice was playing in the audio, has a boyfriend.

That tracks with my interpretation of what was happening.

@potteresque-ire

Unless people have learned the dialect, Mandarin speakers cannot understand Cantonese, and vice versa. This is why I don't support or wash auditory candies, especially if it involves someone from Northern China (such as DLS, who is a Beijing native). Their local accents make their Mandarin even more difficult to understand.

This dialect restriction is actually not specific to a me, or other Hong Kongers. Someone whose family is entirely from Northern China would be equally prone to making mistakes if they're asked to lip read southern Chinese.

Lip reading also removes tonal consideration, which makes everything that much more uncertain. Have you heard of the Mr Shi Eats the Lion story? This is why, even if I hear some similarities, I'd hesitate to say X has to be saying ABC. Context is important.

Cantonese speakers are especially picky about tone. Mandarin have 4. We have 6 or 9, depending on who you ask. So... I may be more picky than I should be that way too. And I don't want to spoil anyone's fun 😊

The translation was correct in the sense that it was faithful to the Chinese words in the clip I saw, which replicated what DLS said accurately. But the video itself was from a fancam. Where that fancam happened (and got cut off) was at Q3 at the Q & A segment, starting ~9:34 of the official YouTube clip.

DLS said what he said half way through the voiceover of Option A (very precisely, right after the words "I'm the only one"). Technically speaking, therefore, he wasn't talking about DD.

However, it was also a little strange why DLS said what he said. If you watch that segment, all options have a certain personality attached to them. C was very talkative / pretentious. D was connected to DD because it was blunt and direct. A was the so called "overbearing CEO" personality... which is common in het romance dramas but isn't one that has been connected to the gay stereotype. And so, DLS's timing of saying that ... is curious.

Dd did look a little ... I wouldn't say upset, but tense after DLS said that. Maybe it's because that comment kinda came out of nowhere (because of its curious timing), and so it would be read as hinting at something. But that comment is harmless, wording wise.

Alternate theory

I’ve seen some talk from fans about a different theory for why DLS said what he said. Fans say the announcer for option A was Bian Jiang, the actor who did the voice of LWJ in The Untamed. They say that DLS was making a joke about LWJ not needing a boyfriend because he already has one. That actually makes a lot of sense to me as well, and if that’s really Bian Jiang, then I’d say that’s the most likely explanation for this entire thing.

Conclusion

It’s my firm opinion that DLS was not talking about DD having a boyfriend, nor was DD ‘near tears’ in this clip. Whatever DLS said to DD after that, it almost certainly wouldn’t have been ‘words of comfort to placate an upset DD’.

The Bian Jiang theory fits best, but we don’t need to know why DLS said what he said to be able to conclude he wasn’t talking about DD.

Cute DD candy from this episode

If anyone wants a better candy from this episode, look no further than when he emerges from “door #2″, chosen by one of the women as someone she’d like to date based on the food he’d picked out, and immediately launches into “I want to take a man back to my place and hide him.” A LWJ reference (which DLS and Wang Han clarify with him because they appear baffled by what he just said), but still a tactful, perfect rejection of this woman he’s being paired with. 😅

#bjyx #yizhan #ddu #ttxs #bxg fact checking #ggdd entertainment circle #ggdd signs #Youtube

166 notes · View notes

iamanartichoke · 3 years

Text

I wasn't sure if I was going to post this, but I may as well.

I keep starting to reply to things and then stopping bc the words just aren't there, and I suppose I figured out the core of what bothers me so much (and is making me have such a rollercoaster of a fan experience) about the show.

(cut for length)

It's not well-written. My opinion is my opinion, so I'm saying this subjectively, take it or leave it, but ... I feel that it's not well-written. The overall story is fine, and the plot is fine, but I don't know if it's because of the limited number of episodes not being enough to house the story, or because of the relative inexperience of the writer/showrunner+director, or both, or something else, but -

In an earlier reaction post to episode 4, I mentioned really wanting to sink my teeth into all of the subtext I picked up on. That was what made me initially enjoy the episode so much - there were a lot of little moments that I initially felt revealed so much about the characters and about Loki, and I wanted to analyze them. But at some point, as I gathered more information, my perspective changed and now I no longer want to analyze the subtext bc ... subtext = good. Subtext w/out payoff = not as good.

I'll go into more detail in a moment, but I think the tl;dr of it is that I feel like the narrative requires the audience to work way too hard to put together all of the moving pieces here and, like, I kinda just don't want to do that work? Not so much of it, and not in vain. A lot of the enjoyment of Loki's characterization is coming from fans who are rationalizing why he's behaving as he is, but the narrative never actually confirms those rationalizations. It's asking us to figure it out and maybe our conclusions will be correct but maybe they won't, though. At some point, subtext isn't enough without explicit follow-through.

I thought my issue was with the lack of character development - that is, not having enough narrative space to really earn the big things that are happening now, like Loki/Sylvie or Mobius turning against the TVA. And that's still true, to an extent; I still feel like the pacing is all very off and it seems like most of these things kinda came out of nowhere (but are not unbelievable - just undeveloped).

But, yknow, it is what it is, it's a limited series, and I can excuse some things. Ultimately, my issue isn't a problem with what the narrative isn't doing, it's a problem with what the narrative already failed to do and probably cannot recover from at this point.

The narrative has left out significant details that should at least help us do some of the work here. If a person turned on Loki and started episode 1 and had no background knowledge of the character besides that he tried to take over New York - how would that person interpret Loki? Would that person say, oh, well, he's been through X, Y, and Z, and plus A happened, not to mention B, C, and D, so really, it makes sense that he seems off-the-rails, or that he'd want to get ridiculously drunk at the worst time ever.

Maybe we'd like to believe they would, but how would they be getting to that conclusion? The narrative hasn't led them in that direction so, no, they would not say well we have to consider this, this, and that. It would be impossible to really understand Loki as a character from just what we've gotten in the series. The general audience would probably interpret Loki as being out of his element and so it becomes, I wonder how this character is going to get the upper hand here. And, while that's not wrong, it's just so limited.

The narrative at face value does not address Loki's identity crisis from Thor 2011. It does not address his hurt and devastation at being lied to, nor does it address how complicated his self-image is (bc it sucked to begin with and that was before he found out he was part of a race of "monsters," as he'd been taught his entire life). It does not reference Loki being so broken at the end of Thor 2011 that he deliberately let himself fall into the void of space (aka tried to kill himself). It does not reference that he was tortured by Thanos or even that he went through a seriously dark time in between Thor and Avengers, and it absolutely does not reference or address any influence or control of the mind stone.

These are all things that we, the fan audience, know because we've already invested our time into this character's story. But tons of people, the general audience, wouldn't know these things. Or if they did, bc they saw Thor and Avengers, they wouldn't be thinking about them as deeply as we would, nor contextualizing them with how Loki is behaving now, or why it would make sense that he needed to get drunk, or why it's understandable that he needs to keep going-going-going in order to not have a spare second to think or feel.

They'd probably look at Loki, again, as a character who was a villain and is now getting his comeuppance in a place where he has no power or control, and no literal powers, and even when he manages to escape and catch up to the variant, he proceeds to fuck up their plan for seemingly no real reason except that he wanted to get drunk bc he's hedonistic. Which Sylvie even berates him for! I mean. This is not exactly a complex character breakdown, nor a very flattering one, but that's what the narrative has given us.

(If the narrative has addressed Loki's mind control, his torture, his mental breakdown, his suicide attempt, and his general shitty self-esteem as a result of his upbringing, please point it out to me. If the narrative has explicitly acknowledged and referenced these things anywhere and I am missing it, please show me where. Please explain to me how the casual viewer would know any of these things that they need to know in order to actually understand what's happening in this story.)

So I mean, okay, we have a narrative that doesn't paint a full, accurate picture of Loki. Fine, sure. But because the general audience starts out on the wrong footing, they're not going to get out of the overall story what the writers probably intended them to. For example, in episode 3, a lot of us theorized that Loki had some kind of plan - that he broke the timepad on purpose, for some reason, bc otherwise it wasn't believable that he'd be such a failure. But episode 4 revealed that no, there was no bigger plan, Loki just plain old messed up. Which is fine if, again, one is only considering the surface-level portrayal here, but it's not true to Loki's actual characterization.

I mean. Loki is not perfect and Loki actually fails a lot, this is true. He fails for a lot of reasons, but incompetence has never been one of them. Usually it's that either things grew beyond his control, or there ended up being too many moving parts, or he had to change his plan at the last minute due to some roadblock or another being thrown his way, or even that he got in his own way - whatever the case may be for his plans' failures, he was always at least shown to know what he was doing.

That wasn't the case here. The "plan" to fix the Timepad failed as a direct result of Loki's actions, which were careless and made him seem incompetent, like he couldn't even handle this mission. "You had one job," etc. And there were pretty big consequences for this; they were not able to get off-world in time and would have been killed had the TVA not shown up at the last second.

And maybe none of these things matter bc the writers never intended any of this to be a reflection on Loki's character, positive or negative. The situation exists solely because the writers needed to put Loki and Sylvie together in some kind of hopeless scenario so that they could get closer, and thus the narrative could set up their romance. I get that - but, there were other ways to do it that didn't require Loki to look foolish.

Furthermore, the whole reason they needed to set up the romance is to show Loki eventually learning to love himself (like, figuratively but also literally). The audience is supposed to gather that Loki and Sylvie fell for one another, possibly due to the high emotional aspect of, yknow, being about to die (in addition to the variant-bond). The intent is clear: Loki and Sylvie almost die but get rescued at the last minute, having now created an emotional bond --> Loki and Sylvie team up and the narrative further establishes that Loki, at least, has caught feelings --> Loki might confess them but is pruned before he gets the chance --> he somehow survives, he and Sylvie are reunited and don't want to lose one another again, and the combined power of their love is enough to break the sacred timeline and spawn the multiverse, and the reason that the power of their love is so, well, powerful is because it's about self-love and self-acceptance as much as it is about having the capacity to love someone else. The end.

I get all that. The writers more or less said all that. And, I mean, it's certainly not the way I would have chosen to go about it, but it's a fair enough arc to explore. I don't really have an issue with the intent - but my question, however, is this: if the narrative has so far not addressed Loki's background issues (as outlined above), and has furthermore kinda gone out of its way to portray Loki as hedonistic and narcissistic, among other things (like kinda incompetent), and the context the audience starts with is that Loki's this villain who deserves what he gets -

- my question is 1, why should the audience care whether or not Loki gets to a point of loving and accepting himself (thus to make the theme of self-love, via the romance, hold weight) if they don't know that he hates himself to begin with and 2, why should the audience root for Loki to reach that point when so far the perception of him is that he's "kind of an asshole"? if he's a hedonistic narcissist, he probably already has a pretty inflated sense of himself, right? A misplaced inflated sense of himself, at that, because, again, the narrative has made him out to be not that capable of much of anything. (And it didn't start out that way! It seemed to start out with Loki being capable and intelligent but it's like episode 3, in trying to set up the romance, just jumbled it all up somewhere. I think this is why I'm harping on the Loki/Sylvie aspect so much - it's frustrating bc it kinda messes up the whole story and can't even accomplish what it's supposed to anyway.)

Anyway, that's beside the point. What I'm ultimately getting at is, at what point is the audience supposed to get invested in Loki's personal growth journey?

They can't, not really. Without understanding and having the context of everything Loki has been through up until now, and why he hates himself, and why it's so important that he learn to love himself, then the "payoff" becomes kinda pointless bc the significance of it is lost in translation. So suddenly we're left with this romance that comes off as either "Loki loves Sylvie bc of Reasons" (best-case scenario) or "Loki loves Sylvie bc he's vain, narcissistic, and kinda twisted" (worst-case scenario). Neither of these conclusions are what the writers intended or were going for, I'm positive, but there we are, regardless.

In order for the writers' intent in these storylines to land, they need to address the context of what makes these particular stakes high for Loki. So far, they haven't done that. They're asking the audience to pick up on all of these things, and they're showing things that subtextually make sense and are relatively in-character - but only if you realize there's subtext in the first place.

