#none of them have a worldview that i agree with entirely

[stars-in-my-damn-eyes]

me coming out of my well to shame myself or whatever

[bethanydelleman]

Unconsciously Done: An Examination of Misogyny in the Treatment of Caroline Bingley in Jane Austen Fan Fiction

This essay is not meant as an attack on any specific author who writes JAFF. It is a criticism of a trend that is very strong in the genre and I find extremely problematic.

It is my firm belief that Jane Austen felt deeply for the plight of women in her era and that her books examine the difficult decisions that women were forced to make because of their secondary position in society. Jane Austen presents women to us who have little power and whose only hope in future provision and comfort lies in the whims of men. Moreover, Jane Austen never in her collected works, asks us to delight in the downfall or destruction of a woman. Given this context, I find it highly distressing and untrue to Jane Austen’s legacy that so often in Jane Austen Fan Fiction (JAFF), authors invite readers to celebrate the degradation of Caroline Bingley. This is a repugnant practice that both goes against the intent of Jane Austen’s works and by attacking a woman in particular is an unconscious display of misogyny.

After the Netherfield Ball, where the Bennet family shocks Elizabeth, Darcy, and Caroline with their vulgar behaviour, Caroline and Darcy agree that it would be better for Charles, Caroline’s brother, not to marry into such a family. Together, they go to London and convince Charles to remain there, away from Jane. Caroline writes to Jane to inform her of this. Later, when Jane follows them to London, Caroline cuts off the friendship, which lasted, we should remember, for only a few weeks. She also works to conceal Jane’s presence in London from her brother. She is aided in this endeavour, again, by Mr. Darcy. Her final act of the book is attempting to embarrass Elizabeth in company at Pemberley and then insulting Elizabeth to Darcy in private.

For the purposes of this argument, I will first lay out what the original Caroline Bingley does in the novel Pride & Prejudice. Caroline dislikes the unmannered inhabitants of Hertfordshire, specifically the Bennet family, a sentiment she shares with Darcy. They make fun of the Bennets behind their backs together in the first section of the book, along with Caroline’s sister Louisa. When Jane Bennet is sick at Netherfield, Caroline is not as attentive to her as Jane’s sister would like, despite spending several hours with her multiple times.

It is important to note several things. Firstly, none of Caroline’s actions cause lasting harm to anyone. In the end, Jane and Charles do marry. Secondly, Caroline is drawn by Jane Austen as a social-climber who is not above using artifice to reach her goals, but her actions are entirely rational within that context. Every action that Caroline makes is a logical expression of her two motivations, a wish to marry Darcy and a wish to see her brother marry well. Thirdly, Caroline is aided in nearly everything she does by Darcy himself. One could speculate that without Darcy’s interference, Charles would have returned to Hertfordshire as he planned. Darcy’s own words imply this, “with a stronger dependence on my judgement than on his own.” (P&P, Ch 35.)

The position of women in Georgian society is made clear through Jane Austen’s works. Women are dependent on their parents or guardians until they marry at which point they are dependent upon their husbands. There are only two acceptable options for women of the gentry, marriage or becoming a governess. When Charlotte Lucas submits to a marriage with Mr. Collins, we are told marriage was the only provision for well-educated young women of small fortune (P&P, Ch 22). Jane Fairfax, in Emma, is so upset with her the profession of governess, that she compares it to slavery (V 2, Ch. 18). Jane Austen is clearly of the opinion that a woman should marry for affection rather than only for wealth, but she acknowledges how difficult this line is to draw when marriage is so vital to a woman's life. Caroline is set up as a representation of a mercenary worldview in Pride & Prejudice. Like many other Jane Austen women, Mary Crawford (Mansfield Park, specifically her early interest in Tom Bertram), Lucy Steele (S&S), and Charlotte Lucas (P&P) for example, Caroline is pursuing a man for wealth rather than love.

Lydia Bennet is another woman whom Jane Austen, in the social morays of the time, could have condemned and invited us to hate. In Mr. Collins letter we hear the morality that would delight in a woman’s downfall, “The death of your daughter would have been a blessing in comparison of this.” (P&P Ch. 48). Yet again, the narrator does not invite us to treat Lydia with scorn. We are reminded of Mrs. and Mr. Bennet’s faulty parenting and that he ignored Elizabeth’s advice, we are reminded of the character of Wickham, and we are assured of Lydia’s future provision. Lydia will not fall into poverty because her two wealthy sisters will protect her. Her sisters do this despite the fact that they had the most to lose from her rash actions. This demonstrates an acknowledgement that all women, despite their faults, deserve to be protected.

It is important to note that while Jane Austen invites the reader to disapprove of these women who marry for money, she does not outright condemn them. Charlotte Lucas’s decision to marry Collins is explained with some compassion. The narrator notes that, “the boys were relieved from their apprehension of Charlotte’s dying an old maid” (P&P, Ch. 22) which again reminds us of the importance of marriage for a woman’s future provision. Maria Bertram (Mansfield Park), who married for money and then committed adultery for love and whose actions are clearly condemned, is still allowed compassion. The narrator mourns that Maria must suffer more than her male counterpart for the offence, "In this world the penalty is less equal than could be wished” (MP, Ch. 48) and Sir Thomas spends a good deal of time blaming himself for not raising his daughter properly, “here had been grievous mismanagement” (MP, Ch 48).

Unlikely as it is for Jane Austen to desire further punishment for Caroline, it is more improbable that she would wish for men to exact that retribution. We are told in the history of Eliza Brandon, (S&S) how much power a man can exert over a woman in their guardianship. Eliza is confined to the house and allowed no pleasures until she submits to a marriage to a man who will treat her with cruelty and steal her fortune. This action is despicable and is presented as such. Yet, many authors write Charles Bingley exerting this same sort of control over his sister, or at least threatening it. They wish for him to cut off her allowance and thus financially constrain her behaviour. They have Charles threaten to disown his sister, who in such stories is under his guardianship, or sometimes even give her money away. Not only is this unnecessary, as Charles already can control his sister’s behaviour to an extent as we see during the visit from Mrs. Bennet when he “forced his younger sister to be civil also” (P&P, Ch 9), it is cruel.

It is unlikely therefore, that Jane Austen meant for us to hate Caroline or take pleasure in her imagined downfall. In the original novel, the ‘punishment’ Caroline receives is equal to her actions, she must endure seeing Elizabeth Bennet raised to the position of mistress of Pemberley. It is the same thing that happens to Lady Catherine de Bourgh, who like Caroline, wants Darcy to marry for wealth rather than affection.

More distressing are the words used by characters in works of JAFF, mostly by men who in Jane Austen’s original works treat women with respect, about how Charles might control this “deviant” sister. These terms are often far harsher than anything used for the correction of Lydia Bennet, whom we know to actually be unmannered and wild. Proposals that Charles, “bring Caroline to heel” are repugnant. Caroline is a human woman, not a dog. However one imagines speech in the Georgian era, these are not words used by Jane Austen. Suggestions that Charles cast her out of the family home or be obliged to lock her up, when not said in jest, are terrifying. In this society, these things could happen and would be catastrophic to Caroline.

Even the mere suggestion that Charles should control his sister’s speech in in a start contrast our exaltation of Elizabeth’s lively manner. Jane Austen allows us to find Mr. Collins distasteful for suggesting that Elizabeth controls her tongue, “and your wit and vivacity, I think, must be acceptable to her, especially when tempered with the silence and respect which her rank will inevitably excite” (P&P Ch. 19). Yet, JAFF authors want Charles to do this to his own sister! Would it be in keeping with the morality of the creator of Elizabeth Bennet to have a man force a woman into silence? Jane Austen gave women voices and ideas in a time when that was counter-cultural, yet 21st century authors, most of them women, want to send Caroline back to the dark ages.

Some authors have this same abuse performed by a husband that Caroline unfortunately marries for money or through "compromise" (a common but likely ahistorical trope), only to find out he is cruel. There are stories that present this outcome as just instead of horrifying. Again, these are 21st century authors, relegating a 19th century woman to a cruel marriage in which she has few rights and little chance of honourable escape. Occasionally Caroline is married to Wickham, and instead of Elizabeth Bennet pitying the match, as she does for her sister Lydia, she often finds it funny or just. The idea that any woman deserves to be trapped in an abusive situation, or have her wealth stolen from her by a deceitful suitor, is again, repulsive.

The final degradation that Caroline faces is also the most troubling: authors repeatedly deprive Caroline of her rationality. Jane Austen’s Caroline is a rational creature, as are all the women that are depicted in her works. Good or bad, Jane Austen’s women are carefully rendered images of real life and they have motivations that guide their actions. Caroline’s two motives were discussed above and her actions are entirely rational based on her goals Even if we dislike Caroline’s reasoning and acts, we ought to respect her humanity. Unfortunately, many works on JAFF, in an effort to create a more villainous character, twist Caroline into an evil, insane, psychopathic version of herself, bent only on cruelty and hatred, without any clear goals.

As for authors who relegate Caroline to a life of perpetual dependence, Jane Austen herself only consigns a single woman to this fate, Miss Bates in Emma. Jane Austen treats Miss Bates with respect and kindness, creating a town around her that takes care of both her physical and emotional needs. Emma is admonished by Mr. Knightley for ridiculing Miss Bates before other members of the community. To Jane Austen, a woman in perpetual dependence should excite pity, not disgust or laughter. Miss Bates also is granted a voice and we, along with Emma, are encouraged to listen to her and respect her value as a person.

The reason that all of this is so disturbing and repugnant is because these words are written by modern authors, people who should understand how oppressive and wrong the subjugation of women was in the Georgian era. For those authors, many of them women, to attack a fellow woman with the very tools of the patriarchy that we have ourselves struggle to throw off and fight against is horrid. Jane Austen does not resort to these methods; Caroline Bingley is not bent under the power of her male guardians in Pride & Prejudice. The only woman who is, Eliza Brandon, is an example we are supposed to pity, not scorn.

Worse, Mr. Darcy himself is an active participant in almost every bad action of Caroline. Yet, while Darcy is forgiven completely, and often given excuses like shyness for his actions, Caroline is again and again vilified. It is a double standard of the worst kind and one that especially female authors should recognize as unfair and unjust. Yes, we do not see Caroline’s apology or reformation in Pride & Prejudice, but she is also not a main character. Many JAFF works almost seem to forget Darcy’s interference or rudeness towards Jane and the rest of the Bennet family. He is excused and Caroline is hated and destroyed.

Instead of a human with rational motives, JAFF authors imagine Caroline as a demon. Caroline becomes a playhouse mirror imagine of Elizabeth, who is often turned into a “Mary-Sue” or a picture of perfection. This Carrie-Sue (credit to Amelia Marie Logan, who coined the term) acts in a way that Caroline of Pride & Prejudice never would. Carrie-Sue attacks and insults people in public without motive, including her own brother; she continues to pursue Darcy after he is married; she continually attempts to “compromise” him; and she will do anything no matter the cost. She is a grotesque in the worst sense of the word and she is not of Jane Austen.

If there is one overall thesis of Jane Austen’s works, it is that women are rational creatures. Elizabeth Bennet and Sophia Croft (Persuasion) actually use that term explicitly, but every heroine in Jane Austen demonstrates this same theme. We see inside their heads and we understand their humanity. Even the women we are meant to despise display rationality. Fanny Dashwood of Sense & Sensibility for example, talks her husband out of giving money to his sisters because she is greedy. Lucy Steele lashes out against Elinor Dashwood because she is fearful of losing her one chance at financial security: Edward Ferrars. Mrs. Norris (Mansfield Park), probably the cruellest woman in Jane Austen’s works, abuses her niece because she cannot bear her own inferiority to the Bertram family. She relieves her own feelings of dependence by pushing her niece further below herself. All of the actions of these women are despicable, but they also follow cogent motivations.

This is especially problematic because it is almost always Caroline who faces this treatment. Wickham, a character who actually deserves the term “villain”, is allowed rational motives, most often lust, revenge, and greed. He is allowed to retain his humanity and his mind; it is a woman who is deprived of hers. As I have stated, I believe this is done without malice on the part of the authors, but I would ask them to reflect on every instance, for I know there have been many i their own lives, where another person has deprived them of their humanity based on their gender. It is a pervasive problem that persists in our modern society and we ought not perpetuate it in our works of fiction.

To conclude, Jane Austen does not delight in the destruction, humiliation, or subjugation of women. If we wish as JAFF authors, and as women, to honour Jane Austen’s legacy, then we should refrain from doing those very things and from depriving a woman of her rational mind. The treatment of Caroline Bingley in JAFF is a form of misogyny and as such it should be stopped. This is important because while Caroline Bingley is of course fictional, the representation of women in fiction can perpetuate stereotypes and prejudices in real life. Jane Austen wanted to tell the world, through her fiction, that women are humans worth listening to and worth respecting. Let us leave Carrie-Sue behind and allow Caroline Bingley to finally live in peace.

[aroapl]

hello! first off, this ask is not at all meant to be antagonistic and i am genuinely coming from a place of wanting to understand. i've always been extremely for "people can be and identify as whatever they want, so long as they're not hurting anyone". what i'm struggling with is that last bit and the way that i am seeing some people using the aplatonic or loveless labels.

i am both aro- and ace spec myself, so i definitely understand not having emotions or attraction in the way that a lot of people feel that you should. and while i am pretty high empathy myself, i'm also friends with people who have low or no empathy and have no trouble understanding that that's just another way of existing and doesn't mean that you can't have compassion for people or treat people decently. my best friend has no empathy and is incredibly supportive and caring.

i also totally get when i see people iding as loveless because the way that our society (especially western society) uses the word "love" is so weird and definitely not universally relatable. completely understandable.

i've seen many people identify being aplatonic as meaning "idk i just don't really Connect with people in the way that i see most people talk about, if my friends all moved away, i wouldn't really be bothered" okay, cool. i don't Get it, but just seems to be a different experience.

where i'm really struggling is not to condemn or get angry at people who i straight up see saying "i'm loveless meaning i don't care about other human beings and if any number of people just died right in front of me i wouldn't care. if i saw someone in trouble needing my help i'd walk right past them. i hate humans". i haven't seen a TON of people express this, but i've seen enough to where i feel like they can't all be trolls, and i'm not sure how to respond.

i've also seen a lot, like definitely the vast majority of people i see pop up on my dash who id themselves as aplatonic, say that they feel horribly lonely and disconnected and just Can't make friends...therefore they must be aplatonic, and they should stop trying and be "naturally" isolated. a lot of these people also mention having past trauma, and a lot of them seem to be young teenagers.

now. i am of the opinion that identifying yourself "incorrectly"--eg, a young trans woman identifying as ace before she figures out she's trans because she has no interest in sex as someone who's seen as a man--isn't ever really harmful. not having sex with anyone isn't going to hurt you. briefly deciding you're a lesbian isn't going to hurt you if you're actually a trans man.

but these teenagers i see iding as aplatonic because they're unable to make connections with people but want to really worries me. if you don't have any close friends or even casual friends and are totally happy with that and id as aplatonic, that makes sense and seems perfectly fine to me. but i just can't make "i id this way because i'm miserable" mesh with my worldview, nor can i make "i id this way because i hate everyone" mesh either.

in the past when i've brought this up to people with the loveless able specifically, it's incited threats of violence, doxxing, and a lot of ableism, which tbh did the opposite of convincing me it was a harmless label.

do you have any thoughts on this?

(Little preface to say I consulted a server with a lot of apls and loveless folks in it to get a second opinion on how to respond to this. So, some of this is entirely my own thoughts and some is paraphrased from another loveless apl. This person did not want to be credited/named.)

I’m gonna start with my main thought on all these points, which is this: there are always going to be some people that identify with a label for the “wrong” reasons, and there are always going to be some assholes and some people you fundamentally don’t agree with in every label/community. None of these things ever make it okay to try and get rid of or police a label, to take it away from the people that genuinely find community, joy, and self acceptance in it.

A lot of what you’re saying here is quite frankly just classic aphobia, the same stuff a lot of people say/think about aros and aces just directed at apls and loveless people. There are plenty of aros that desperately wish they could like romance and have romantic relationships, and there are aphobes that think these aros are just mentally ill and that the aro label should be done away with to “save” them. There are some violently sex negative aces out there, and there are aphobes who think they speak for the whole community and that the ace label should be done away with because of it. There are people that mistakenly identify as ace and/or aro because they’re struggling with other things, and some of them isolate themselves because of it in ways that genuinely do harm them, and there are people that think ace and aro are inherently harmful labels because of this. 

Whether they truly are aplatonic or just falling back on the aplatonic label because of other struggles, some aplatonic people genuinely wishing they could make/keep friends and feeling lonely doesn’t mean that the aplatonic label as a whole is a problem. Like I said, people misidentifying in ways that do actually harm them in some way is something that can happen with any label. Also, trying to make someone drop a label that doesn’t actually fit them and force them to face the problem that led them to it before they’re ready to is rarely helpful. A lot of people in this situation would at best feel disrespected and upset, and at worst double down on their misidentification or have a serious mental health spiral over being made to face a problem they aren't ready to face. People wrongly IDing as aplatonic might find understanding and resources in our community that help them heal, they might be miserable the whole time they ID as apl and eventually move on and get help afterward, or they might learn and heal in other ways or go on to struggle for a very long time. Either way, it’s not the job of outsiders to decide someone is identifying with a label for the wrong reasons and make them let it go. 

(Also, a side note on this point. While aplatonic is currently primarily defined and used similarly to other aspec labels, there have been several other definitions that differ quite a lot. One of these definitions defines it as struggling to make or maintain friendships due to neurodivergence, or just generally struggling with friendship. Some people do still use this definition. Some of these people you’re talking about may be using this definition.)

Now on to lovelessness. Some of what you’re saying here gets into ableism, particularly towards people with personality disorders. Some people with personality disorders genuinely just aren’t capable of caring about strangers like that, or people in general. Some often aren’t capable of going out of their way to help people, or struggle a lot with it. That doesn’t make them bad. People can’t control how they feel. As long as they aren’t hurting anyone, people can feel or think whatever they want. Thought crime isn’t real.

Now, if someone is actually hurting people and using the loveless label as an excuse, that’s obviously not okay. The thing about that though is that taking the loveless label away from them won’t make them stop hurting people. They will just find another excuse, or stop bothering with having an excuse. An asshole is still going to be an asshole no matter what label or excuse they attach to it. On top of that, some people within an identity/community being bad people doesn't make it okay to vilify everyone that shares that label or get rid of that label/community. 

I’m genuinely very sorry some people have been ableist and violent towards you, that is never okay. I do need you to know though that despite what may have been good intentions, this does come off as aplphobic, loveless antagonistic, and a bit ableist. That can rightfully inspire anger and defensiveness in people with these identities, especially since many of us are already used to having our identities antagonized, disrespected, and demonized. Since you’re aroace-spec, imagine how you would feel if someone came to you and expressed these exact same sentiments, but towards ace and aro identities instead. Imagine how you’d feel if some came to you doubting that ace and aro identities should be allowed to exist because they’d encountered some aces and aros that were mean or unhappy in their identify.

At the end of the day, not everyone is going to share your worldview, and that’s fine. You don’t have to understand them or like them, or even get along with them, but they have a right to exist as they are even if you don’t agree with them or like it. If they aren’t hurting you, simply move on and focus your time and energy on the people and communities you do like and understand.

[tumblingxelian]

Storyteller Akuma: K, this thought wouldn’t leave me be, but I'm not sure how well it’s going to translate from brain to page, so bear with me.

I see part of Ladybug Not Being Affected . . . like, she is being influenced, it just SEEMS like she isn’t, because 1) as we discussed, she's the hero, & 2) 1 of the major influencers right now is CHAT NOIR, who knows Ladybug really damn well, so she's basically herself, right? Well one thing that just hit me-

Right now, Ladybug IS NOT Marinette.

Like, as much as people write about it, Ladybug & Marinette are not separate people. Ladybug is not an entire act Marinette is putting on, but rather an extension of herself. Ladybug makes choices that Marinette absolutely would, because THEY ARE THE SAME PERSON. BUT . . . No one knows who Ladybug is behind the mask. Not even Chat. So things DO go a little different, because Marinette's BIAS isn’t there.