But you can't expect the audience to do all of the work for you. If you don't want the audience to think that Loki is a narcissistic asshole and instead you are trying to convey that, worst-case scenario, he thinks he's a narcissist but is an unreliable narrator, then you have to address that. If you need the audience to understand why you're going the selfcest route and why it's important to explore Loki's capacity to love himself and others, you have to address where that exploration is starting from and why it matters. Etc etc etc.

The narrative isn't doing any of that. And it isn't like it'd be that hard to do it. They don't need to reinvent the wheel here; a lot of the pieces are already there. A few lines of dialogue for context, a brief scene here or there addressing the issues, a little more care and consistency in how Loki handles things - these are all little things that could go a long fucking way in making the narrative stronger.

I'm rambling. My basic point is that my rollercoaster of emotions with this show is because

- as a part of the fan audience, not the general one, I can contextualize and analyze the subtext and come to the conclusions the show wants me to, and thus find the story and the characters more or less enjoyable,

- but I am also going to be using the subtext to come to conclusions that aren't there but probably should be (I think it would be a better story, for example, for Loki to confuse platonic love with romantic love bc it would pave the way to explore just how fucked up Loki's understanding of love - whether of other people or of himself, and the different forms it can take - actually is)

- and when they're ultimately not there, then I think, okay why am I bothering doing all this work just to ultimately feel very unfulfilled? They don't even have to write it the way I would, I'm not saying that, but they do have to do something to make the story feel rewarding.

If we don't get some confirmation of what Loki's been through, and where his headspace is, and why it matters for him to love himself, then the story remains pretty shallow and, for me, it's not fulfilling enough. It's not engaging enough. There isn't actually anything to sink my teeth into, so it becomes kind of boring. Maybe it's rewarding to other people, and that's great for them, but like - I need more than whatever this is.

So I'm just like - well, I had a lot of worries about this show, but my being bored wasn't one of them and now there's only two episodes left and am I really not going to get anything out of this, in the long run? No new canons, no new depths or layers, no new information on Loki's experiences? This is it?

I don't dislike it. I didn't start out disliking it, and I probably wont end up disliking it. I mean, there are a lot of good moments, and good things, and fan service-y things that I appreciate. As far as inspiration for fic goes, it's a goldmine, both plot-wise as well as aesthetic-wise. All of that is great. I don't dislike this show.

But I am disappointed in it, and I feel like I'll be watching the next two episodes lacking the sense of anticipation that would make it exciting. I'll still enjoy them, probably, if for nothing else just the sheer Loki content, but whatever it was I felt watching episodes 1 and 2 is gone and I'm sad about that, too. Because I really wanted to feel fulfilled by this series; I wanted it to fill up the void that Loki's death in IW created three years ago. And I just ... don't feel it. Maybe, maybe that'll change over the course of episodes 5 and 6. I don't know.

Everything that I end up enjoying long-term, I think, will come about as a result of my own interpretations and analysis and while theoretically there's nothing wrong with that, if I had known all I'd get out of this series was more headcanons or support for my current headcanons then, well - that's fine, I suppose, but I'll definitely a little bit robbed.

#loki spoilers #loki series negativity #loki tv series spoilers #loki series spoilers #long post

149 notes · View notes

stellocchia · 3 years

Text

Okay, holy crap did we get an interesting stream yesterday! Time for an analysis of it!

So, there is a lot of confusion surrounding the stream and, more importantly, c!Wilbur himself. So I wanted to try and interpret this whole thing at the best of my abilities for my own sanity.

Before that though there are a few things we have to keep in mind:

For something to be manipulation there needs to be intent on the side of the manipulator, which can be quite hard to establish in some cases

A lot of c!Wilbur’s confusing thoughts and constantly fluctuating opinions come from a general lack of knowledge, his own faulty worldview and his incredible overestimation of his own impact in the world, which I’ll talk about more later, more so then what actually would appear to be an intentionally manipulative behaviour

One more thing to point out is that Wilbur sees his life as a spectacle. To him reaching his “desired conclusion” the first time was a victory and he seems to have started on a sort of scripted “redemption arc”, and I mean scripted within the narrative not meta wise, (in which he’s trying to drag Tommy into as well) after he had his self-proclaimed “villain arc” in Pogtopia, however this view is faulty at best...

We also have to keep in mind that c!Wilbur is truly a relict from the past at this point. He places an incredible amount of value on “factions” and “leadership” and has a very black and white world view, but things have changed a lot since he was around and they’re much more complicated then that now which leaves him with a complete lack of understanding for the world around him and possibly with no tools to correct that lack of understanding

And for last, let’s keep in mind that Wilbur is an INCREDIBLY UNRELIABLE narrator. We cannot trust everything that comes out of his mouth so let’s not take everything blindly as fact

Also, while all I’ve just said is true Tommy is still 100% entitled to not trust him at all and to not be sympathetic towards him, even without considering this stream (and trust me: I’ll get to that one) because their history together is not great. Keep in mind that they were basically alone during Pogtopia and that Wilbur always sorta grouped himself and Tommy together (as in Wilbur considered BOTH of them to be “the bad guys” and BOTH of them to be bad for the server and better off dead) and he was always extremely manipulative in the ways that he used to try and get Tommy to believe his world view as well (and he seemed to adopt a similar behaviour in the stream, but I’ll get to that one later). Sadly that also means that Tommy isn’t a reliable narrator at all for what concerns Wilbur...

Okay, now with all the introduction out of the way the proper analisys will be under the cut! Be advised that it’ll treat some very heavy topics (like abuse, manipulation etc) so, you know, keep that in mind.

The stream I’ll be using for this one is: Meet the latest resurrected gentleman of L'manburg, though I may take some things from: Wilbur Is Revived.

The stream starts with Tommy and Wilbur meating up on the glass covering the L’Manburg crater. Right after we have a bit of banter with Wilbur openly mocking Ghostbur, ignoring Tommy’s discomfort at the subject, like always. I wanna say it right now that the dismissal of whatever Tommy is feeling and whatever he says that does not align with Wilbur’s idea of Tommy is not something new. It’s a behaviour Wilbur developed all throughout the Pogtopia times. He may look like he listens to Tommy a bit more during this stream, but he never takes into account anything he says and constantly dismisses anything he feels, so we know that’s not true. Of course, Wilbur is not the only person who exibited this behaviour (Tommy often gets dismissed when he speaks and if re-watching exile taught me anything is that Dream was also very keen on dismissing all of his emotions).

Also one of the first things Wilbur asks about is his Chekhov's gun, which Tommy moves on from quickly without answering (propably because it got destroyed by Dream while Tommy had it).

“Hey pu- Hey! Put Friend down!” “Wh-why? He’s gonna come with us!” “I don’t want you... no he could die!” “And? It’s a sheep Tommy, who cares about-” “Calm down man! I know- I know that you have the power of eternity over him, but just put him down!” “No! I’m just saying: who cares about a sheep man? It’s just a sheep. Just come...” “Oh I fucking...” “What?! It’s just a sheep my man!”

Once again dismissal of Tommy’s emotions, but also an introduction to the theme of attachments that seems like will be important once again. This time the conflict that’s introduced surrounding attachments is not about their intrinsic value (like it was in season 2) but it seems to be that of attachments vs ideals. In this case what we’re presented with is seemingly a detachment from Wilbur (though we can’t say if it’s volountary, like in Dream’s case, or just an effect of his depression yet).

“Tommy... I’m sorry” “Wait what are you- are you gonna kill me?” “No no sorry” “You’re gonna wack me?” “Ignore the Lore Sword, I’m- I don’t- I’m not good at this man. I need to make some apologies. I told you I needed to have a think and I don’t think an apology would ever sum up... uh... what I did here. I mean look at this mess!” *looking at the crater of L’Manburg* “You did this! Well, not all of it, you did a little bit” “Yeah... I didn’t do the glass. But like I think- I think that I do need to, I need to apologize to some people! You know, I’m gonna- I’m gonna make amends!”

Okay, there are a lot of things to unpack here:

1) Tommy’s immediate reaction to Wilbur apparently softening up while holding a sword is to expect to be hit, probably because of residual trauma from exile where Dream would act in a similar manner

2) Wilbur seems to recognise that he needs to apologize to people, but he doesn’t actually seem to regret anything or doesn’t understand WHAT he needs to apologize for (which is the reason why he only apologizes to people he hasn’t hurt, didn’t know or doesn’t particularly care about). He doesn’t apologize to Tommy for example, his “I’m sorry” at the beginning isn’t directed at Tommy as much as it’s a general statement (this could have something to do with him lumping himself and Tommy together as the bad guys of course). Also, remember that idea about Wilbur seeing his life as a show? Well, he did the villain arc so the only 2 possible ways to go after that are a repeat or a redemtion arc... this is him starting in on the second, while not actually believing in it

3) We already see Wilbur giving himself more importance then he actually did have. Tommy explains that he’s only resposible for a small part of the crater, but Wilbur doesn’t know that Techno, Phil and Dream did exactly what he did but bigger later on and assumes that all of it was done by him (probably making him think that he’s had a decidedly bigger impact then he actually did)

“Well I’m in my forties now Tommy, I counted the years man... how old are you now? You must be what, like, 20? 30?” (Wilbur does not seem to be aware of the time dilatation that occurs in Limbo)

It’s also interesting that Wilbur asks Tommy of all people to give him a tour. I mean, the two were close before and Tommy is the only one who stayed by his side through everything, but Tommy already expressed multiple times a dislike for Wilbur even directly stating to his face in the revival stream that Wilbur should have stayed dead. My best guess is that what brought him to ask Tommy specifically despite that was a mix of being still in a similar mindset to Pogtopia where it was the two of them vs everyone else, Wilbur’s paranoia not having disappeared meaning he doesn’t trust anyone else and a sort of dependency Wilbur has developed on Tommy to avoid loneliness.

“No no! Will, you didn’t get a grave. This is just what you left behind” (destruction and a betrayal of trust are the only remains of who Wilbur used to be it seems)

“Here’s the thing Tommy: I know I was bad and I know I can- I know I can redeem myself but you know there’s- there’s a little bit of fun in being bad, you know, I mean, we’ve spoken about this” (callback to “let’s be the bad guys” and further confirmation that Wilbur isn’t truly interested in redemption as he still sees himself in the role of the villain)

The first person that Wilbur apologizes to is Skeppy who fits the category of “person he more or less knew, but never actually wronged”, meaning that one is a useless apology (and Wilbur seems to recognize that when he asks Skeppy to say one thing he did to him). (Also rip Friend Skeppy doesn’t deserve rights anymore).

“He was Ghostbur’s man! And I wish you’d stop disrespecting him” (technically about Friend but more broadly about Ghostbur as well)

“You see I’ve always seen myself as a bit of an iconoclast so I don’t think I’ll be getting involved in the whoel deity section” (Wilbur is canonically an atheist)

The second person Wilbur apologizes to is Jack Manifold, which is also when Wilbur starts excluding Tommy any time there is someone else there as well. Jack honestly fits in the category of people “Wilbur knew but didn’t really care about”, which is why his apology ends up being quite generic and not very accurate to the historical happenings. He apologized for leaving him behind when he got exiled but, once again, that never actually happened. Jack stayed back of his own volition there. He apologized for not granting Manifold Land independence, which would have been up to Dream. He apologizes for leading him into war which he simply never did, because Jack joined after. All this apologies are what Jack wants to hear, but none of them are true to what happened.

Either way, Tommy brings Wilbur to the roof of the hotel and they have quite the important conversation there. Tommy tries to tell Wilbur about when he decided to go see Dream for the last time, but Wilbur entirely dismisses him.

“I know you’ve had your little strife man” “But I died!” “But I don’t- I don’t care” (full dismissal)

They then end up talking about exile (Wilbur specifically is the one to bring it up).

“Tommy, I’ll tell you what, if I was there and it wasn’t that stupid shell of a ghost instead of me I would have struck down Dream right where he stood. We would have disemboweled him. We would have disemboweled him” “You would have killed Dream?” “Together” “Well Tubbo is the one who sent me off... You would have killed Dream?” “Tommy- Tommy! I wasn’t blind, I saw what he was doing to you Tommy... I saw. I saw what he was doing to Tubbo” “I don’t like thinking about it” “I saw what he did to me”

So talks about Tommy’s exile are always something... Tommy still shows clear hesitance in blaming Dream even after all this time and even more hesitance at the idea of someone killing Dream at the time (probably because he still subconciously bleieves that he was his only friend back then).