Cause like. I think we all agree that Marinette is very "Black-White/What-Is-This-Grey-You-Speak-Of?" in her worldview. It's basically why, when Chloé DOES make efforts to change, they go either unacknowledged, or misinterpreted, because Marinette has several YEARS of Chloé being a rude, unrepentant, Rich Bitch Bully. & I'm not saying it’s wrong for Marinette to think that way, but it's what makes it all so hard for the girls to see where the other is coming from. It colours their every interaction, even when Chloé is trying her hardest to please Ladybug. But right now? Ladybug isn't - CAN'T - be Marinette. & her biggest influence is Chat Noir, who sees Ladybug as herself, yes, but also her BEST self. So that changes things.

Like, Ladybug is AWARE that she's really Marinette Dupain-Cheng. But if she focuses too hard on that, she starts slipping into whatever the Storytellers see Marinette as, & nope, can’t do that, so we are Ladybug right now! & none of the Storytellers know that Ladybug is Marinette, so they don’t think to apply Marinette actions to Ladybug. & what this really means, is that Ladybug finds it easy to be sympathetic to Chloé in particular. Because without the years of animosity between them, if Marinette had met Chloé as a teen, & seen first hand how her parents treat her? Oh, she'd be FURIOUS. How DARE they treat their daughter like that!? Can't they see how they're hurting her!? How hard she's trying to be what they want!? How miserable she is!?

Or what about Adrien? Without the crush blindness, what does she think of him? How does she see him? Like, yes, at the core Ladybug & Marinette are the same person, but - *inarticulate gestures cause my brain is failing me*

It basically lets her view the whole situation objectively, so when everything is over . . .

Ooh I am excited!

Yeees, yeah I can totally see this, I love exploring the distinction in identities and sense of self that come with the mask. (Ask me about Six-Teen-Heroes sometime XD) But yeah cos like, her magic, role in the Akuma's narrative and all three but especially Chat's dominant experience with her means Ladybug is gonna be pretty close to her professional hero self... While Marinette is sort of... Not quite there right now.

Also yeah Chat not knowing whose behind the mask plays heavily into things to, so true, he only as the Ladybug perception. & Marinette returning to the field will have been 'in character' as well.

You are also right I hadn't considered that but I love it! Cos yeah she's got several years of negative experience with Chloe & a rather simplistic world view where parents are good & loving, authority figures are generally reliable and being nice is natural and easy. Intellectually she may know bad parents exist but Chloe's life on the outside looking in, is not super obvious on that front unless coming at it from an adult or more neutral perspective. So to Marinette there's no real explanation save "Spoiled rotten". But for Ladybug, none of that stuff applies!

Let alone the fact that Chat probably wouldn't mind it if they got along, he always seemed amused by their interactions X3 Also true facts on her best/ideal self.

Yeah there's definitely be some dissonance there, and to avoid losing herself she probably leans harder on Ladybug but is maybe also a lil freaked out somewhere cos she doesn't want to not be herself either. Everyone's getting a messed up mind today!

so they don’t think to apply Marinette actions to Ladybug.

Action, feelings or history, so at most its like, oh the ever professional Ladybug can be a bit eh on the exuberant Chloe & that's at worst.

Also yeah I can see it, hell if they'd only met as heroes she'd possibly be full on fond of her even without seeing her trauma. Or at least able to go "OK that was rude but like, god damn what an over reaction." Let alone yeah Audrey at least would be something she could pick up on. Add in stuff like Maladikator and all the pieces would fall into place given Akuma are not meant to harm their loved one's and both her parents try to harm or use her as Akuma. So it'd be all red flags all the time, especially cos she's a hero in all their eyes.

Gosh yeah that'd be interesting, like does Adrien's perception of himself as Adrien VS Chat play into things as well? So many angles!

But yeah I love this so much.

Low key just imagining post purifications everyone just flops onto the floor unsure what to do with themselves. Probably feeling a bit eased up like in that original ask I sent you:

The rich kids have taken knives to each other. They've cut open their festering wounds. The rot is exposed, scrubbed raw. While they lie angry, bleeding, crying, and dying [inside], they have the opportunity to look upon themselves once more and apply new dressings.

Or maybe a little relieved, or hell jus confused. Marinette-Bug is not much better, but like if Chloe tries to flee, or put up an act, she might just get that hug she's been starving for all her life and just fucking breakdown sobbing.

[pinkacademic]

Themes, Context and Problems of Studying Literature

We’re dealing with old books written by old people who had old views, so pretty frequently, we’re going to come across attitudes and language that… well, I hope none of you agree with it… but that’s not a bad thing. We should challenge our worldview, we should learn how to debate it eloquently, learn the context of why people thought the way they did, and learn how to discern between good intentions with bad choices of language, and bad intentions even with good choices of language.

I’m going to be coming back to Dracula a lot as my go-to example text because we all have ease-of-access to it through Dracula Daily, even if we aren’t participating, and I think its fair to focus on one we could all be reading for free.

Common Themes

Themes that come up a lot in any analysis of literature are always the major political issues of the world at the time the text was written, and that still widely apply eg racism and xenophobia, feminism/sex and gender, religion, environmentalism, class… Then, on top of that, there will be motifs that are specific to the book in question. For example, Wuthering Heights, as the name suggests, has a constant refrain that takes it back to pathetic fallacy- which means weather-based metaphor. And actually, the storms which can often in literature be forboding, to Cathy and Heathcliff represent thw call of the wild drawing them home to the moors.

It begs the question that many of you have probably encountered in that cringe Facebook meme about the curtains being blue.

Sometimes the character likes blue and has blue curtains and that’s it- and it is worth knowing that that can be true- but sometimes the curtains are blue because everything is blue and has been since the character’s mother designed the house, and blue is the oppressive colour of an old attitude but the main character wants to live in a modern world of yellow. Maybe, as soon as the mother dies, the main character is going to redesign the house that felt like a trap for so many years and the curtains will be yellow.

More on symbolism, metaphors, and other methods next week!

Interpretation

So, what are you supposed to do with this information? Well, pick an angle and defend it with your entire being. Here comes the Dracula because firstly, do you feel like Jonathan is a sexist because he expects Mina to be in the kitchen cooking paprika hendl for him? Or is he a true romantic who is thinking of her always on his trip to Transylvania?

This is the importance of opinion. Answering essay questions has, in my experience, always meant picking a side and gunning for it to the death. You have the evidence for your case. Look at this asshole Van Helsing being so condesceding to Mina, he’s so sexist! Alternatively, look at this feminist icon Van Helsing treating Mina as the only one with the brain cell.

It’s up to you, and that to me is the value of studying literature because it forces you to think for yourself. And the thing is, you can’t be wrong if you back it up.

Context

I think it’s important to understand where the author was in their lifewhen they wrote their book when we’re analysing its contents. I think the content should be the dominant force in your interpretations, but understanding some of the context matters.

Taking our faithful companion Dracula, it is important to know that this story where the beautiful Lucy is viciously attacked by a creature of the night was written in 1897, and that the murders of prostitutes committed by Jack the Ripper were less than a decade prior. It is also worth noting that the predominantly English cast of characters were written from the point-of-view of Irishman Bram Stoker who supported Home Rule for Ireland.

It can be useful to familiarise yourself with the language of the time, particularly when referring to issues such as sexuality, class, and race, when looking at broad questions such as, for example “is Dracula racist?” Not really, it mostly just uses period-typical language, but Jonathan himself can be pretty xenophobic because he represents the typical Englishman of the day.

That is also one hypothetical interpretation- it’s not even necessarily what I think- so, always keep these things in mind too.

My point is, understanding the time period can help you understand the work in question.

Why it is Important?

Ok, girls, I’m about to start PREACHING! As I mentioned, I think the value of a literature degree is how much it forces you to engage with challenging material, understand the nuances of creativity, and messages versus enjoying art for art’s sake. I think the reason creative subjects and humanities are underfunded because (tinfoil hat voice) THEY WANT US STUPID!! But in all seriousness, take every opportunity to expand your media literacy, your worldview, and your understanding of what counts as art, a classic, literature, and something worth thinking about.

Ok, girlies, I’m leaving it here for this week. This is my absolute PASSION, so I could talk about it FOREVER, but I’ll stop now to focus energy on the actual study section for next week!

[sparatus]

can I get secret and future for the sparatus kids pls? They need chewing on. Like squeaky toys.

not-so-nice oc asks

you're so right tho

secret: What's one secret your OC never wants anyone to know about them?

part of areus resents his father's career in xenopolitics. he loves his dad, and once he's a dad himself he understands why as a father he'd want to take the opportunities to provide a better life for his children, but areus hates the attention, hates the security, hates that he'll never be a nobody again - he hates everything about being the councilor's son, and as much as he loves and respects his father, he can't help but hate that he ever agreed to go into politics in the first place.

verres is a coward. he's the military son, he's a lifer, but he'd much rather never face combat a day in his life. he stayed in the military because he excelled at leadership and he felt at home there, but he has a very strong survival instinct. push comes to shove, he'll do his duty, especially if there's a personal tie like protecting his family or his friends, but he's very gentle at heart.

calvetorin is terrified of dying. specifically, she knows that she had a lot of life-threatening birth defects that were corrected with surgery so she could survive, and she has a horrible fear that something got missed, or that they were only temporary fixes, and she's been living on borrowed time all along. she's also terrified that those defects, since they were caused by eezo exposure, will turn out to be hereditary and every time she gets pregnant (she ends up having 3 children) she's risking passing on those same problems to her kids.

future: What's the worst possible future for your OC? Are they taking steps to avoid that outcome? Are they even aware it's a possibility?

for all three of them, not that they realize it at all, the worst future... is what happens in bad end. their father is killed in an act of high treason and terrorism (because shepard killing the council is both of those things, whether fandom and bioware like to acknowledge that or not), there's no body left for final rites to let his family say goodbye properly as he passes across the veil, and all the galaxy falls apart. if you asked them, the worst thing they could imagine would be their spouses or kids dying, or galactic war; in a timeline where shepard kills the council, none of them had ever considered that outcome, and their entire worldview is shattered.

[direwolfwargs]

Here’s the thing that house of the dragon has made me realize. Rhaenyra has, at every point, every single one, been given the benefit of the doubt. Even among royalty she is massively privileged, as is Daemon, because of viserys. There’s loyalty to your family and then there’s willful blindness. And to a certain extent, it’s understandable, it’s almost kind, that viserys truly is so devoted to Rhaenyra, but we know, and she knows, it’s out of guilt. Ep1 Rhaenyra makes clear her relationship with her father is not close, he wants a son and she doesn’t want the crown anyway. It’s only after Aemma and Baelon’s death, when she’s named heir, does he put her on this pedestal, and even then in her youth he still acts like a father, chastises her and curbs the privilege that he and Daemon had at her age. But it’s not out of love, it’s because he killed her mother, and she’s all he has left. Same with Daemon, if he loved Daemon, truly loved him, he would recognize that he cannot control him, but Daemon is all that’s left of Alyssa and Baelon.

Yet he never extends this privilege, this benefit of the doubt, to his children by Alicent. I won’t speak of Alicent here; she has her own issues with privilege and responsibility in dichotomy to Rhaenyra and smarter people than me have gotten into it. But what few interactions we’ve seen of him with Aegon and aemond(none with helaena, I might add) he does not treat them like family, like his children, and certainly not like princes. Hell, the interrogation of Aemond in ep7 mirrored the events in GoT that led to Lady’s death, an act that ultimately drew a massive rift between Sansa and Arya as sisters. I’ll come back to that.

Viserys is not solely to blame. Alicent is just as complicit. It is one hundred percent clear from the get go that her children are a duty and an obligation, and while they maybe weren’t always and that’s come from years of shitty marriage, it’s true come episode 6. She gives aegon no privacy, gives aemond the bare bones amount of sympathy, doesn’t even attempt to understand helaena. And aegon says clearly in ep7 that Alicent betrothed him to helaena; a match that he, at least, clearly wasn’t happy with, and though we haven’t gotten helaena’s thoughts on the subject she’s clearly gentle and fragile and does not compliment aegon. The match is pure politics, but it’s not even good politics; blood of the dragon yadayada but Alicent herself is not blood of the dragon. It’s not one hundred percent unknown to marry into other houses; Rhaenys’s mother was a Baratheon, aemma was an Arryn. Alicent could have easily made calculated political matches to secure her childrens futures and secure allies by marrying them to other houses, or for godssakes she could have been done with the whole thing and we’d helaena to have, ensuring Rhaenyra would not harm her children. But no. She has no conception other than what these people with their “queer customs” keep saying about the blood of the dragon, and besides if either of them were to leave kings landing then she wouldn’t have control over them. I mean she slaps aegon in front of a room full of people, her father manhandles the kid, no wonder he ends up being such a shit. But still, of course they end up loyal to her, because she’s the only person giving them the slightest amount of affection or support, no matter how double edged it is.

If there was any love, ignoring love, respect or sense or duty in viserys towards his children there would have been some kind of punishment. Now I agree that taking a kids eye out is a bit much but still, at the very least reprimanding. But no, he harasses his sons over something he knows is true but refuses to believe because then his worldview would collapse. And I compare it to the Lady Incident for several reasons; let me be entirely clear, Viserys is not Robert in this situation, he’s Cersei. Fiercely devoted to their child to the point where they will lie for them, ignore all wrongdoing, anything to stake their claim? Alicent is Ned. And I’m gonna say some stuff about Ned that a lot of people aren’t gonna like now; misplaced devotion to ideals and the conceptualization of people rather than people themselves, obsessed with honor and duty to the point where they actively harm themselves and those they love. And Aemond, like Sansa, lied, threw aegon under the bus out of fear. And if I’m reading my parallels right, their relationship is not going to recover from that. They’re already at odds over Helaena, it’s only gonna get worse. Because of Viserys. And Alicent is no better. She didn’t pull a knife on Rhaenyra for aemonds sake, she did it for herself, for her pride, for her grudge against Rhaenyra.

So it’s no wonder aemond and aegon grow up to hate Rhaenyra, to want her dead. She’s been given everything they’ve lacked, every benefit that their father denied them. It’s fascinating to see, and honestly fucking heartbreaking.

[myrddin-wylt]

GerAme?

B: Not cute but they're fascinating holy fuck

Damn, Ludwig is popular rn huh?

so America/Germany is really weird because they're such foils of each other and mirror the other really well - the superpower and the superpower that could have been - which is very spicy imo, especially as time goes on and the two countries begin to develop increasingly contrasting worldviews. but they're also tied together so, so strongly.

In WW1, was the President Wilson's 14 Points that eventually brought the Germans to the negotiating table, because it was the only sort of compromise where the Germans - the military of which was still in pretty good shape and able to fight - didn't get fucked over. unfortunately, none of the Allies xcept the Americans had any intention of actually following through with the 14 Points (Britain came around eventually), which meant the Americans and Germans got duped, and both were extremely pissed off about it. and I just....

Okay, Alfred figures that if he's gotta go into this stupid shitshow that he's not gonna let his boys die for no reason - he's gonna get something out of this war so that it never happens again. If he HAS to participate, he's going to make it worthwhile and a positive thing for the future. no secret treaties, no controlling the sea, no oppressive reparations, and some sort of international body of law to mediate conflicts. he's done with this. And Ludwig sees the one person casting him a lifeline from a crowd of group of people who want to see him never get up again, so of course he takes Alfred's deal.

Except it doesn't happen. the French won't do it. the British are fighting amongst themselves tooth and nail to even consider the terms. No one wants to give the Germans another chance to pull this shit again. so they strip the 14 Points as much as they can and agree on a skeleton version that quickly ceases to be even a skeleton when the Americans call them out on their bullshit, reject the entire fucking thing, and take their ball and go home so they can make their own, separate treaty with the Germans that doesn't hold them to Europe's bullshit.

So that definitely sucks for Ludwig, and really all any of it accomplishes is WW2, but still, he saw the potential. He saw that Alfred was willing to show quite a bit of mercy, which only increased as American money funneled into rebuilding Europe, including Germany, before and during the Great Depression.

And then you have WW2, which is almost sorta just business for Alfred? His fight with Ludwig honestly isn't even personal? he's in Europe to help his father and the stupid frog and the piece of shit commie and this time to actually put an end to Europe's bullshit. But his real personal beef is with Kiku (and Ivan, soon), not Ludwig. Ludwig is a threat, obviously, and don't get me wrong Alfred does not like the man, but he's also not really emotionally invested in kicking his ass. Just professionally invested.

In the wake of WW2, a few interesting things happen: for one thing, Germany and Japan will never be superpowers. The UK relinquishes its superpower status as well. France has a long way to recover even just great power status, and it's questionable if superpower is even possible. But for the USSR and US, this shitshow is just getting started, and Germany is about to play host to it. Alfred and Ivan both sink their teeth into Ludwig and it's a no holds barred brawl for the victory and it's not pretty.

For Ludwig, he well aware he's Alfred's pawn in all this. the question is if that's something he even objects to? This time the Americans are the ones dominating the terms of the treaty and this time it will be productive, dammit, because who's gonna say no to the guy who just dropped two atomic bombs on Japan?

Alfred throws his weight behind rebuilding Germany, making the country into something useful that will consolidate American power in Europe. And it's a really nice gig for Ludwig, frankly. The justice he does face for is waaayyyyy more lenient than what is deserved, for one thing, and now Alfred is basically trading money, security, and power for loyalty. That's it. It's a good deal.

So for most of the post-WW2 Era, Alfred/Ludwig are a very interesting, utilitarian pair. the problem comes after reunification when the USSR declines and the Germans don't really have a need for American support anymore. So Ludwig and Alfred naturally drift apart.

aaaand now today that was clearly a fucking mistake because we have a very cutthroat political game going on in the background between these two countries. but that's neither here nor there.

[youvereachedthebadend]

Oh, definitely! I mean, he still has some loyalty to Anti while JJ has none, but he's starting to question some things. He agreed with me that Anti hadn't told him everything about his memories, even if he insisted that it wasn't on purpose. He just needs time. You can't reframe your whole worldview in one day. By the time we've got a plan in place for how to get to him, he might be willing to be un-corrupted.

I should probably ask JJ what he thinks, actually. If he thinks it's possible for him and you to get close enough for the un-corrupting to work, or thinks we should focus on someone else first. I just still don't know if he's being controlled by you-know-who right now

I'm glad that went quickly on your end, that's good to know!

'Okay...' Jack nods slowly. 'Okay. Okay, we can do that. We can figure something out for him.'

"Don't worry about it too much, Jack," Chase says softly.

Jack laughs. "Don't worry about it?' Don't worry about uncorrupting one of my best friends when I've only done it once before and I'm not entirely sure how it works? Thanks, but the anxiety's gonna be there anyway.'

"Well, I mean, obviously," Chase says. He instinctively reaches out to put a hand on Jack's shoulder, but withdraws it when he remembers it would just pass right through him. "I mean...try not to spend every second thinking about it. We can't do much until Schneep leaves the Place, anyway. If you're feeling bad all the time, then...it's bad." He looks embarrassed at the poor phrasing. "You know?"

Jack sighs, and smiles at Chase. 'Yeah. I know, don't worry.' He pauses. 'Um...anyway. What was that about JJ?'

"Can't you guys just...pop in and out really quick to check on him?" Stacy asks. "If he's there, then just leave immediately."

Sam swishes Their tail, and Jack turns to look at Them. They must've said something long, because it's a while before Jack nods in response. 'Right. We don't want to risk losing the connection. But Stacy has a point.'

Stacy blinks. "Uh...Jack? Can you hear them?"

'Oh. Right, yeah. I...guess it's a new thing?' Jack says slowly. 'I-I don't really remember when it happened.'

"...okay then," Stacy mutters. Chase says nothing, but looks a bit concerned. "Anyway, thank you for saying I have a point. I guess it's up to the voices what they want to do."

[makeste]

BnHA Chapter 305: Worst Intervention Ever

Previously on BnHA: Shinomori, whose name took me an entire week to memorize, was all, “nice to meet you Deku, I’m ten feet tall, do you want to know how I died?” and without waiting for an answer explained that he kicked it from old age at forty thanks to good ol’ OFA. Deku was all “wait a minute, then how come All Might, who’s fifty-five and is definitely dyeing his gray hair, is still alive?” First and Shino were all, “we really have no fucking clue but we think it’s cuz he’s quirkless, JUST LIKE YOU!” So basically, since quirkless people don’t exactly grow on trees these days, Deku is probably going to be the last user of OFA. The chapter ended with Nana being all, “psst, Deku, about my grandson. Uh, can you kill him?” which is sure to lead to a very interesting conversation this week.