Then there is Wilbur who has admitted to know about Dream’s abuse of Tommy and his manipulation of Tubbo and himself (though to which extent for any of these is unclear) and he seems of the idea that: 1) if he was alive he would have been allowed to go with Tommy, which he wouldn’t have and 2) that if he was there they’d have killed Dream. Though he changes his narrative on the second point right after it’s intersting that he thinks he would have been allowed with Tommy because if he was as aware of the situation as he seems to think he is he’d know that Dream “exiled” Tommy specifically to have him alone and vulnerable where he could mold him as he pleased. It wasn’t a political stance like their previous exile, it was a glorified kidnapping.

“After seeing Ghostbur interact with Dream I realized that, no, Dream is not the enemy, Dream is not the enemy” “He-” “This world was not supposed to be inhabited by people of this caliber. Dream is the hero! Dream needs to be let out of here. Dream’s not in prison because he’s a horrible person, Dream’s in there because he dared to try and stop you all. He dared to try and stop you all from gaining all this power because the minute I was gone there was a vacuum, there was opening and everyone just slicked to get in there and Dream was the only one who stood up to them and told them not to. Dream is the one that held my seat for me”

Again, a few things to unpack here:

1) Wilbur somehow fails to see the contraddiction in his own reasoning. “I know Dream abused you, but he is not being imprison because he is a bad person, he was only doing what is necessary” was what his speach boiled down to which is just bullshit plain and simple. But why does Wilbur get to this conclusion? Well because he has faulty information at best to fill in the blanks from the time he was dead and he has a very simplistic worldview where everything must fit neatly into a small little narrative and where people are either “villains” or “heroes” and since Wilbur thinks of himself as a villain and thinks he corrupted anything he came in contact with it makes sense that he would see Dream, someone who opposed everything and everyone previously associated with Wilbur, as the “hero”.

2) We have Wilbur, once again, giving himself more importance then he did have. Wilbur didn’t leave a power vacuum, L’Manburg was rebuilt pretty quickly and all Wilbur left behind was a bit more trauma and, even then, people have done worse since. Wilbur was, in fact, pretty irrelevant in the grand scheme of things. Once his story was over people moved on one way or the other and Wilbur simply cannot accept that because he sees himself as a protagonist, but he simply wasn’t around for a long time.

(Also I really wanna punch him in the face for this one because f*ck him for calling Tommy’s abuser a “hero” to his face, that’s a HUGE d*ck move)

“If Dream died instead of me, I would be in there right now” (again, fundamental misunderstanding of why Dream’s in prison in the first place)

“I didn’t actually really care about L’Manburg, I just cared about, you know, sticking it to the man. Actually I cared about L’Manburg for the sole reason that I could use it to stick it to the man! You ever sticked it to the man Tommy?” “That’s not true” “L’Manburg was a tool, it was a great tool, it worked! You know? It divided so many people man”

Listen, we can debate all day wether Wilbur actually cared about L’Manburg beyond seeing as a tool to achieve his ends or not, but that’s not really important. The important thing to take away from this is that Tommy, Tubbo, Niki, Fundy, Eret and Quackity believed in L’Manburg. They believed in it enough to fight for it. Others as well. So whatever the answer to “did Wilbur care?” is, their experiences are not invalidated because of it. The other thing is that the whole conversation about L’Manburg fully establishes the theme of ideals vs attachment that may be explored more in the future.

“I’m sorry for a lot of things but, Tommy that doesn’t mean I’m not gonna try again” (and here it is. Wilbur shows Tommy the most awful side of him that hasn’t changed all the while pretending to be a completely new man in front of others so they won’t believe Tommy if he tells them. This one is full on manipulation)

“I did care about L’Manburg. I did, I did, but if L’Manburg- a rose by any other name would still smell as sweet, L’Manburg would have still been as loved by me if it was called Bim Bum and it was in the middle of the desert” (once again reiterating that it wasn’t about material attchment, but more so about the purpouse of L’Manburg)

“Stick it to the man Tommy! High five” “No! You just said that you loved 'The Man'” (Tommy pointing out the contraddioctions in Wilbur’s reasoning)

“It was like we were a family, you can’t just say that!” “We were a family Tommy. We were. And you know what I guess you just didn’t- I guess you just didn’t have the balls to follow along with me. When I pressed the button you were always against it-” “You blew up our fucking home!” “We’re leaving it behind Tommy, it’s in the past. We’re friends now, we’re friends”

So, two things here: Wilbur seems to resent Tommy partially for not enabling his destructive tendencies seeing Tommy opposing him destroying L’Manburg as him leaving Wilbur behind. And also Wilbur is, once again, dismissing Tommy’s rightful anger, this time in a way that is very reminiscent of Dream (reinforcing the idea of them being “friends” despite having done something that hurt Tommy a lot).

“You’re following me for quite a while for someone who doesn’t care” “*deep sigh* Where are we going next?” (while Tommy is aware that being with Wilbur is not good for him he also seems to not want to leave him either)

“You know I often give him a lot of shit and pretend I don’t like him, because he has a peculiar relationship with Tubbo, but he is a very good man and I stuck up for him because I see potential in him, alright?” “Yeah? What is he, a strong fighter?” “Yeah, well he is- he is a very strong fighter, he stuck by my side, he visited me in exile, he is a good man and he’s helped me”

It’s interesting to see how their opinions diverge. To Wilbur “strenght” is physical strenght and strong ideals. He respects Tommy to a degree because Tommy is not afraid to stand up for what he believes in for example. For Tommy “strenght” is compassion and loyalty. Tommy considers Ranboo strong because he has the strenght to remain kind in a world like theirs where kindness usually doesn’t take you far. And this is the main reason why Wilbur and Ranboo clash, why they are narrative foils: because Ranboo is extremely well loved and secured himself a relatively peaceful life by going against everything that Wilbur believes in. Ranboo is respected and loved where someone like Dream who, to Wilbur, embodies the ideal of strenght is widely hated and he doesn’t understand why because he’s missing so much information.

Third and final person Wilbur apologizes to is Ranboo who falls into the category of “Wilbur didn’t know him”, meaning the apology is, once again, just performative so that Wilbur can move along his perceived “redemtion arc”. During the whole chat with Ranboo Wilbur, once again, mostly pushes Tommy’s presence to the side in favour of the new person, though Ranboo does actually notice Tommy’s constant worry and tension and reassures him multiple times that everything’s fine.

“Everyone I seem to meet seems to have this deep intrinsic feeling of disgust towards me” (no one actually does, this is just Wilbur’s self deprecation talking. Like, Tommy is the only one who has expressed anger towards him so far and he’s still sticking to Wilbur and trying to talk to him)

“Tommy is very suspicious of me because of who I WAS” (this is, once again, manipulation. Trivializing Tommy’s fear and suspicions in front of others while reinforcing them when they’re alone is a way to isolate him from an eventual support system)

“It was big, it was big effects though right? I mean... let’s be honest here” (Wilbur once again overestimating his impact. He did have a lasting effect on people, but nowhere near as he seems to think)

“Tommy I don’t know who you’re tryng to protect here, me or Ranboo” “Ranboo” (yes yes, Allium Duo moment, but also Wilbur seems sort of jealous of the relationship Ranboo and Tommy have and how obvious it is where Tommy’s loyalty lies now)

“You get into people’s heads Wilbur, alright? You’re like a little caterpillar, you go in through their ear, then you hatch a butterfly, before you know it your brain is all colors and flying...” (Tommy lacking proper terminology to describe Wilbur’s manipulation, but still doing a wonderful job at it)

Wilbur spends quite a while interrogating Ranboo on his beliefs and getting progressively more confused about why people (and Tommy especially as he specifies later) love him so much as Ranboo explains his “pick people not sides” philosophy. He seems particularly annoyed by Ranboo soley defining Dream as “bad”, possibly because in the world view he crafted for himself everyone is so extremely divided and he can’t imagine the existence of someone who tries to actively defy that by trying to side with everyone who hasn’t directly harmed his loved ones or himself. At first Wilbur thinks Ranboo must have some ulterior motive for being kind to everyone and is even more shocked at finding out that that’s not the case.

“There’s been more wars while I’ve been dead then when I was alive Ranboo, that’s- that’s a-” “There’s actually been only one and ever since you died and Dream’s been put in prison the server’s actually been peaceful” “So you’re saying that you don’t like me? In the same way you don’t like Dream you’re against me then?” “I- no! No no no, I don’t not like you Wilbur, I don’t like the person that you were. I’m willing- I’m willing to like you now, if you’ve changed”

And here we have Ranboo standing against Wilbur quite directly. Wilbur seems convinced that, because Ranboo doesn’t dislike most people he stands for nothing which, admittedly, Ranboo is quite hypocritical and weak willed, but he is showing the sort of strenght Tommy admires him for here. Ranboo dislikes who Wilbur used to be because he hurt his family, but he is willing to give him a second chance, which is more then even Wilbur ever did for himself. Also, to be fair, once Dream was locked up the server did become more peaceful and there were less wars. Ranboo was right when pointing that one out and the fact that Wilbur doesn’t seem to know it points to his lack of knowledge that he doesn’t seem willing to fix.

It’s also interesting that Wilbur seems to conclude all this meetings in a hurry by asking Tommy to go on with the tour and basically pulling him along... even if it’s pretty clear by now that Tommy isn’t really needed there. Wilbur remembers how to navigate the server without Tommy thanks to Ghostbur’s memories and he ignores Tommy’s presence whenever someone else is near. The only reason why he is pulling him along is because he can and because he uses him to vent and say all the things he lies to others about... so much for his “no lying” oath...

“He’s a follower Tommy! You’re not a follower man! You stand up for yourself, you fight for what you believe in” (reiteration of Wilbur’s idea of strenght which alsoseems connected to worth for him. For him being a “follower” is inherently negative)

“Tommy he felt like the polar opposite of me” (in case we needed more reasons to consider them foils)

Wilbur and Tommy have a fight right after because Tommy’s upset at Wilbur being an ass to Ranboo and completely ignoring him and about his presence just in general. Wilbur is the one insisting for the fight to be physical in a scene that mirrors the Pogtopia pit scene quite a lot while Tommy would have been contented (and would have actually preferred) with Wilbur admitting to his faults. But so far Wilbur hasn’t apologized for his more grave faults even once and he has yet to apologize to Tommy for anything at all and I honestly doubt he intends to at the moment or that he even feel remorseful for anything... they fight and Tommy wins and takes Wilbur’s sword to avoid a repeat of the situation.

“Look at me. No matter what happens, no matter what goes down, today, tomorrow, next week, the week after, the week after next, the fact that I’m alive means that anything that happens along this line I’ve won. I’ve already won. I won when I pressed that button. You can spar me however many times you want for your own personal victories, but, in the grand scheme of things, I’ve already won. And I think, from your silence, you know that”

This brings us back to Wilbur seeing his life as a show and himself as both the protagonist of the story and the villain. The button scene was the ending of his story and he managed to complete it with what he considers his own victory. Of course it’s also a way to put down Tommy in a similar way to how the “you’re never gonna be president” speach worked. Tommy didn’t want to spar with Wilbur in the first place, but he did win. Tommy didn’t want to be president either because, despite Wilbur being convinced that he has his same idea of power, Tommy is quite content to live a simple life with none of the responsabilities that come from having power. In both cases though, Wilbur takes the chance to use the aspiration of the image of Tommy he’s painted in his mind against the real one, by saying thet it’ll be impossible for him to accomplish what he thinks he wants. Doesn’t work anymore though, Tommy immediately called him out on his bullshit even if he was ignored again. Also what’s with Wilbur and constantly asking Tommy to look at him? Is he afraid to disappear if Tommy’s not looking or something?

“You just stick with me man, stick with me. Stick with the winning side. Stick with the side that stands for something, stick with the side that believes in something” (it’s also interesting to note that Wilbur seems to constantly see his life as a conflict adn, right now, he appears to think that it’s him and Tommy vs the world, similarly to how Dream started thinking in prison)

“I thought he had infinite canon lives” (Wilbur seems to have held at least some of Ghostburs naivete it seems)

“Honestly I wasn’t expecting you to have your shit together like this man, I thought you just came on to kill me” (once again Wilbur thinking he’s the center of the world apparently)

“Thank you for that [killing him] by the way. No no seriously, thank you for that! Because if you hadn’t done that I’d ended up living- I would have been exiled with Tommyinnit and then I would have gotten angry at Dream because Dream can’t go around hurting Tommy like that. I would’ve been angry at Dream. I would have tried to fight Dream, which now I see would’ve been a silly move because Dream’s my hero! Dream’s amazing! So I would’ve ended up fighting Dream and then I would’ve been the one in prison and not Dream”

I was kinda surprised that he said all of this to Phil, but I guess he may remember Phil siding with Dream for Doomsday perhaps, so he thinks he can get understanding on all the Dream stuff. He also prefaced this by bringing up something that Phil still feels immensely guilty about meaning he was more prone to listen. Also, again he seems to have a fundamental misunderstanding of what exile was about or why Dream is in prison in the first place but, aside from that, his opinion on Dream just seems to genuinely fluctuate between despising him for hurting Tommy and considering him a hero because he brought him back to life and because he covers the role of the misunderstood underdog who’s trying to do what’s right in the version of the story that he created in his mind.

“Well yes, but I wouldn’t have stood for Dream’s shit while Tubbo, well Tubbo did stand for it” (see what I mean? Fluctuating opinions. Pretty sure not even he himself is entirely sure of what he feels or think in this regard)

“Oh, Will?” “Yeah?” “I forgot to mention by the way. I, at one point, griefed George’s house with Ranboo and that caused to a chian of events that lead- that- that was kind of why I got exiled more so...” “Okay and Ranboo managed to not get exiled with you?” “Oh no, it was just me” “That’s pretty uh-” “But I stood up for Ranboo. I made sure he didn’t because he was so new and he was, you know, he was-” “Ah, so you got thrown under the bus. Did he not stand up for you? Did he not offer to go with you?” “No he did stand up for me but to, like, to an extent because he didn’t wanna get exiled and that’s fair” “okay... I’m Sure I’ll Get On With Him!”

Wilbur’s obvious distaste for Ranboo shining through again. Also he was pocking in the right direction, but, sadly, Tommy is not the right person to ask this questions to because he fully believes that he deserved what happened to him still, so he won’t be able to explain that the reson why Ranboo wasn’t exiled was because Dream didn’t care about him and the exile was just about gettng him alone. I don’t think anyone aside from Dream has clocked that in quite yet as a matter of fact. Also this conversation has just proven further to Wilbur that Ranboo is the pushover he though he was after all.

After that Wilbur explains to Phil that the reason he lied was because he didn’t want to let him down. He also tries to convince Phil that he doesn’t lie anymore and that he didn’t lie much in the first place, only to address Tommy and go:

“Old Wilbur did a lot of lying Tommy, old Wilbur did a lot of lying”

“Wait did you say there was a counselor on this server that we could talk to?” (Tommy yet again being the only f*cker in the server that genuinely wants to go to therapy)

Also Phil trusts people way too easily. He just confronted Wilbur about lying in his letters for a long time only to turn around and immediately trust him that he is a changed man, even after Wilbur said straight to his face that Dream is his hero. Like... he is supposed to have lived a long ass time, how did he stay this naive?

Will also mentions that he has plans and intends to have both Phil and Tommy in on them as soon as they’re ready. He also proceeds to make it sound like the only reason why Tommy is upset with him and doesn’t trust him is because he was a bit mean to Ranboo which is him, once again, trivializing Tommy’s fears in front of others so that they are less likely to take him seriously in the future. He then asks for a bed and shower which Phil provides. One other thing to note is that Wilbur seems extremely reluctant any time that it comes to going underground, probably due to trauma from living in a ravine in Pogtopia.

“Do you trust me? Do you believe that I’m turning a new leaf Tommy?” (this is not the first time this stream that Wilbur seems to seek out Tommy’s approval and it’s interesting that he doesn’t seem to do it with anyone else)

Once again Wilbur interrupts the visit in a hurry as soon as Tommy tries to explain his side of the story to Phil telling Tommy repedly to go with him. This really seems to be a pattern since it happened every single time, and I’m guessing that the reason is that, once he has given his pieace, leaving Tommy to speak may be detrimental to the manipulation in the long run.

“Be nice Tommy, okay? Be nice” “Phil, you murdered him” (Lmao)

“Tommy you’re missing the sunrise! You’re missing the sunrise” (for the sun as a symbol enthusiasts)

The two of them then have a very weird argument about stone that it’s literally just textbook manipulation in action right there. At first Wilbur asks for stone then, after Tommy complains a bit, he concedes and switches to cobblestone just to then comment on the fact that stone looks better, but he’s graciously letting Tommy having a say in it. He then expresses that his request is for Tommy to get “all the stone” but making sure that he doesn’t believe that Tommy will be able to do that. Multiple times in fact. He then tells him to get it with Phil because Phil would be able to do so, unlike him. And all of this is just to split up from him in a way that’ll have Tommy still be too busy to explain to anyone about Wilbur.

“He’s a good kid, he’s a good kid. I’ll be back on the saddle soon... I mean it’s only a matter of times I’ve done it once I’ll do it again” (I do think that Wilbur does care for Tommy a bit, I’m fairly sure about that, but their relationship really sin’t healthy. Also we’re back with Wilbur immediately assuming the role of “protagonist” in his “story” once more)

“Why does everyone like that Ranboo guy? I don’t understand...” (once again, incapacity to understand someone who is so diametrically opposed to him)

“I’m done apologizing” (he didn’t even start. Not in a way that mattered and not to the people who needed it most)

“I don’t know how I was revived” (Wilbur canonically does not know about the revive book)

Wilbur’s stream ends with him checking out Quackity’s book and Wilbur making a whole speach confirming that his idea of power is tied to physical strenght and feeling self assured in the fact that he was “right all along”. Tommy’s stream however was not over yet.

“I don’t want to try and save the server, I don’t have that in me”

“We need to get the stone... and then we need to stop Will and he hopefully won’t destroy the server” (Tommy being dragged back in the role of the hero kicking and screaming)

“When we did L’Manburg I was a strong guy, a character that could go around and now it feels different. I feel thinner. I feel... don’t have a choice. I don’t have a choice” (once more he lacks the proper words to describe trauma, but he still does a great job of it. He also feels once again like this role was put on him and he has no choice but to oblige)

Tommy later talks about how he won't let anyone put him "through that shit" (manipulation) but that he’ll still get the stone because it would be nice to have Wiilbur be impressed with him. Which is just a great way to let us know that Wilbur's tactic has indeed worked.

And this is pretty much it!

#tommyinnit #wilbur soot #ranboo #dream smp #tw manipulation #tw abuse mention #character analysis #relationship analysis #long post #my post #pretty sure that this is the longest post I've ever written...#the whole thing was just so utterly confusing #this did clear up my thought though so that's nice!#also shoutout to wilbur dying inside at tommy's tinder joke and visibly having to force himself to stay in character for it

174 notes · View notes

shihalyfie · 3 years

Text

What went down with the DigiFes situation, from the community and translator perspective

I think the events of the last few days have gotten everyone in a huge fuss, and because everything got caught up in a lot of chaotic social media stuff, there’s been a lot of questions about what came from what and who knew what at what time. Fortunately, I happen to be:

Someone who’s a veteran in this fanbase and thus has a small handful of friends in this community, who also have their own friends

Someone who understands a little Japanese (although not as much as others in this community do) and therefore can read things in Japanese myself to some degree without needing someone else to translate it for me

So hopefully I can shed some light on what kinds of things were being discussed, and what was known and not known at what time in this fanbase with all of this.

The most important thing I want to establish is that there was no organized coalition or smear campaign. (Kind of ironic I have to say this when the topic at hand has so much to do with conspiracy theories.) I’m a veteran, I know friends who are veterans, they know other friends who are veterans but don’t know me at all. My friends usually agree with and like the same things I do, and I give them advice and assistance with my skillset when I can, and they return the favor. We pass things along through the grapevine, not through some super-secret club grapevine, just via the nature of social relationships and some Discord servers (multiple; again, not everyone knows each other). So these are my impressions of what happened, based on said grapevine.

How it all started

Konaka’s blog is long. Like, really long. Which is only natural, because he was recapping basically the entire 51 episodes of Tamers in excruciating detail, so no translator in this fanbase would be able to translate all of that and not lose their mind! So for the most part people who couldn’t read Japanese had pretty much given up on reading it (with maybe a few dedicated people using machine translation), and some people who understood Japanese would point out parts they found interesting, but for all intents and purposes it remained untranslated and not super-accessible to the mainstream. (Even the Japanese fanbase itself wasn’t super aware of the blog’s existence.)

So when that first post in May about 9/11 dropped, the people who did read Japanese started going “uh...”

At the time, the DigiFes stage reading hadn't been announced yet. So, in other words, everyone reading it only knew it as, functionally, him namedropping an alt-right YouTuber and praising his observations. The reaction from anyone reading the blog at the time was something along the lines of “disappointed and mildly concerned.” (Note the mildly.)

The posts in June about the Great Reset and the anti-vaccine sentiment were when people keeping an eye on the situation started to get really worried about how far this was going to escalate. At this point, I want to make something clear that may not be apparent to those who weren’t keeping up or who are outside the fanbase: Most of the translators and Japanese-reading people deliberately chose not to be too public about this at this time.

Why?

This is the irony surrounding the fact that said translators are now being accused of trying to further “cancel culture”: cancellation was absolutely not what anyone wanted back then! If anyone wanted to create a smear campaign, 9/11 conspiracies, the Great Reset, and anti-vaccine statements are already more than enough to make a starting case. But at the time, this was a blog that very few people (Japanese or otherwise) knew about, translating it would basically just boost its platform more than it would have had in the first place (which would be counterproductive), and -- well, let’s be real, it’s not hard to imagine that people might get reactionary over it, and people would go nuts. Was there any real benefit that would come out of that? Not really, no.

So at the most, those keeping an eye on it might have vented a bit on their personal accounts, but some even tried to self-censor with “[redacted]” or vagueposting, because this was a matter that needed to be handled with delicacy. Thus, there were “mild rumors through the grapevine” about what was going on, but those who knew were trying to hold back with restraint and mostly inform people quietly in the hopes of this not needing to become some kind of huge social media campaign.

(Also, to be a bit blunt about it, it’s really hard to be in front of someone who loves Tamers and is gushing about it and showing admiration for Konaka, knowing all of this and wanting to say something, but feeling like a jerk if you pop their bubble like “also, he’s probably an alt-right conspiracy theorist now.” Not to say that the ignorance-is-bliss concept is always a good thing, but...)

But since the blog posts in question were discussing the prospect of having his sentiments in fiction, everyone reading them was on edge anticipating what might be in store for DigiFes. The hope was that it might blow over. Hopefully, everything would be in the form of subtle themes with plausible deniability, it would all stay within the realm of “it’s not worth causing a fuss over this,” that would be the end of it, and we’d all move on with our lives.

Unfortunately, “Political Correctness is activating Cancel Culture” isn’t exactly subtle.

DigiFes and the aftermath

I think it’s too easy to assign too much responsibility to the fansub group that was indirectly responsible for breaking the news for all of this, but actually, the truth is, this would have gotten out anyway.

Even when the stream itself was going on, there were Japanese livebloggers, and there were also English speakers who caught on that something was happening with “the Tamers fighting political correctness”. Some hours later, an upload of the stream went live on YouTube, and quite a few people started watching it and caught onto what was going on. If the fansub group that released the now-infamous version hadn’t done it, I’m absolutely certain someone else would have eventually (perhaps in a different language first, but nevertheless). And even before then, information about what the hell was going on was already starting to circulate in broken and incomplete forms. That fansub solidified what was going on, and perhaps accelerated the moment the bomb dropped on everyone, but if it hadn’t been there, it would have happened much more gradually and chaotically.