Today on BnHA: Nana And The Gang are all “so, Deku, how can we put this delicately. The thing is, we’re pretty sure that AFO really fucked my grandson up, so on the off chance you can’t save him, how would you feel about, you know... [throat slitting gesture].” Deku is all “idk you guys, I kinda feel like he’s really just a traumatized child at heart and he’s in a lot of pain and stuff and so I should try to help him.” The Vestiges are all “BUT WHAT IF YOU CAN’T” and Deku is all “BUT I WANT TO TRY, DAMMIT” and the Vestiges are all “well when you put it that way, we, uh, were just testing you, so congrats, you passed!” The chapter ends with First being all, “ANYWAY SO WHY DON’T YOU TWO SHY BOYS STANDING OVER THERE IN THE SHADOWS COME SAY HELLO” before we CUT AWAY FOR ANOTHER WEEK, goddammit.

seriously, Nana

just... have you met Deku?? look, if you really want Tomura dead, just sic him on the U.A. first years and tell Shouto and Honenuki that it’s a training exercise

oh my god lmao

we’re too far away to see Nana’s face here so I will just assume that she turned and is staring DIRECTLY INTO THE CAMERA for this one line lmao. “I just wanted to clarify in case anyone felt inclined to take my dialogue out of context and spend an entire week complaining about it”

oh my god?! are you all purposely trying to make me sad??

someone stop me before I launch into an impromptu rant about all my Tomura feels. WHY IS NOBODY STOPPING ME. oh my god but yes, exactly. he’s just in pain all the time. this is exactly why I think Tomura has such high redemption potential even though so far he seems to lack so many of the redemption arc essentials such as feeling remorse, wanting to change, and taking responsibility for his actions. the reason why I’m willing to overlook all that in his case is because Tomura has essentially had zero agency his entire life. AFO molded him into a killer by making sure he was in constant mental agony, and making it so that the only thing that even slightly relieved that agony was killing peeps. like, please don’t think I’m making excuses for him or anything, but if you take a child and manipulate their existence to make it virtually impossible for that child to grow up as anything other than a killer, and basically never give him the chance to be anything else, then no shit he’s gonna be a killer?? he’s basically never had the choice not to be. it’s never been an option for him. anyways I feel like I am EXPLAINING MYSELF SO BADLY but nonetheless I am prepared to die on this hill

anyway so now Nana is all “that’s a rhetorical question btw because Our Hearts And Minds Are One so we can feel everything you feel bro.” so yeah, that’s interesting

now Banjou is getting started on the “let’s try and talk Deku out of wanting to save Tomura because it’s insane” part of their OFA Mystical Space Void Reunion agenda

look, Banjou, I feel you, I really do. you guys don’t think it’s realistic that Deku can defeat Tomura without killing him. so if it’s a choice between killing Tomura vs letting Deku and everyone else in the entire world die, then duh, you think Deku should kill him. I get it! and if this were a real life mass murderer I’d totally agree with you. but the problem is that this isn’t real life, this is a sympathetic shounen villain with a tragic past who might as well have FUTURE REDEMPTION ARC RECEIPIENT stamped on his forehead at this point

so First is all “look, there’s absolutely no doubt my brother has fucked this kid up good and proper by now”, which, again, fair

though, that’s kind of exactly my point though. everything that Tomura is, everything he’s done, he’s done because of AFO. AFO has so effectively shaped his personality and his worldview by this point that it’s all but impossible to penetrate that. he’s AFO’s puppet. but the problem is that rather than treating him like a victim, you all are treating him like a casualty. like he’s already a lost cause. but good luck trying to convince Deku of that

WHOA WHAT, RANDOM SUPER-IMPORTANT AND BIZARRELY UNRELATED EXPOSITION DROPPED IN JUST LIKE THAT??

way to still not reveal Sixth’s name, btw. THE PEOPLE WANT TO KNOW, DAMMIT. but also so this confirms something we basically already knew already, which is that not even AFO can steal OFA. it literally can’t be taken away by anyone unless the owner wills it. SO SUCK ON THAT AFO YOU EGG

(ETA: so I have no idea why this was omitted from this translation, but apparently the Sixth’s name was revealed as “En”, which is obviously not his full name but at least it’s something. also he most likely has a fire or smoke-related quirk based on the kanji used, 煙.)

so Banjou is saying that Deku’s “lack of an iron will” could be a disadvantage against AFO. hahaha what?? Midoriya “I’ll break all of my bones without blinking an eye just to protect someone” Izuku lacks an iron will? do tell

he says this is going to be a test of Deku’s determination. well yeah, no shit. but just not in the way you guys think

OH HELLO AGAIN

darker hair again here! but I don’t trust the contrast in these scans at all after last week. his coveralls are way darker than they looked before too, and you can clearly see he’s standing in the shadows now

(ETA: yep, once again the raw shows that his hair is considerably lighter than what’s shown in these scans here. although there’s no mistaking now that his hair is consistently being colored in this slightly darker shade, and it’s not just the lighting.)

anyways lol First was saying something about how AFO can’t steal OFA, and they’ve spent all this time cultivating it as the ultimate weapon against AFO, and blah blah blah. go on then, keep lecturing

NANA GODDAMMIT NONE OF THIS IS YOUR FAULT

girl what?? you did everything in your power to protect your family, and AFO, fucked up man that he is, targeted them anyway. there is one person and one person only to blame for what’s happened to Tomura, and that potato-faced asshole needs a good kick in the balls

NANA GODDAMMIT DON’T MAKE ME COME OVER THERE

SO HELP ME GOD!! I WILL GIVE YOU THE BIGGEST HUG YOU’VE EVER HAD!! THAT IS A THREAT

so now Nana is all “I’m just going to call my grandson a Thing to ensure that fandom has only the freshest, grass-fed no-hormones-added discourse this week”

I don’t even need to drop into the tags to know exactly which specific people are going to respond to this, and what kind of posts they are going to write lmao. everyone’s all caught up in the “that thing”, and meanwhile I’m over here completely hung up on this “nay” that’s appeared out of NOWHERE you guys. look at that. she really said “NAY”

Nana, my love, my dearest, I feel you girl I really do. but he’s not an unforgivable manifestation of pure evil, Deku is exactly right actually, he’s a boy in pain. you guys need to stop questioning Deku’s shounen protagonist instincts here and just let him work his sparkly magic. “let’s try and convince Midoriya Fucking Izuku that he can’t save someone” is a plan that is NEVER going to turn out well you guys

“DEKU GODDAMMIT WHAT IF WE CAN’T SAVE HIM” lmao it’s like an intervention

“DAMMIT DEKU JUST ADMIT YOU HAVE A SAVING PEOPLE PROBLEM!”

RED ALERT IT’S ANOTHER CLOSE-UP OF THE BACK OF MISTER TWO BON CLAY’S HEAD OMG

(ETA: I was too distracted with freaking out about Two and Three to really appreciate how ridiculously handsome First looks in this panel. but on my second readthrough it stood out so much that I had to go back and add an extra bullet point just to talk about how hot he is. look at him. wtf.)

THAT IS DEFINITELY AN UNDERCUT. THE PLOT THICKENSSSS. also those are fucking exhaust vents on Mister Three’s neck. MISTER THREE COULD YOU POSSIBLY BE RELATED TO THE IIDAS, PLEASE TELL ME YOUR SECRETS I’M DYING OVER HERE

so now Deku is launching into what will undoubtedly be a “saving people problems require SAVING PEOPLE SOLUTIONS” heroic counter-speech!

I mean, they can already feel the “lol nah I’m gonna try and save him” feelings running through him lol. ~OuR hEaRtS aNd MiNdS aRe CoNnEcTeD~ and all that. this is just a formality, but that doesn’t mean I don’t love a good shounen protag speech

oh wait hold up, do you mean to tell me that the whole “hearts and minds are connected” thing I was just mocking just a paragraph ago actually allowed Deku to feel what Tomura was feeling?? like literally feel it??

YET AGAIN these Tomura feels are pounding on my front door you guys?? they just will not quit?? people my house is already full of feels, does it look like I need you to sell me any more of them?? -- what do you mean, they’re free??

AW YISS THAT’S IT DEKU. THAT’S SOME GOOD SPEECH RIGHT THERE

I appreciate the contrast here between the Douchebag Triumvirate of Overhaul, Muscular, and Stain versus the Misguided Twosome of Gentle and La Brava. never let it be said that Deku doesn’t know the difference between a redeemable villain and an unredeemable one

OH NO -- OH MY GOD

someone please help me I need directions to the OFA Spooky Galactic Nebula Realm in this fictional Japanese manga land. it’s not on google maps. I need to give these two babies a big hug and wrap them up in a blanket and treat them to some McDonalds Happy Meals please help

other things: (1) ENDEAVOR CHILLING OUT IN DEKU’S “PEOPLE I HOLD DEAR” PANEL LMAO NEON DISCOURSE EXTRAVAGANZA, (2) “ONE FOR ALL IS A POWER TO SAVE, NOT TO KILL” I’M ABOUT TO CRY DEKU I LOVE YOU SO MUCH HOW IS IT EVEN POSSIBLE TO FEEL ALL THIS LOVE, (3) [SLAMS HANDS ON TABLE] THERE’S YOUR MOTHERFUCKING IRON WILL!!!!!!!! -- I’m sorry, please don’t call security, I’ll be good

I just randomly remembered that Deku is still saying all of this in his muffled “FMMPHHMMPHMM” voice and I’m somehow cracking up lol. so actually it’s a very good thing Their Hearts And Minds Are Connected, otherwise they’d no doubt be all, “...what?”

(ETA: so I completely missed this on account of it literally not being visible in the scan at all, but in the raw you can clearly see Baby Kacchan and Baby Shouto fanboying over All Might in two of these panels, and excuse me, ma’am??

thank you very much Deku for including them in your montage, particularly since you’ve never seen Baby Shouto before lol. amazingly accurate image you managed to conjure up, all things considered.)

SDKFJLSKHG -- AS IF ON CUE???