On top of that, while the use of Western alt-right rhetoric (seriously, please do not try to bring the “injecting Western politics into Japanese media” argument here when all of us are asking him to take the Western politics out) meant that it went over most of the Japanese audience’s heads (hence your answer to “who approved this?”), there was at least one Japanese person who was politically savvy enough to call it out for what it was in disgust. (I’m not linking them here because I’m not dumb enough to fling them in a place where some of you trigger-happy people will go after them.) They didn’t even need to be super in-tune with Western politics to get it; they understood enough to tell that there were some pretty alarming extremist views in there. If they understood that much, it was naturally going to follow that the Western side was definitely going to become aware one way or another.

Even all that aside, at the very least, said fansub is accurate; imagine how much worse this situation would have been if someone else had taken it up and confused things further with a misleading translation, or, worse, deliberately messed with the contents. Basically, this debacle could have easily been a lot worse.

I don’t think anyone expected this to get as big as it did (as in, to the point mainstream anime reporters outside the fanbase picked up on it). There was a similar tri. reading back in 2016, but even a lot of the hardcore fanbase barely remembers it exists! These aren’t even supposed to be canon, either! But when you have that disclaimer at the front, and the contents are really like that, it was probably inevitable for it to become a social media sensation. I mean the contents...sure are a thing.

One thing I should point out about the disclaimer is that it only mentions the program itself. It doesn’t bring up the blog, and it doesn’t bring up who wrote this scenario, just the fact that the program contains alt-right rhetoric and conspiracy theories. Because it does! It’s not even technically praising or condemning the content within, it just says “we don’t agree with it”! What the group did condemn was...approaching staff about it (and especially starting a fight). Because, in the end, that’s what the disclaimer was for: a heads-up about what was in there, and an added reminder that the people translating this are just translating it for the sake of informational purposes. Or, in other words:

It was a content warning. Even without the disclaimer, there were many, many people who would have recognized the contents for what they were and been caught by it unawares, and become upset by it. There were many people who said that they were glad to have that there because it at least gave them some time to mentally prepare for what they were about to be slapped with!

It really, really was a disclaimer. When you have something that level of extremely politically charged stuff, it’s only natural to start suspecting that the translation group had an agenda (official translations tend to get this a lot when content is remotely political). But no, the translation group did their due diligence, even if their opinions were starkly opposed to what was in there.

I was not personally involved in that translation, but I’ll give you this (copy-pasted with permission, from someone who wasn’t technically involved directly in it but was privy to discussions while it was being done):

no we brought up all of those questions like the fact that Yamaki's clearly off his rocker and this isn't supposed to be taken seriously in the first place or that maybe if we're lucky he'll just sound like a fake woke boomer but no matter how you slice it the plot is about him "convincing" the unbelieving Takato and co. into rallying up against the true enemy of Political Correctness and that's just literally the alt-right playbook in a nutshell

the thing even made it to YouTube, we were basically racing against the clock

I mean I really want to say this is plausible deniability but I don’t know how you can get any less subtle than this, this is not something you can mince words

like I really wish we could pass this off as “as long as you don’t know the blog you can take this innocently as political commentary or something” but I honestly don’t think this is something you can take innocently even without context

tbh the Political Correctness part is the most cringeworthy but Yamaki’s rant about fact checkers being evil and all that is probably a lot more worrying when you think about it

tbh I’ve never felt as conflicted about what’s the right thing to do as I do now

So in other words, it was not a reckless decision to just tack on a political label; it was done after a lot of consideration about the consequences to put the label on and what people would think of it with or without context, whether there might be a glimmer of light possibility to try and pass this off as more innocuous as it was, and eventually a determination that, in the end, there was indeed alt-right rhetoric in the program, and should be labeled accordingly.

The result was that, of course, everything broke out on social media, chaos burst out, a lot of hearts were unfortunately broken, and a lot of alt-righters started invading spaces accusing people of proving him right with cancel culture. Ironically, my personal observation is that, while there were exceptions, most people in the actual fanbase did honor the requests to not harass people about it, and this may actually be the most solidarity I’ve ever seen from the Digimon fanbase in my life, which is saying a lot considering how we usually tend to be a drama magnet most of the time. The ones who were actually directly messaging him were his newfound supporters locking down on offering him “support against people trying to cancel him” (I think they were more heartbroken and upset at him than anything...), and most of the harassment came from alt-righters not even in the fanbase, namesearching and sending harassing, accusatory messages to anyone involved for as much as expressing mild dismay. (You want to talk about harassment and being attacked for having an opinion? Pot, meet kettle.)

This leads us back to the question of the blog: if you’ll remember, I just said that the fansub in question did not bring it up at all. That’s because, at the beginning, there was no intention to bring it up if it wasn’t necessary; this was not intended as a smear campaign. The warning was attached to the DigiFes program because it was about the DigiFes program. But the resulting chaos had a lot of people bring up the blog because it better contextualized what was going on, and discussion led to people looking it up themselves and posting fragments of it on social media, sometimes even using machine translate.

Ultimately, that’s the reason this document was released: it was the same reason as the fansub being released at the time it was, which was “if it hadn’t been released, the alternative was watching things get disseminated more slowly and chaotically.” I will say outright that I was one of the people who got to lay eyes on that document before it was publicly released (and even helped out with some advice here and there); it’s no secret that it was being quietly passed around as an internal memo prior to the outbreak. The original version of the document had a request to not post it on public social media because of the chaos it would cause, and while I don’t know how many people got to see it before it was released, I’m under the impression that it was enough people that I was quite surprised everyone who saw it respected that request.

Why does the document contain a ton of analysis and debunking on top of just the translations? Well, when you’re translating those blog posts, you’re technically giving it a bigger platform (which was one of the reasons it was originally considered better to not post it publicly). Since the document exists primarily to inform people, especially about why certain things that may seem innocuous actually have wider context behind them, it’s going to need to contain an analysis like that.

The summary

There were a lot of decisions involved by a lot of different people through all parts of this ordeal. I think it’s fair to criticize whether they were the right decisions in retrospect or whether certain things should have been done slightly differently (including my small role in this), but nevertheless, it was one where the risks involved were thought through and taken into account in every step of the situation, with a desire to avoid chaos, or at least prevent it from getting too much worse. When you have contents like this, a controversy honestly is inevitable -- how on earth are you going to be able to put contents like Yamaki reciting off all the typical alt-right YouTuber talking points and ending in Political Correctness activating Cancel Culture and not expect that to make a stir at some point? -- and so, in the end, this wasn’t so much a conscious attempt at stirring the pot as much as it was the dam finally breaking, and a desire to keep it from spilling over too much. Nobody coordinated this! I think everyone just really hates drama.

Knowing all the steps and thoughts that went on behind all of this, I think being reactionary or accusatory for clout is the last thing anyone involved wanted to be. Considering just how many of these steps above could have easily been made into exposure, from the posts all the way back in May and June to the internal memo document that was made to keep friends quietly informed but could have been leaked to the public with only one bad actor, there was an active, common desire among people who didn’t even know each other to try and minimize the potential damage as much as possible. When you look at the situation now, of course it looks awful and hardly like something that came out of “trying to minimize damage”, but in reality there’s only so much you can do when the contents really are like that, and I personally believe everyone involved was doing what they thought was their best option as the situation kept changing.

I can’t speak for anyone else, especially since I don’t even know most of the people involved, and I didn’t have much of a role in all of this, but I think everyone involved, myself and my friends and everyone who’d been keeping tabs on this situation for months, has been going through a lot of heartbreak and conflict over what to do next, so please understand that there was a lot of thought put into all of it, and that it really was a difficult situation no matter how you look at it.

#digimon #digimon tamers

110 notes · View notes

masterhandss · 3 years

Note

Personally I don't see what you see in Geordo. He seems like such a scumbag to me and is the least likable charater in the whole series. He is always trying to get her alone to push her into things of a sexual/ more romantic nature without taking how she really feels into consideration. Like he "really wants her" and thats enough for him without caring what she really wants. Honestly he is the borderline non-con villian in my mind.

I mean, it's okay if you feel like that. To each their own.

Hmmm when I think about Geordo being sexually aggressive towards Katarina, I only really just think of the anime. The manga is a much more moe-fied and toned down version of the novels, and the novels does an okay job at balancing his desires for Katarina in all aspects. I'm not saying he doesn't have that trait in the other two mediums, I just think that they aren't as intense as the anime, so as someone who consumes all three versions I just tilt my head and go "huh." Of course I'm sure there are people who read the manga and novels that still feel uncomfortable about his behavior and that's valid too.

-> light novel spoilers ahead <-

tldr, there is a lot more going on to him than just someone who offers sweet words and questionable invitations to Katarina's ears, this may not be noticeable or acceptable to some people but we get to know more about how he thinks whenever the novels puts us in his point of view. You're free to dislike him as much as you want, but I like him & don't see him as a scumbag; and here's why:

I at least find it okay that Geordo is very serious about his pursuits for her because he is aware that she is dense and will not get it until you spell it in the sky. Everyone is just walking eggshells around Katarina hoping that the girl would just develop feelings for one of them to win the harem olympics. He knows that being dealt with a good card isn't enough, so he's actively taking action in order to win her heart. I mean I don't always agree with his methods either, like the "fait accompli" line or constantly inviting her to his room alone, but really, how much of that is something he really means to do vs how much of that is his excessive flirting + our minds assuming that he really means to claim her in that way?

Lines like that are really popular with japanese fans because it makes Geordo look "sexy" and "forward", which they enjoy in their fictional stories. He knows that his position gives him an advantage so he'll try to play his cards right and use it to increase his chances in victory.

It actually reminds me of a scene from the Hamefura StoryMe game, (don't really know how canon it is but I remember the JP ver. was advertised by @/hamhura) where Geordo indirectly asked Katarina how to woo a girl he really likes, and Katarina thinking he was referring to Maria, gives all the things he usually does in order to win her heart (visit her home, give her gift, dance with her in parties, be really forward about your feelings etc). I'm not saying Katarina approves of the ways Geordo attempts to win her heart, but there's some hilarity in knowing that Geordo already had and is constantly trying all the known ways to win over a girl in the world from a young age, and still has nothing to show for it. Like no awareness, much less any *feelings* lmao. So trying to make it obvious that he is interested in her romantically and sexually seems like the next logical step to him. I mean if you go by Geordo's logic and considering the time period this takes place in, he's pretty confident that he can get Katarina to love him back and they are engaged anyways so in his head he's in safe waters to attempt to make teases about such advancements if it gives him the smallest chance that Katarina would become at least aware of him through it.

Of course I know that stuff like that won't fly here in the real world, but maybe that's why I'm so lenient personally when it comes to his (debatably) sexual teases and advances, because it's a fictional story for a japanese audience. Doesn't mean I would approve any advances like that if it happens to me, it's just that it's hard to take his actions seriously when Katarina or the story doesn't take them seriously. Like, the girl would be pushed down to a bed by RufuSora and gives her a hickey and she still thinks the man is out for her blood.

He wouldn't even be entirely wrong, knowing the identities of the characters who Katarina knows has romantic interest in her in the novels, actions does speak louder than words when it comes to her. Like I said, whether or not Geordo really means what he says when the story teases the readers with sexual implications in his words and action depends on the reader in my opinion. They are there, I wont pretend they don't but I'd argue about the level of intent depending on what scene you're talking about.

The only scenes on the top of my head where he is very abrasive towards Katarina is the "fait accompli" scene, the Book scene form the anime (S1 EP8), saying he wants to lock her in his room (LN6) and the multiple times Geordo had invited her in his room at night alone (LN6 and LN8, i think).

I've already explained why I am okay with both Keith and Geordo's Book scenes from episode 8 of the first season because they are accurate representations of an exaggerated and unhinged versions of their desires towards Katarina so I won't bore you with those details again.

He mentioned in Volume 6 that he wants to lock Katarina in his room forever and keep her light to himself, which alarmed a few people when the book came out, but he said that in a moment where he feels super grateful and loving towards her because she knew how tired he was despite his fake face and without even saying anything. It was a moment where he felt so infatuated towards her that he wished the moment where he gets to rest in her arms would last forever, thus he made such a comment. I make it sound more dramatic than it was in Volume 6, it was just a quick comment honestly lmao.