HE’S SO ADORABLE HELP?? Trippy Space All Might looks like he’s about to cry, and First is all “don’t crack a smile... you have to be Firm and Serious here... dammit, don’t smile” omg

anyways! YOU GO DEKU. “MY QUIRK MY RULES, BITCHES” damn, son

KLJLKKHLG TRIPPY SPACE ALL MIGHT LITERALLY ACTUALLY IS CRYING ALL MIGHT HOW COULD YOU DO THIS TO ME

“I JUST... [CLENCHES FIST] REALLY LOVE SAVING PEOPLE” FUCKING HELL LMAO THIS IS THE WORST INTERVENTION OF ALL TIME

Deku is literally all “sure, maybe I’ll have to kill him, but have you guys also considered, MAYBE NOT??” it’s no use Nana he’s too powerful

LMAO FIRST

“like I’ve been saying this whole time, you should definitely try saving Shigaraki Tomura.” “but, uh... First, didn’t you just -- ” “shut up”

(ETA: clearly it’s not just his brother who inherited those smooth-talking genes.)

so now Deku has turned back into a sixteen year old and his clothes have gone missing again. just OFA things

dskljdlsklgk

yes... sure... “testing” you...

HEY

FIRST OF ALL, DAMN YOU HORIKOSHI YOU MADE NANA CRY. even if I’m pretty sure they’re actually tears of happiness/relief. and SECOND OF ALL, “TELL MY BOYFRIEND I SAID HI” DJSKDLKJJL ANYWAY MAYBE GRAN, NANA, AND MR. SHIMURA WERE IN A THROUPLE

[SCREAMS]

WHY WOULD YOU END IT THERE?? WHY WOULD YOU END IT THERE!!!!!

(ETA: and two-to-one odds that we cut away to some other scene once they finally start to turn around next week. I’M CALLING IT NOW. giving myself a week to brace myself for the rage.)

fucking hell. well if anyone needs me I will be adding Horikoshi fucking Kouhei to the list of irredeemable villains, peace

[writingwithcolor]

Okay, so this one keeps throwing me. So I have a very expansive world, and it’s pretty magical (alternate version of our world) and I learned through reading your blog that since it’s pretty polytheist (several small pantheons and then a couple big ones, and none of the big ones are based in any religion), I probably shouldn’t have theistic Jewish folks as their theism would be entirely, provably wrong - does that extend to culturally Jewish folks? I want to give them the rep and I want to do it right, but I’m not sure how best to go about that? Thanks!

Polytheist world: Should I keep culturally Jewish people out of my polytheist story?

Bearing in mind that mileage may vary, personally, that would be my preference -- no one single work of literature is going to include every demographic of people, so I wouldn’t have a problem with us being left out of this story entirely.

--Shira

In this case, where the world is filled with various religions, and Judaism is provably wrong, I would absolutely prefer to be left out of it. In situations where multiple religions, including Judaism, are at least partially true, I am personally thrilled to be included, but in a case like this it just ends up feeling like mocking, even if that's not the author's intent.  

It may be more obvious to the broader public why Jewish characters who practice Judaism should be left out, but I would argue that secular Jewish characters should be left out too.  Judaism isn't the only thing that makes people Jewish, of course, but it is the prime, foundational aspect of Jewish culture that so much else sprang from. So many of our foods, habits, humor, even our broad worldview, is based on concepts from Judaism. For this reason, if you write a world where there are Jewish people, but Judaism is demonstrably false, you give the impression that those beautiful things are based on nothing, pointless, even foolish. 

Better to just leave us out of this story. 

-- Dierdra

I agree with the others. I’m just chiming in here to say thanks for trying to give us representation, but as Shira says, don’t feel bad about it! You don’t have to, and can’t, include every demographic in every story. --Shoshi

[lindstromm]

I was raised by a Conspiracy Theorist. In the years since I broke out of my family, I’ve tried to find the right label for my father. Narcissistic Personality Disorder seemed close, but it didn’t include the depths of hatred that my father was capable of. He wasn’t depressed. His paranoia was kind of low grade. None of those labels totally encompass my father.

But after four years of Trump, I’ve decided that Conspiracy Theorist should be considered its own disorder. The irrationality and hatred are what distinguish it from narcissism. My dad speaks in the same word salad that Trump speaks in. He makes crazy jumps of reasoning that only make sense to him. He can’t fathom that there should ever be consequences for his behavior. Anyone who disagrees with him is evil and must be destroyed. He blames entire groups of people for anything/everything. My father has a real talent for hatred. It’s like this floating cloud of hatred that seizes on a group and imbues that group with every evil motive my father can imagine. The target of the hatred changes sometimes, but the hatred is the same. Conspiracy theories, at their heart, are just manufactured reasons to hate and blame a group of people.

What really messes with your head is how normal a Conspiracy Theorist is in the other areas of his life. My dad was a good employee and a helpful neighbor. He came to all our school stuff. He fixed cars and enjoyed woodworking. He hugged us and told us he loved us. We went on family vacations, had family game night, did work projects together, went to church every week. What a great guy.

Except if you disagreed with something that mattered to him. He wasn’t a total control freak. In areas where Dad didn’t have an opinion, I was free to think for myself. Like, I could choose which books to read and which classes to take in school. But there were areas of life in which Dad was king because to cross him was unthinkable. Anything about politics, laws, medicine, education, the entire mental health profession, history, the local city council, science, that guy at work, the economy, religion, vaccines, plastic, that guy at church, clothes, gender roles, and whatever else Dad decided to have an opinion on belonged solely to Dad. We just avoided those topics in our family. Conversation was full of gossip and anecdotes because telling a story was the only thing we could talk about without Dad taking over. I remember the total shock I felt when a friend of mine said she talked politics with her dad. “He listens to you?” I asked in disbelief.

The thing is, we (siblings and Mom) knew there was something wrong with Dad. We rolled our eyes at his rants. Everyone knew not to take him seriously, not to argue, not to set him off. Everyone KNEW he was whacko. But we all worked to shield him from our opinion of him. We said we were protecting him, but really we were protecting ourselves. With a Conspiracy Theorist, there is no genuine love in the family, just approval. If you let Dad live in his fantasy world, he approved of you. That’s the closest my family got to love. The alternative was Dad’s utter hatred of you, and we all knew just how good Dad was at hatred.

You know how Trump immediately turned on anyone who was disloyal to him? The contempt, the anger, the smears? Yeah, my Dad’s like that too. Twelve years ago, I finally told him what I thought of him. My Dad briefly tried to fix me - he told me I was under the influence of Satan and I should repent. I didn’t. You know how Trump treated Romney? I’m my dad’s Mitt Romney. My mom is Mitch McConnell and my siblings are the other suckup Republican leadership - you saw how they treated Romney after he voted to impeach Trump (the first time). My family knows I’m right about Dad, but they hate me for saying it. And because my family has been trained in hatred by a grand master, that’s really saying something.

Those Conspiracy Theorists who rioted in the U.S. Capitol the other day - many of them have families. Trump has a family. Most of those families will be loyal to their Conspiracy Theorist.

I’m writing this because I’m hoping there are some other people who have been able to break away from Conspiracy Theorist parents. It’s traumatic. You can’t do a ‘soft departure’ or ‘agree to disagree.’ It’s all or nothing. If you disagree with a Conspiracy Theorist, he will try to destroy you and the rest of the family either joins him, or lets it happen. Parents shape your worldview, and that shatters completely when you leave. I’ve had to rebuild everything I think and feel from scratch - alone.

Anyway. Just. Yeah. I want a support group for children of Conspiracy Theorists. Reply to this post if you were raised by a Conspiracy Theorist and you’ve rejected that worldview. If there’s enough response, maybe I’ll start a sideblog.

Reblogs are appreciated.

[ruby-whistler]

I feel like if we really want to take a closer look at the topic of c!Dream’s obsession with c!Tommy, we have to look into both his reasons for it, and the tactics he employs to achieve his goals concerning it.

[ /dsmp /roleplay I did not tag this that way but this entire analysis is hugely c!Dream critical and focuses on the various facets of his manipulation, so if you’re not in the mood to read that, you have been warned not to. ]

Interestingly enough, before the SMP was actual heavy roleplay, back during the original disc war, the reason c!Dream listed for keeping the discs was to use them as bargaining chips, because he knew c!Tommy wanted them back, as they were hard items to get at the time, and knew he could use them for that purpose.

He had just gotten mugged and repeatedly killed by c!Tommy, who had also participated in a conflict beforehand, and only gave a half-hearted apology in the end. He had also seen him cause problems on the server before that. The discs were meant to be something he would threaten to destroy if c!Tommy started acting out of line, because he didn’t trust him to keep his word and wanted a guarantee. That was the reason he insisted on keeping the discs after getting his armor back, which is why he originally stole them.

And I feel like c!Dream’s train of thought, while skewed and twisted with irrational mindsets, is rather straightforward in essence. Conflict is what he actively stands against and what stops him from having a united server, hence in his mind, he needs to destroy things that bring conflict, and control what he can’t or doesn’t want to destroy. He thinks c!Tommy brings conflict, so he feels like he needs to find ways to control him.

Sure, we all know about the systematic abuse and isolation he employed to make c!Tommy believe he was his friend, but one of his major tactics since the beginning has also been intimidation, or a particular type of manipulation that leads to people fearing him or thinking that he has more power than he actually does. In his mind, if people are scared of him, they’re much more likely to listen to him. And the most fascinating thing is that it works.

During the initial exile conflict, despite him being just a single person with no official political power, he assures victory by aggressively, and very intelligently, threatening his way through the negotiations. c!Tubbo is scared of him, and that is not a coincidence. It’s purposeful.

Seeing as he planned to give L’Manberg technical independence either way - he said that there was no real way for him to stop them from pursuing that anyways, so that wasn’t the intention - even the war seems like a very likely ploy to make the revolutionaries fear him enough so that they wouldn’t start conflict after seceding. c!Wilbur is careful not to start anything with the Greater Dream SMP after this, because c!Dream has shown that he can and will ruin them if they do. c!Tubbo also knows exactly the lengths c!Dream will go to if he promises war thanks to this, and that if he says he’ll build a wall and keep them from leaving it with force, he’s going to do it. When c!Tubbo is faced with an ultimatum, seeing as his goal is to keep New L’Manberg safe and peaceful, he knows he has no option but to give in.

Another variation of this tactic is making himself seem more dangerous and unpredictable than he actually is and obscuring his motivation. If people don’t know what he wants, they are less able to devise effective tactics to stop him from getting it. The element of surprise is something that he utilizes constantly throughout warfare, and psychological battling is no different. For instance, during Doomsday he begins talking about how the server will “be at peace now” thanks to L’Manberg being gone, before c!Tommy barges in, and begins implying he did this all because he hates him.