For people who don't read the novels, that last part looks very sus and raises a few red flags I know, but to be fair we can't definitively say what his intentions are because Katarina never commits to those visits. Katarina has actually become wary of those invitations, because Keith and Mary have warned her that Geordo's intentions are sexual, but I'm not really trusting the word of the two people who are most distrustful and antagonistic to Geordo. They could be right, of course, but who can really say? We assume that they are correct because they care about Katarina and are wary of Geordo, but hamefura('s novels) is full of unreliable narrators anyways, it's not like Keith or Mary would consider the possibility of it being anything else because when it comes to the third prince they always fear the worst case scenario.

If you think about it, Geordo is probably aware that winning her over with a "fait accompli" won't work at all because it'll put him in a position that will make other people push him for the throne (which he doesn't want) or could ruin his reputation in high society if Katarina or her family react to it negatively. I'm not Geordo though, so I can't really say if he even have such fears and doubts in the first place, that's just my assessment based on the obstacles he has. On the outside he is really sure of himself and confident (which he arguably deserves) and on the inside he is very careful and insecure when it comes to Katarina.

Also like, spoilers but for someone who is very forward when it comes to his physical advances, Geordo is super weak when he is in the receiving end of those touches. He gets super embarrassed and easily flustered when its Katarina who is touching him, as if implying that to some extent that he's all just talk lmao.

I don't really agree that Geordo doesn't care about what Katarina feels at all, in fact his inner dilemma in the novels is that he doesn't know what to do because in every step he takes he might do something that could ruin his image in Katarina's eyes, be it pursuing or abandoning the throne or looking like a monster in front of her. He even halts his plans to make advances towards her during the Keith Kidnapping Arc, but threw it away because he knows how much finding Keith means to Katarina. He puts what Katarina want and doesn't want as his priority, so when what she feels is unclear that's when he acts on his own intuition. The only reason Geordo feels so confident to advance towards her sexually is because Katarina never rejected him before (because she doesn't know what they mean, and all of this is for the sake of simply making her aware in the first place)

I'm not trying to make anyone think that one has to read all the books in order to understand him, I think the manga does okay at conveying his feelings too. The anime really prioritizes on making him look "sexy" for the japanese female audience, so anything he does is sprinkled with spice whether we like it or not.

I'm sorry if it seems like I'm overanalyzing all his actions just to justify them, everyone has the right to be uncomfortable with his advances if it seems too much for you. It's just that his actions, while over the top and unnecessary, are done to please the type of audience that hamefura caters to, and it's hard to take him completely seriously when the story doesn't either in my opinion. Doesn't mean he's right or that any of it is okay, but it's his method of trying to put a dent on Katarina's bakashield. When you're in a race versus your friends who Katarina all loves equally, he's gonna use whatever card he can get in order to win.

I like Geordo; I like how much of his feelings for Katarina forces him to reexamine himself and realize that he isn't a perfect prince at all, that he has lots of problems and flaws that he needs to work out in order to be someone worthy of her. I like the way he falls more and more in love with her in every interaction they have because he finally gets to have a genuinely and caring interaction with someone. I like how Geordo wants to do better and be better for Katarina and the people around him, and he wants to be able to thank Katarina directly for that through being able to show his love. I like that despite how much of a chad he acts in front of her, he's a blushing mess at the thought of Katarina returning his feelings. I find it funny when his "sexual advances" fails and gets thwarted because he's trying them on the densest person and most protected lady to ever live. I like how Geordo is so head-over-heals in love with her and how much comfort and warmth she brings to him by simply being her caring and bubbly self.

I guess it's just a matter of different perspectives. If you find him unlikeable or a villain, then you do you. I try to explain why I personally excuse his actions, but I know it wont fly with everyone. We all see each character differently and absorb the material in different ways. In fact it's probably a bad idea for me to defend him with material that isn't the anime nor manga yet lmao. I mean I'm not that much of a fan of Mary anymore, and I'm kinda scared and wary of her, but I know people don't see her the way I do and I'm okay with that.

Maybe its just me, who is the kind of person who just goes with the flow and doesn't think too hard because it's all fiction anyways

It's hard to tell all this from simply watching the anime, so I laid all my feelings down in hopes that someone out there would understand why I like him so much.

Thank you for the ask, you can ask more questions or call me out if I said anything insensitive or wrong, I know a lot of this is me overanalyzing things which might look like I'm jus stretching. As someone who is aware of the things to come in Hamefura X, I can say that I am both excited and nervous as to how everyone will react for the direction of Geordo's character.

#mh ask #hamefura #my next life as a villainess #geordo stuart #katarina claes #geokata #for some reason tumblr wont type the letter E #anyways there are my thoughts please dont hate me lmao #if you dont like Geordo then thats fine #im not forcing anyone to like him #i just wanna explain my own perspective thats all #DONT THROW FIRE AT ME #bakarina #destruction flag otome #hamehura #hamefura spoilers

85 notes · View notes

filipinoizukuu · 3 years

Note

I saw your post about the FA's translations, and I totally agree. Sometimes, when they do not translate accurately, is to make it sound better or cooler in English, but it just ends up taking away a lot from the context and characters. We know how one of the most affected character interpretations is Katsuki's, a main character, no less. And Izuku and Katsuki's relationship too, which is something super super wrong, considering is deeply intertwined with the main plot of the series, thus if someone misinterpreted their dynamic, this person would miss a bigass chunk of the message the story has.

Here is the panel you mentioned before btw

I remember when I read this, only 10 or 11 chapters into the manga (?), and I was like "...I'm...pretty sure this guy didn't say that" khshsjdhs

OK FIRST OF ALL LMAO HELLO MANG!! THANK YOU SO MUCH AND DW ABOUT IT I TOTALLY GET WHAT YOU MEAN !!

(this is your warning for a long post ahead!)

In any case, I still think you're very correct on this! Not to ramble a bit, but Horikoshi's particular talent in developing the plot of MHA is actually very very brilliant and there are a lot of blink-and-you'll-miss-it details that together, assemble the big picture of what MHA is.

Translations are such an integral part of being able to understand foreign media. MHA or otherwise. The simplest of details say a lot about a character and often times make or break a series because everyone knows that strong character dynamics are what carry even the shittiest of plots.

First and foremost, I want to clarify that because of the nature of fan translations and the fact that most of it is volunteer work/ written out of pure enjoyment of the manga--we shouldn't judge these fan translators too harshly (if at all) for interpreting it the way they want to. FA, as far as I can tell, is a fan-based group that works out of donations.

The first thing I wanna bring up is that when it comes to fandom and its works, there are two types: Curatorial and Transformative. Now, the transformative part is something that must be very familiar to a lot of you. Fanfiction, fanart, and most headcanons fall under Transformative Works (i.e. AO3) because they are all about transforming the canon world to fit each individual's personal preferences. Meta-analysis posts and Character Breakdowns are also classified under this.

Curatorial on the other hand are fandom interactions made with the explicit purpose of being as close to canon material as possible. This is working out the logic of quirks, for example, or memorizing as much canon content about your favorite villain as possible. These are more cold, hard undeniable facts that lend themselves to the DIRECT VISION the creator/author had while making this media. If you were to ask me my opinion on this, this would be the moment where I tell you that the Curatorial side of fandom is where fan translations should (for the most part) fall under.

What people need to know though is that oftentimes, fan translations do not.

Translating isn't and has never been a one-is-to-one process. There are hundreds of thousands of aspects in a language that make it so that it isn't perfectly translatable. Colloquialisms to sayings to dialects, to just plain-out words that don't have a proper English translation to them! Manga is made by and for a Japanese audience, so obviously in a lot of instances, there will be cultural nuances that will not be understood by anyone who hasn't immersed themselves in Japanese culture/language.

So what does this mean then for fan scanlations?

It means that a vast majority of translators teach themselves to only get the essence of the message. They take the dialogue as they understand it and translate it to something of their interpretation. When language and cultural barriers exist, translators do what they can in order to make it understandable to the general populace. This means making their own executive decisions on how they see a character speaking. In example, if they see Todoroki using very direct and impersonal Japanese--one translator might interpret it to mean that Shouto is stiff and overly formal, while another may see it as him being rude and aloof.

The problem is, translators are fans just like us.

Like with the image Mang posted above, the translator based the usage of curse words off of their understanding of Bakugou's character. The lack of foul language in the original Japanese might have made the translator think "Oh. There just aren't enough Japanese cusses for his character." And took that as an initiative to make Bakugou's lines more colorful and violent because this was working off of the image Bakugou had had at this point in canon.

But Codi! You may cry. Wasn't it proven multiple times that Bakugou prefers concise and short lines? They should've known better!

Yes. Maybe they should've known better. But tell me honestly in your first watch-through of MHA, did you perfectly understand Bakugou's character either? Did you catch the whole 'direct and no flowery language' aspect of his language when you first saw Season 2?

Most people don't. I only really understood this fact after I'd read multiple discussions of it and even double-checked the manga myself. These are the kinds of things that only become noticeable with a sharp eye and some time to scrutiny. But the fact of the matter is that when it comes to fan translations, the clout and recognition are always going to go to who can post the quickest.

Am I excusing erroneous translations? A bit, I guess. It's hard for us to go in and expect translators to catch all these errors before release when we ourselves only catch these errors like 4 months in with a hundred times more canon context than these scanlation groups did at the time of its release.

Still, there are plenty of harms that come with faulty translations.

When a translation is more divorced from the original's meaning than usual, it creates a dissonance between what is actually happening versus what the audience sees is happening. This looks like decently-written character arcs being overruled and rejected by most of the readers because of how 'jarring' and 'clumsy' it seems. By the time translators had caught on to the fact that Bakugou was more than just a ticking time bomb, we were already several steps into showing how significantly he cares for Deku.

The characters affected most by these translation errors are often those with the most subtle and well-written character arcs. A single mistake in how the source material is translated can make or break the international reception of a certain character to everyone who isn't invested enough in them to look deeper into the canon source.

It creates hiccups in plots. Things that seem out of character but really aren't. Going back to MHA in specific, the way that inaccurate translations hurt both the 'curatorial' and 'transformative' parts of the fandom is that people have begun to cite them as proof of the main cast's characterization.

Bakugou and Todoroki are undeniably some of the biggest examples of mistranslation injustices.

Katsuki, in a lot of people's minds, has yet to break out of the 'overly-aggressive rival' archetype box that people had been placing him in since Season 1. One of the most amazing aspects and biggest downfalls of Hori's writing was that at first, nearly every character fit into a very neat stereotype for Shonen Animes (Deku being the talking-no-jutsu sunshine MC, Uraraka being the overly bubbly main girl, Todoroki being the aloof and formal rival). He made the audience make assumptions about everyone's characters and then pulled the rug beneath our feet when he revealed deeper sides of them to play around within canon.

What made this part about Horikoshi's set-up so good though were the many clues we were given from the very beginning that these characters were more than what they acted like. Even from the very first chapters, for example, we learn that Katsuki (as much as he acts like a delinquent) dislikes smoking because it could get him in trouble.

That is just a single instance of MHA's use of dialogue to subtly divert our expectations of a character.

Another example is when they replaced 318's dialogue of the Second User saying that Katsuki "completes" Deku with him saying that Katsuki merely "bolsters" him. This presents a different situation, as that line was meant to reinforce the importance of those two's relationship as well as complete the character foils that MHA is partially centered around. By downplaying their developed connection, it becomes harder for the MHA manga scanlations to justify any future significance these two's words have on each other without mottling the pacing of the story.

AKA, it butchers the plot.

With every new volume, there are dozens and dozens more of these hints and bits scattered around! So many cues and subtle foreshadowing at the trajectory of everyone's character arcs--yet mistranslations or inaccurate scans make it so that we don't notice them. This is what I mean when I said that some character arcs are being done great injustices.

Until now, many people can't accept that Katsuki Bakugou cares for anyone other than himself (much less his rival and MC, Izuku Midoriya), nor can they accept that Todoroki would ever willingly work by Endeavor's side. The bottom-line then becomes that because of people missing heavy bits of characterization that become very plot-significant in the future.

When it comes to the point where people can no longer accept or fit their interpretation of the earlier manga events to what is happening in canon, the point of a translation fails completely because it has lead people to follow an entirely different story.

TL;DR - Fan scans are hard. Translating is hard. Don't get too mad at fan translations, but also maybe don't treat them as the catch-all for how characters truly operate. Thanks.

Side note: DO NOT harass FA for any of these things. FA is actually a pretty legit and okay source for scans (they've been operating since like 2014 ffs), but regardless of that they still don't deserve to get flack for their work. You can have any opinion or perspective of canon that you want, I don't care. These are just my two (more like two million tbh) cents on translations. I suggest reading takes from actual Japanese audiences tbh if you wanna know more about the source material of MHA. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

#IM SO SORRY MANG I RLLY WENT ON A RAMBLE FOR THIS #asks #mang #bnha #mha #my hero academia #boku no hero academia

34 notes · View notes

curedigiqueen · 3 years

Text

This year I spontaneously watched Appmon nearly 2 times, and I have thoughts about it. And what better way to acknowledge it than on its 5th Anniversary. (Or 4th anniversary of Our Singularity). I'm planning on at least covering my thoughts on the main 5 kids this month, in an order based 100% on who I want to talk about first.

It's Astra.

I think Astra is generally the least liked Appmon character, or perhaps more accurately, is the character I see the most disdain for. And, honestly, I can understand where it comes from. But he’s my favorite Appmon character actually. In a cast with a non-conventional protagonist, a blackbelt idol, and a hacker, Astra’s “Apptube” is well, just kind of there. Like a more modern version of Eri’s idol career. His personality is clearly meant to be representative of the target audience, the group whose number one career aspiration is Youtuber. So, he’s kind of cringy and kind of annoying, especially to an adult audience. I get it. But Astra’s a character I found to have a lot of stuff going on.

I admittedly tend to have a soft spot for the babies of any team, especially if they are assertive enough to keep up with their seniors. And Astra does fit the bill. He’s generally seen to be on equal footing with the others, and his rather aggressive way of talking to the other doesn’t exactly make you think baby of the team. He doesn’t use honorifics, and in general Astra’s referred to in the same terms as Haru and Rei. (As near as I can tell, anyway with my nonexistent Japanese skills, correct me if I’m wrong). The fact he’s in elementary school is a bit more incidental than anything.

We learn the most about Astra’s family and upbringing compared to the other characters, and it is central to his arc. We get a lot of information straightforwardly in the show. He had a lot of pressure on him as the heir to the school, and felt pressured to act the part of the perfect heir. Throughout the show we see him struggle with the pressure of being the heir. As a child he was extremely dedicated to following his father's footsteps. He didn’t seem to see himself as anything other than the heir to his father's school. He seemed set apart from other children, seemingly due to the closed-off way he acted. This dedication to being a good heir was to the detriment of his happiness. Until Musimon came into his life allowing him to loosen up and seek his own happiness. Classic stuff. But Astra is a little more at war with himself than may be obvious by his “annoying” attitude.

While we first learn about Astra suppressing his own eccentricities, in his debut episodes, it’s not until later that we learn about his mother, and learn that this side of his personality didn’t come out of nowhere. His mother is very similar to him, which gives us the question of why he ever became so disciplined in the first place if his behavior isn't out of place in his family, and his mother is a strong advocate for him doing his own thing. In fact, Astra seemed initially a bit embarrassed by his mother when he introduced her to the other Appdrivers. Of course this is almost certainly because his mother calling his friend “pretty” and gushing about her husband and how they met is embarrassing, and even if Astra himself acts just as obnoxious. But even so, he's clearly less respectful towards her. The reasons behind why Astra calls his mother by her first name are unclear, though it doesn't seem to stem from a lack of love for his mother.

But regardless, it helps build the idea that more likely, he was trying to win the approval of people outside his immediate family. After all, as shown in episode 7, it was the assumption that Astra would inherit the school by others that prompted Astra’s response to his father. Even if Astra’s father does have a desire for Astra to inherit his position, he also understands that it's first and foremost Astra’s life to live. Astra however does have a lot of respect for his father and seems to value his opinion immensely, he recognizes that not inheriting the school would be disappointing to his father and does not want to disappoint him. So while I think there is something to be said for Astra’s behavior relating to a desire to impress his father, I don’t personally think it's the origin in its entirety.

Astra over the course of the series is very independent and marches to his own beat, Astra, like Eri, had made the first step to change prior to his introduction, but that doesn’t mean he was already completely different from the boy who acted stiff to prove himself to others. Astra’s second episode deals with him succumbing to peer pressure in his new activity, and his final episode is about not succumbing to his uncle's expectations, the old expectations that kept him down for so long. (But it's also a bit about fulfilling Hinarin’s expectations, expectations he agreed to).

Despite Apptubing being the career choice where Astra does as he pleases, his final episode isn’t about him Apptubing because he wants to but as a way to help someone else. Particularly his cousin. While it isn’t explicitly clear if Astra knows it’s his cousin the fact of the matter is that he’s helping his family through his Apptubing, even if it is something he picked up for himself. (A reasoning perhaps parallels Eri’s reasons for being an idol, wanting to bring smiles to her mom, despite it clearly being something she herself enjoys). His care for his family is exactly the reason he continues to train to be the heir, but that doesn’t mean even if he doesn’t uphold expectations that he can’t be a help to his family.

Astra’s arc deals with expectations vs. a desire to help. Astra in large part is assertive about not having to help other people out and doing his own thing, recognizing he doesn’t have to do anything he doesn’t want to. But his actions consistently betray his care for others. I think this is most evident in the way Astra acted as if he wasn’t going to help Eri out with her elections, but did so anyway, even if he antagonized her a bit in the process, but ended up being the proudest of her accomplishments. Not to mention the way he continues to train as the heir, albeit on his own terms. Over the course of the series, he becomes more open with his care towards others, culminating in the jailbreak episode, but he’s always been shown to care. He’s finding that balance between living his own life and helping others.

It’s clear that Astra doesn’t hate being heir at least. He’s extremely determined to do both. And personally, I think it’s very possible that he sees Apptubing as a hobby. He after all proposed the half-hour limit himself. Even at the beginning with his most abrasive. He dutifully kept it to a relatively small impact on his life. For all that it’s brought up as an important element in his life, and he is shown breaking his own rule on occasion without consequence. One of the longest times we see him Apptubing is when he’s helping Eri out. Of course on the flip side of that, we have episode 8 where he breaks the rule because his videos aren't doing as well as he likes, but that's definitely tying back to his desire for people's approval. While he is for lack of a better word, tempted into giving up training to be an iemoto to dedicate himself to Apptubing, it isn’t something he seems to seriously consider at all.

The biggest thing Musimon gave him was not the courage to be an Apptuber, but the courage to be himself. Indulging in Apptubing for fun is merely a small part of that. Astra is still the good heir, but he is no longer letting that define his entire life, sometimes forgoing certain parts of training. But that doesn’t mean that tea ceremony is a bad part of his life. There’s also a certain balance in his personality between the abrasive “annoying” boy at the start of the series and the passive boy prior to the show's beginning. I don’t feel that the polite Astra is completely disingenuous. Astra is capable of acting calm and grounded, and this side of himself becomes more apparent as the series goes on, particularly with Eri who, in contrast to him, throws herself into her idol career with more and more genuine passion. When he supports Eri with his videos but asks her to take a break, which tracks with what we know about his fathers working habits. It’s his final focus episode where he is shown to be acting, more in someone else's interest, and even shown to be a bit embarrassed by it. In contrast to an Astra who even in episode 19, was not taking much seriously. I think it’s only fair to say Astra did genuinely inherit some of his father's more grounded and dutiful nature.

And while earlier I did say Astra’s age feels incidental, I don’t think that is to say it has no bearing on his role in the story. It's part of the reason Eri is so dismissive of him at first, Sure, the other’s treat him as equal, and are in no way particularly protective of him, nor do they expect him to be any less capable than him. But this isn’t to say Astra’s relative youthfulness isn’t apparent when with the others at least in the beginning. Astra is definitely on the more immature side of things, he after all is the one who started the rivalry with Eri because his ego was bruised (not that Eri's initial dismissal of him was helping matters any). As I said earlier, Astra mellowed as the show progressed and I think it’s a fair assumption to say he’d continue to do so. Not that he’ll lose his energy, but that he’ll be able to act with more maturity and consideration for others. The most common complaint about him I’ve heard is “annoying”, which is understandable. But that’s not accidental, even in-universe (hah), others seem to find him to be a bit much at first at the beginning of the series. His “annoying” personality is him testing the waters beyond the role of dutiful heir he’s always played. He’s annoying because he’s an 11-year-old boy who does not always know how to act in ways appropriate to his situation. He’s the kid of the group. I do understand if that still makes watching irritating. Watching should be fun after all, but it’s more of a matter of opinion than an objective flaw.

Unlike Gatchmon, Offmon, and Dokamon whose personalities seem to clash a bit with their buddies, Musimon and Astra are consistently on the same page, after episode 8. This is exemplified in episode 29, where Musimon runs away for fun rather than because he wants something from Astra, and Astra is the only partner who seems to have not been worried, recognizing what Musimon was doing. Of course, their fight in episode 8 was about Astra not being true to himself, thus naturally conflicting with the one who is on the same page as his true self. Musimon shares Astra’s high energy but caring nature. I’m not an expert on the Japanese language by any means, but there is something notable about the fact Musimon uses “Boku” to Astra’s usual “Ore”. Musimon and Astra are without a doubt very similar, the only difference in their demeanors being Musimon is perhaps a bit less confrontational. If Musimon being Astra’s buddy says anything about Astra, it’s probably that Astra is by his nature not quite as aggressive as he seems. Which for someone who clearly used to takes people's opinions of him to heart, seems about right.

Astra’s arc is all about expectations, expectations as an Apptuber, and as the heir. Astra living up to, or disregarding expectations based on what he believes is best. Living the life he wants to live.

Some final observations from me in regards to Astra, is that he’s paired with Fakemon for God Grade. While it’s probably in part just how things worked out logistically, it also makes a bit of sense as a foil. Fakemon is constantly being disingenuous, while a huge part of Astra’s arc is being true to himself, while also fulfilling other people's expectations of him. Also of note, Entermon is described as a Digimon who exists wherever you can find culture something that is particularly relevant to Astra.

While being biracial is not directly important to the story, it’s not incidental and clearly is thematically related to him being trapped between the traditional and the modern Japan. While in story Astra’s story is simply about outside expectations of inheritance, It’s possible to read Astra prior to the series as trying to overcompensate for his foreign mother in the eyes of the people at his father’s school. This is something I find notable considering that Appmon’s assistant producer, Akari Yanagawa, went on to become the producer of 2019’s Star Twinkle Precure, a season of Precure notable for the franchise's 2nd biracial cure, whose personal arc more obviously alluded to racism than Astra's, though still very indirectly.