DREAM Tommy… Look. In all destruction *looks at the falling TNT* there is a new beginning.

TOMMY You- you did this…! To all of us! Not just to me, but to everyone here…!

DREAM Beautiful. You know… the unfinished symphony, right?

…

TOMMY Why…?

DREAM The server will be at peace now.

TOMMY Why, Dream…?

DREAM Because I didn’t-

TOMMY Couldn’t you just- couldn’t you just burn the discs…? Couldn’t you just do it to me? Why did you have to…?

DREAM This is much more fun.

[ credits to @dsmptranscripts on twitter ]

Although c!Dream’s motivation for destroying L’Manberg was actually that, much like with c!Tommy, he thought that it bred conflict and division, he picks up on this and switches to saying how he did indeed do this all to hurt c!Tommy because he finds it fun.

He talks very inconsistently plenty of times, but it’s rather easy to spot a pattern of him being honest about his motives with his allies but straight up lying to his enemies. This makes sense, and it is usually employed as a deliberate tactic.

Intimidation is something he also uses to manipulate people during his time in prison. Ever since he got locked up, it became a mental fight. If people fully realized that he was powerless to stop them from hurting or killing him, his life only hanging by a thin strand on the concept of the revive book, he would’ve lost the control he needed to assure his survival.

The difference is that before then, c!Dream had actual physical power, however the manipulation gets harder to pull off when he has none, even with people he finds naive enough to fall for it. He still risks it because he’s desperate, and has nothing but his own life to lose, which is something he believes to be protected by his possession of the revival book. He had never been big on self-preservation besides staying alive to reach his goals.

He first tries this on c!Sam, who, rather unpredictably, begins to get morally corrupted by the power he has over c!Dream, on top of other factors. c!Dream talks to c!Sam about exile and about c!Tommy because logically, if he’s afraid of him, he’s less likely to try to hurt or kill him. This backfires because this new, unexpected version of c!Sam begins to fiercely hate c!Dream instead, hurting him further.

The same thing happens with c!Tommy - when he realizes that he can’t influence him through repeated visits anymore, he attempts to scare him into obedience again. He establishes himself as someone dangerous who has the power to escape and hurt c!Tommy as well as his friends, which he hopes will subconsciously sway him to not do things that he would disagree with. We can see him pretending to be the one in control throughout the stream after c!Tommy first got revived.

He also tells him that he can bring back the person who he’s afraid of the most and get him on his side, which is precisely the bit that ends up backfiring, but it doesn’t really matter, and trying was still the best thing he could’ve logically done.

If he hadn’t, at some point people would realize he actually has no power at all, and pay back the fear he’d instilled in them previously. This happens with c!Quackity, who began to take advantage of c!Dream’s lack of control as soon as he realized how easy it was to strip away the last bit of power he has, which is also keeping him alive.

Getting back on track, c!Dream essentially tries to control c!Tommy first by manipulating him into believing he is his friend, then believing he is a threat to him when that fails. We can see this from the way the Finale is prepared to be somewhat of a final showdown between the two, and also by him actually revealing the tactics he used to employ during exile, for example talking about taking away the invites to the party and not actually being his friend. This also proves he knew exactly what he was doing during that time, and he could easily switch between tactics because the end goal of controlling c!Tommy was more important to him than what c!Tommy thought of him.

And that’s it.

It’s all just a ploy to control him because he finds him one of the hardest people to stop from causing conflict.

Controlling him is as important to c!Dream as destroying L’Manberg and dethroning c!George and collecting people’s attachments, because what is important to him is achieving his goals through whatever means necessary, not the means themselves.

As for people, while he has no desire to actually kill them - or feels he cannot, because they could still be useful to his plans in the future - he treats them as either tools or obstacles he needs to deal with, especially if they ever get in the way of his plans, and he isn’t particularly attached to them. He does this to himself as well, and doesn’t seem to care about his own well-being or reputation as long as he achieves what he wants. While he’s focused on the ends to his means, that is the only thing that is important to him.

You could argue this does stem from thinking of the people he wants the server to be united for as important, since cc!Dream said his goals are for “everyone to get along”, but that doesn’t change the fact that the ways in which he works towards that goal doesn’t treat others’ or his own feelings as consequential at all. In the case of people who stand against him, their entire well-being is put to the side until what needs to be done in his mind gets done.

c!Dream isn’t “scared” of c!Tommy per se, nor does he seem to be obsessed with the guy himself, but he finds him something necessary to get out of the way to accomplish his goals, and he does so, ruthlessly as ever.

And even though the goal of eradicating conflict and uniting the server is something that he is so focused on that it could definitely be called an obsession, c!Tommy really isn’t that important within the equation at all.

This wasn’t a post to excuse or downplay any of his actions, nor do I agree with the “logical” thoughts I mentioned. There is a reason why I used phrases like “he finds” “in his eyes” “he thinks” “in his mind” “he feels like” a whole lot throughout this essay.

The character has an extremely flawed worldview that I in no way agree with (and although that should probably be pretty obvious, you really don’t know with this fandom). All this post is for is to analyse certain traits that are assigned to him, and figure out through logical reasoning whether they’re a mischaracterization or not.

And as far as the evidence goes; c!Dream isn't obsessed with c!Tommy, he is obsessed with his goal, and he sees Tommy as a big obstacle to achieving it, which makes him focus on him. These feelings he puts on display are an illusion to distract people from his real goal so they don't know how to get in his way - because, just like cc!Dream said, he “likes to withhold information; withhold plans; and withhold feelings” from everyone else.

[metvmorqhoses]

i was pretty disappointed as well, because the idea of linking vampirism to religion - or more precisely, the christian ideology of "life after death" and "sacrifice" and so on - sounded quite promising.

but yeah the execution of the angel was done very poorly, they could have at least used either biblically accurate depictions of angels (anything from multiple faced or winged, or flaming sknakes, or inhuman-shaped with numerous eyes etc... the list goes on) which would have made sense for a setting where the bible gets recited All The Time.

(but i guess it's also very fitting to only pick the things from the bible that agree with one's worldview or whatever serves them in any given moment and ignore the rest - which is also what is shown in the scene where they put islam/the quran vs christianity/the bible.)

they could also have at least made the angel appear "beautiful" since vampires are told to be charming and "angelic" looking to lure in their prey if i remember correctly? (as well as beauty being rather threatening when it's too flawless.) i would think it also more convenient when trying to convince people to do your bidding, being able to say "look at this beautiful angel, come to save us all" instead of "look at this hideous bastard i found in the desert". but no, instead they went with "has to look somewhat scary because horror-genre" but then again "not too much because we need to stay mainstream because we want as many viewers and as much money out of it" and then chose the boring old "vampires are bats". that's just lazy

there were a few other things, for example none of the elderly islanders recognising pruitt after he returned looking exactly like he did when he was young. if i were to meet a person that looked exactly like someone from my childhood village 20 years ago, i'd at least freak out a little. i mean we're not talking "vague similarities" that you get from a relative or even a stranger but EXACT SAME PERSON. hello? the overall ignorance of the islanders had me really annoyed early on.

Totally. I was actually so baffled the show ultimately turned out to have such a lack of direction and, quite simply, mere sense.

I don’t get what the intent of the writing even was. A metaphor so interesting, done so poorly? Why putting so much effort in turning horror into existentialism if you then don’t even bother to follow your own theme?

They used a really intelligent expedient just to leave everything so utterly meaningless? And if lack of meaning, nihilism was indeed the final message of the show, even in this case it was just executed poorly, to say the least.

I mean, as someone who understands how to construct a story, I can see the writing here only going in two major and very different directions, both very deep and promising in their own right:

1) The terrible satire: fanaticism puts on people’s eyes blindfolds so potent and terrible to prevent them from even being able to critically analyze reality anymore, even a most obvious and disturbing one, to the point of seeing a monstrous vampire doing average vampire things and wanting stubbornly to believe it a proof of their own personal faith and ideologies. People see just what they want to see and nothing else matters. Is religion a fabricated reality of our own invention? Is fear what makes us construct it? Was Monsignor Pruitt afraid of death to the point of masking it in beauty and miracle the moment he saw its terrible face and deluding himself to have been chosen to eradicate it altogether from life? Was his very denial the downfall of an entire small population?

2) The terrible truth: everything happening is real. That vampire-looking creature is indeed an angel. No real distinction exists between angels and vampires. Culture twisted reality into legend and only the Bible remembered the truth, but no one interpreted it correctly anymore. In truth Christianity has always worshipped beings who rule with a vampire-like logic. Is God really good? Is that the reason we all suffer? Is God the Devil? Or is he just hungry all the time? Is eternal life eternal night and horror? Should we accept it or oppose it?

As you can see, both had endless potential. The show had the potential to be beyond riveting and interesting. Even more so, in my opinion, making the two interpretations parallels and the show split in two parts, five episodes following the first and five following the second - the ending never revealing the truth and leaving it up to debate.

It would have been a masterpiece. Instead they opted for a third option, being going... nowhere?

At first I thought they were going for the satire, tbh. When I saw Monsignor Pruitt’s encounter with the vampire, seeing Dracula and crying angel with tears of joy, I was hysterical. It was deadly funny. That was a vampire doing the most basic vampire stuff possible and here he was, reveling oblivious in his own delusion. It was very fitting, it shows perfectly how narrow-minded and self-assured religious fanatics could be. I can totally see certain Christians seeing fucking Cthulhu and singing praises to the holiness of God.

But as I said, everything soon loses itself in implausibility and plain nonsense. No one seems to have a damn clue about basic general culture, no one ever says the word “vampire” once. No one suspects a thing even when pretty obvious stuff is thrown at highly educated people. Moreover, among fervent Christians, a bat, blood-sucking figure like that would have immediately been identified with the Devil, just as Dracula always is, case closed. Instead they let the vampire turn pretty much everyone on the island. The small number of people who tries to fight against this madness seem to only react out of a normal fear of death and not because they are questioning what is going on. In the end, after hell itself is unleashed, everything resolves itself with Pruitt saying “you know what, I think I was mistaken, never mind”. What the actual...?