#appmon #torajiro asuka #asuka torajiro #musimon #digimon

13 notes · View notes

missdrarrydawn · 3 years

Note

This blog is why we need post-birth abortion rights for women. Your mother would have made the right choice.

yes wow darling very smart you sound incredibly intelligent for sending this yes yes quite an outstanding achievement you got there, amazingly brave too, yes such courage to go on anon and insult people, wow i applaud your bravery truly

my blog is a HP blog with ocassional diverse content, you're getting mad at a joke post that's probably 4-5 days old by now (i'm not sure about this exactly as i lose track of time easily) that described a real medically documented experience a lot of trans women have been observed to go through as their transition and therapy continues which i said is similar to a period of a cisgender woman because of the very real similarities between the two processes

i very clearly stated twice that they are biologically different but still similar enough to warrant validation

i support trans women and i always have and i always will, they are real women just as much as i am. i also understand, unlike most of you getting mad in the notes of the post, that women are not walking talking uteruses and i do not reduce nor define women by that one thing alone because that would be ridiculous and hurtful, since there is more to being a woman than just having a uterus

i don't really see why everyone is so upset (transphobes gonna transphobe i suppose) that i called a trans woman's cycle period like or a pseudo period, when that is the most accurate term that exists for that process as of right now.

what else would you call hormonal fluctuations of estrogen and progesterone (because guess what? trans women do in fact receive estrogen and progesterone injections as part of feminizing hormone therapy) and other symptoms (abdominal cramping, headaches, acne breakouts, hot flashes, dizziness, mood swings, pain, nausea etc.) happening every 5 weeks and lasting for 6-7 days? that's right, everyone would call that a period, it's just the most accurate way to describe the process.

trans women can not menstruate, they can not bleed because they do not have a uterus (something i very explicitly stated in my post explaining my point but transphobes can't read apparently) but, like I said in my original post, the bleeding is honestly the least important byproduct of a period, or better yet, the entire cycle, because it is just that - a byproduct, a consequence of the uterine lining shedding. it is not the one defining staple of a cycle, a lot of cis women don't menstruate but you don't go around calling them fake so. the bleeding is not the goal of a monthly cycle, it is not the end result your body wants to reach (the end result would ideally be pregnancy), just a consequence of the process, and i argue it is the least important part of it, its nothing more than another symptom, just like the cramps and pain are

do you want to know what your entire argument sounds like? let me demonstrate:

person A comes in with a fever, a sore throat and a runny nose. their doctor tells them they have a cold.

person B comes in with a fever and a sore throat but no runny nose. their doctor tells them they're faking their cold and should stop pretending to have a cold because it is insensitive to people who have real colds since person B hasn't presented every single typical byproduct and symptom having a cold produces unlike person A did

yea? isn't that ridiculous? that's exactly what you sound like

'trans women experience every other symptom of a period i do, on a monthly basis like i do, lasting about a week, like mine do, but they don't experience this one specific symptom that i typically do which is bleeding therefore they're fake'

obviously the cycle of a trans women isn't going to be the same as the cycle of a cis woman, i have not once contested that nor have i equated the two, what i have done however, is defend the fact a lot of trans women do in fact experience their own form of a monthly cycle that actually presents all the symptoms of PMS (if we're going to be super picky about it) and I've stated that there is nothing wrong with a trans woman calling her own cycle a period, even if she does not experience the bleeding.

you all are just incredibly transphobic (i checked out some of the blogs replying and found them to be terfs, ew) and i don't want to cross into your territory any more than i've already ended up doing, and i will not be responding to any of your notes or anon messages anymore because i've moved on from that post and you should too, because it is obvious you will never understand what i'm trying to say and i will never understand the hatred you spew

it is telling though that terfs and transphobes came across my post which was in the 'pro trans' tag, i assume while casually browsing there for people to start fights with? very telling indeed.

i will be a doctor by the end of the year and i do not have time to argue with transphobes online over matters of trans health they know nothing about (my knowledge is far from perfect either because i am not transgender but i have listened to trans people and read about what transitions can be like because i wanted to learn and feel comfortable stating what i have). ive seen y'all constantly talk about indigestion and diarrhea which have absolutely nothing to do with the matter at hand and seen some people bring up endometriosis which also has nothing to do with the matter at hand, no one is talking about disordered periods or other health conditions, we're talking about just the regular period of a healthy person

people have asked me to provide proof i'm attending medical school which i don't think i can provide without giving out my personal information which i am not inclined to do to strangers on the internet and a lot of people didn't believe me but honestly that is not my problem

i know who i am and what i stand for and the thing i said is a true factual experience that many trans women go through as their transition continues and calling that cycle they experience a period hurts no one and only helps trans communities

of course terfs and transphobes don't care about that, which is why i urge everyone to go their separate ways. i do not want your transphobia on my posts and you don't want my activism on yours so if you're itching to comment and get pissy with me or send me anons, kindly don't because i truly couldn't care less about your opinion on matters you know nothing about and don't care to learn about either

coming from one cis woman to another, just scroll past me and any of my posts from now on and i'll do the same for you so that we may never have to interact again in any way shape or form

i'm closing my end of the discourse of the post right here with this and i stand by what i said. i believe you are wrong for invalidating the experiences of trans women and transphobic for wishing ill upon the trans community in general and i do not wish to ever associate with any of you ever again

i have said my peace

goodbye

(if any trans woman or trans person in general wishes to correct anything wrong i stated here please feel free to do so, because i am cisgender and you will of course know more about your transition and experiences than me no matter how much reading i do :)) remember you are valid and loved and pls stay safe <33)

#pro trans #positive trans #again i reiterate #PRO TRANS #THIS IS A PRO TRANS BLOG #A SAFE SPACE FOR TRANS PEOPLE #trans health #trans women are real and valid #i am not having this argument anymore #i don't like fighting and i don't care what transphobic women have to say #trans support #this cisgender women stands with the trans communities

8 notes · View notes

omoi-no-hoka · 5 years

Note

Hello! I'm sorry if this has been asked before, but how do you become proficient at handling conversations in Japanese/handling grammar very well? I read your post on the JLPT, and it addressed issues I have been tip toe-ing around--indeed, passive actions such as listening or reading are easier than the active ones. How did you go about that? Did you write a bunch of sentences daily? Did you have a conversation partner? What would you rec. to someone who lives outside Japan? Thank you!

This is an excellent question, and one that I get asked a lot irl by Japanese people in particular. Let’s talk about gaining fluency and the ways we can go about it!

How to Gain Fluency in Japanese (and Other Languages)

Speaking Fluency versus Accuracy

Language proficiency is divided into two separate categories:

Fluency: Although there are no widely agreed-upon definitions or measures of language fluency, someone is typically said to be fluent if their use of the language appears fluid, or natural, coherent, and easy as opposed to slow, halting use. In other words, fluency is often described as the ability to produce language on demand and be understood.

Accuracy: Correctness of language use, especially grammatical correctness and word choice.

By the above definitions, a “fluent” speaker may make grammatical mistakes, but they can speak without having to stop and think too much about conjugations, word choice, etc.

An “accurate” speaker can speak with nearly zero grammatical/word choice mistakes. However, the speed of their utterances isn’t generally taken into account, so it could take an “accurate” person twice as long to articulate the same idea as a “fluent” person.

Ideally, you need to strike a good balance between these two qualities when speaking. I have a boss, God bless him, who is 100% fluency and 0% accuracy and…man is it hard to understand what he’s saying sometimes, but he can generally get his point across just barely. I have another coworker who is 100% accuracy and takes about 3 minutes to form a sentence because he wants it to be perfect.

How to Increase Speaking/Writing Accuracy

First, let’s talk about the easiest thing to improve, which is accuracy. It’s also (in my opinion) the least fun thing to improve, because it means grammar books and vocabulary memorization.

You can only use a language accurately if you know what is correct and what is incorrect, and you can only learn that by studying grammar and vocabulary (or if you’re a native speaker and picked it up innately, you lucky bastard).

So here’s some things you can do to increase your accuracy:

For example, if you’re having a hard time using the passive, you need to review that part of your textbook and find some exercises to drill it into your head.

Say the correct thing aloud. Lots. Sometimes I just walk around my apartment and narrate everything I see/do like a crazy person, but that’s good practice.

Write example sentences using the grammar you’re struggling with and say them aloud too.

There’s a bunch of cool apps that connect you with native speakers that can help correct you too! I used to use HelloTalk, I think.

If you’re a creative soul, when I was studying for the JLPT, I took 1 grammar point and 5 vocabulary words from my JLPT study books and used them to write a 2-page short story about the adventures of ネギ, a stray black cat that smelled like green onions because she napped in an onion field. Then I had a Japanese friend check it over for me and mark mistakes. I hand-wrote them to improve my abysmal handwriting at the same time. It was really fun! I sometimes think about doing it again just for funsies.

When someone corrects you, don’t feel like your entire life is over and you’re a failure and you’ll never get it right haha. I’ve seen people fall into that hopeless mindset, and that’s just nonsense. It’s a good opportunity for learning and nothing more! Say the correct thing you’ve just been taught out loud, then write it down if you can. And, if possible, find a chance to use it in conversation asap.

How to Increase Speaking/Writing Fluency

Now this is the hard one. Especially for those learners who do not have native speakers nearby.

I’m going to be dead honest with you. I started formally studying Japanese at uni, and I had a Japanese roommate/best friend since year one. I had a 4.0 GPA in my Japanese classes (and only my Japanese classes lol) because I was and still am a MEGA NERD about it.

...But it wasn’t until I studied abroad in Japan my 4th year of uni that I gained fluency.

There are a lot of things that can hold us back from fluency. An interesting thing I’ve noted is that Foreign Language is perhaps the only subject in which a student’s personality can directly affect their progress. To gain fluency, you have to go forth and speak, but if you are naturally a shy person, that is going to hinder you. If you are the kind of person who takes mistakes/failures poorly, you will be less likely to take risks and try to say harder sentences. In contrast, you can get full marks in math regardless of the above personality traits.

I’m not saying that you have to be an outgoing explosion of a human being in order to gain fluency. But what I am saying is that you have to be willing to seek out conversations, and you have to be willing to take chances. Get out of your comfort zone. Use that new word you picked up the other day. Try to explain something that is difficult for you.

My problem was that, while I lived with a native speaker who would have happily taught me anything I asked, her English proficiency was much higher than my Japanese proficiency. And when I struggled to say something in Japanese, I’d fall back onto English. And when she told me something I didn’t understand in Japanese, she’d repeat it in English instead of Japanese, because that was easier for us both. The same thing happened when I was in Japanese class as well. I always had the assurance that I could fall back on English.

But when I elected to study abroad in Japan for 3 months, I knew that this was my big chance. So on the host family form in the “other requests” area, I wrote that I specifically wanted a host family that could not speak English. I was setting fire to my crutches, and I was scared but excited to see them burn.

By the end of my three months in Japan, I had gone from “Chotto matte kudasai” and needing a minute to form my reply, to “Okay, yeah I see that movie too and I liked the action scenes, but I didn’t care for the story little.” (I’ve underlined mistakes that I would have made in Japanese, to show you that I sacrificed some accuracy to obtain higher fluency.)

So, in short, the easiest and quickest way to increase your spoken fluency is to throw away all the crutches you can and use the language as much as possible. Every single day. Even if you’re just having an imaginary conversation with yourself! And like I said, there are a bunch of cool apps that connect you with Japanese people who want to learn English and you can do language exchanges with them. I had a lot of fun with those in the past.

As for increasing writing fluency...well. That’s a tough question with Japanese, because I can type Japanese at like 100 wpm, but my Japanese handwriting fluency is at a 10/100. I can read and type at the level of a native Japanese high school student, but I can only write the kanji that 7 year old can write. That’s no exaggeration.

The big reason for that dichotomy is that my work is paper-free. 100% of my work is done on screen, so about the only time I have to write out something is when I’m filling out a form, which includes my name (katakana), address, and maybe occupation.

If you want to increase your Japanese handwriting speed, just keep on writing. Write those little short stories about ネギ like I did, or find some writing prompts (I just started a side-blog with writing prompts yesterday btw) or keep a little diary. Make opportunities to write.

How to Have Nice Handwriting in Japanese

Okay, full disclaimer: I am the absolute LAST person qualified to talk about this, because I have awful handwriting in Japanese.

Unless you have prior experience with a different language that uses kanji, or you lack the keen eye of an artist, you will likely struggle to develop neat handwriting.

Personally, I really like using this app called Japanese Kanji Sensei. It’s on Android (not sure about iOS), and if you pay just a few bucks you can make your own kanji sets and stuff. Anyways, it will show you how to write the characters prettily. It gives you a good frame of reference for what nice, pencil/pen-written characters (versus calligraphy characters). It has hiragana and katakana on it too!

I get a stylus and write out the characters on this app for the muscle memory, so my hands remember the sensation of writing a certain character. (The muscle memory is different if you only use your fingertip.) This muscle memory and repetition is how Japanese people learn how to internalize kanji as well. I really enjoy and recommend this app. I’m sure that there are others out there like it too.

Summary

TL;DR: Review your textbooks, take risks, use every resource available or make your own, and just have fun with it! 💗

#Anonymous #ask me anything #Asks are open #study japanese #learn japanese #japanese language #nihongo #japanese fluency #second language acquisition #jlpt #studyblr #langblr #japanese langblr #japanese resources #kanji #study kanji #learn kanji

2K notes · View notes