Also I loved how everyone just stood there and waited to burn with the break of dawn, an army of immortal vampires, because “there was no shelter anymore”. Hello? You are on a ISLAND, you CANNOT DIE. The freaking OCEAN surrounds you. Are you afraid to catch fire and crumble to dust? Go fucking underwater maybe instead of trying to dig a hole in the sand??? You don’t need to breathe??? I dare say those vampires all died of natural selection in the end.

Plus Riley very selflessly deciding to sacrifice himself in order to make his beloved see the “truth of things” (no one would get the vampirism thing anyway), to give her the best chance to survive, sailing with her as a vampire on a fucking small wooden boat and waiting for dawn with her in close proximity in the middle of the ocean, plotting to die in a blaze of fire? Totally Very Safe and Loving (tm)

I swear, for the death of me I cannot understand on what sort acids the writers were when they thought this show out.

[bailey-reaper]

Hello, I actually have a request this time~ Could we get something with Barok's s/o just being so absolutely fed up with everyone hating/fearing Barok? Like either they confront someone they overhear talking badly about him or just complain to him that they hate how everyone treats him? (This totally isn't inspired by me having been buried in edits of the new official Cafe Art that replace Barok with other characters and fawn over how much /better/ the edit is etc.) ...I'm just so tired all I want is to love him in peace 😞

EXCUSE You??

Notes: Hello there, friend, you can indeed! I'm all for people having their own opinions and I'm totally fine with people not being fond of Barok, but let those of us that like him as a character have our safe spaces to enjoy the leggiest of leggy boys!

S/O is gender neutral (they/them pronouns). Barok refers to them using petnames.

Content Warnings: anti-anti-Barok sentiment; if you don't like Barok this isn't the blog for you tbh; this blog stans a leggy boi; while also accepting that parts of his character are unacceptable by today's standards; but that doesn't invalidate his entire existence; people are complex creatures; Barok is a fascinating character; I won't apologise for that.

Another day, another tedious event hosted by some aristocrat keen to cement their position in London's socialite scene. Of course, Barok had been strong-armed into going by the Lord Chief Justice. To make it somewhat easier, he'd brought his beloved along so that he would have at least one good thing in his midst.

"I'll get us some more wine," they said as he finished his drink.

"Thank you..." he handed over the glass and watched them go in the direction of the bar. Out of the corner of his eye he noted two of the most vacuous and opinionated among the London's social scene. Lady Asquith and Lord Shelby –– they were the sort of people who took opposing opinions as a declaration of war, seemed to think themselves experts on whatever social matters took their fancy and had the most curious ability to ignore any and all evidence that contradicted their worldview.

A most vexatious pair.

He hoped they wouldn't say anything to his love or within their earshot; just the other day they'd been frustrated about the way people spoke of him and had said, "The next person who dares to say a single bad thing about you within my earshot is going to get a big piece of my mind!"

"Oh look, My Lord," Lady Asquith said with a smirk as she hid her mouth behind her fan, "That ghastly cadaver, Lord van Zieks, yet lives!"

"So he does, my dear," Lord Shelby chuckled, "What a disgrace of a man... he is an embarrassment to the nobility, carrying on in court like some sort of flapper girl. It's truly outrageous!"

"Quite so! Quite so!" the lady agreed, "I just cannot abide him! He's so thoroughly dislikable, such a dour and churlish man! It's a wonder he was invited, this is supposed to be a party not a funeral reception."

Lord Shelby laughed.

"ENOUGH!" roared a voice beside them, causing Lady Asquith to shriek and Lord Shelby to drop his glass of whiskey. The whole room fell silent.

Barok frowned; he knew that voice.

"You two are some of the most poisonous, ill-mannered, detestable people I think I've ever had the displeasure of seeing or hearing! How dare you speak so venomously about a man you don't know! You make baseless assumptions and snide remarks about a man who possesses more integrity in his little toe than your entire beings! He is not perfect, but then none of us are! You two are certainly ill-suited to being judges of characters when yours are both so contemptuous!"

"Dearest," Barok came to a stop behind them and took their hand, "That's enough, I care not what such second-rate nobles think of me."

"I care, Barok!" they said, furiously, "People are so derisive about you, yet they know nothing of you or your struggles or your life! They assume and they cast stones because they're too cowardly to look inward. They'd rather point and sneer than do anything worthwhile! Well I'm fed up of it! You deserve better than their poison!"

"Come now," he smiled at them fondly, "You've made your point in a most passionate and elegant manner, I think it's high time we left this place and found a nicer setting to spend time together, hm?"

"...." they nodded, and allowed him to lead them out while the aristocracy looked on in muted shock.

"... Thank you," he said, once they were out in the cool evening air, "Your strength of feeling means the world to me, even if you are quite the firebrand. I shall have to bear that in mind and try to avoid being in your bad graces."

They huffed and kissed his chin, "... I love you, Barok."

"And I love you, my dearest one."

[lex-malla-non-est-lex]

Tatiana, Belial, and their plans relating Jesse in the past

I’ve dabbled on this topic a few times but your comment really got me thinking. @delilahssbard

This turned out long so I’ll put it beneath the line.

Like, ever since CoI I’ve been highkey thinking Tatiana intended for Jesse to be possessed, but the specific phrasing you used reminded me of a part of ChoG and suddenly everything fits even more now.

- Chain of Gold

Back then, I honestly assumed Belial was talking about preference here, especially since he’s made it clear the reason he could possess James without destroying his body is they share blood, but that’s clearly different in Jesse’s case.

Considering how it’s repeatedly clarified that the anchor was placed on Jesse while he was a baby, that fact is probably significant. If anything, I’d dare say the anchor seems to be a workaround Belial’s destruction not just because he was literally anchored to Jesse’s soul, but by way of tolerance, especially since James also seems to have drawn a similar conclusion.

- Chain of Iron

There it is. Belial would have the anchor and a body to possess, as Jesse grew older. The anchor was in him since almost day one, and Tatiana clearly knew about the anchor, but what’s to say she wasn’t involved? We know the only one who was reluctant to place the anchor on Jesse’s soul was Gast. At no point is Tatiana mentioned in this until Belial outright says that he owed her a favor.

Jesse is just Nephilim, unlike James and Lucie, so by all accounts, a normal possession by Belial would have destroyed him, but the anchor intervened in such a way that there didn’t seem to be any visible consequences at all to him being possessed repeatedly (unless we subscribe to the theory that Jesse’s ghost started fading faster near the end because of the possession, but as of right now we honestly have no way to be sure about that specific fact).

We know Jesse’s childhood sickness involved fevers, and perhaps weakness, the latter coming from the statements in which he’s specifically referred to as weak. We also now know that the real reason Jesse died was because the rune he was given reacted badly against Belial’s essence inside him. Jesse’s description of his own death is that he collapsed into bed after getting the rune, then woke up feverish and in agony. Honestly, that just sounds like a worse version of his alleged childhood symptoms.

Considering his death was basically the result of a rune’s angelic magic clashing with the demonic essence inside him, it wouldn’t be that much of a stretch to assume his sickness was just his nature as Nephilim having a bad reaction to Belial’s essence, even if he only died because of the rune. I find it frankly impossible to believe that the anchor wasn’t hurting him, because we know under normal circumstances Belial would destroy a body within hours.

And let’s be real, Tatiana knew this. The only question in relation to her is whether she intentionally let him die.

The following are all quotes from A Lightwood Christmas Carol.

“He is very delicate,” said Tatiana. “Nephilim like yourself wish to put Marks on him, because they are intent on killing my boy as they have killed everyone else I love. You sit on the Council, do you not? Then you are his enemy. You may not see him.”

“I would not force Marks on the boy,” protested Gideon. “He’s my nephew. Tatiana, if he is that ill, perhaps he should see the Silent Brothers? One of them is a close friend, and could come to Jesse at our house. And Jesse could know his cousins.”

Before CoI, lines like these could be shrugged off to Tatiana being paranoid about her son being hurt by marks because he’s sickly, but no, we know now that Tatiana is entirely correct.

And it makes perfect sense that she refused to even let the Silent Brothers examine Jesse. No doubt they’d have been able to notice what was wrong with him wasn’t a sickness. Tatiana made a show out of it to exacerbate her own hatred of Nephilim, but she isn’t unaware of things, she just likes to spin them in a way that can be used to blame her enemies for things.

“Father planned alliances for us, when we were children.” Tatiana shrugged. “How ashamed he would be of you. How is your grubby servant?”

Then there’s her attitude, of course. The implication that she thinks it’s perfectly normal to involve children in alliances and plans. We know she didn’t hesitate to have a dark power forced onto Grace, if anything, it’s implied she requested it. We know Tatiana only sees Jesse as something that is hers, not as his own person, so it’s completely within the realm of possibility that she involved him in her own plans for revenge, even if he was just a newborn with no choice in the matter (or perhaps because he had no choice in the matter, considering how badly she reacts to the fact that Jesse *gasp* has a different worldview than her).

“I don’t care!” Tatiana shouted. “My son is of the blood of two of the oldest of the Shadowhunter families. He is not weak like your son. Go back to your weakness, Gideon. Get out of my sight, get out of my house, and do not darken my door again. I have not missed your company, nor your brother’s, and I am relieved that my child will not grow up under the corrupting influence of either of you.” 

Now, this one isn’t so relevant as much as it’s interesting, because while it looks like Tatiana is just flexing and being mean to Gideon, that whole implication that Jesse isn’t weak does compare to how Belial views Nephilim in general.

- Chain of Gold

Belial had the anchor placed on Jesse alongside his protections as a newborn. Humans never get such protections against possession, and Belial still chose one of the Nephilim as his alternate vessel. He was that plan of his as completely viable.

And much like Tatiana, Belial clearly sees Jesse as a tool, as a method to push his agenda.

- Chain of Iron

And assuming Tatiana knew of the anchor from the start, that checks out. Belial wanted Jesse as a vessel to get closer to his goal. If he’s never seen him as an end-goal, then he’s always planned for Jesse to be a temporary vessel. Tatiana wants the Nephilim destroyed. Letting Belial possess Jesse probably sounds like a completely reasonable thing to her. It solidifies her alliance with Belial, makes things easier for Belial, and as Belial himself implied, Belial owed Tatiana a favor.

- Chain of Iron

Seriously, I can say with reasonable confidence that Tatiana knew Belial would use Jesse, perhaps even agreed beforehand to the anchor itself being placed, because to the both of them, Jesse was basically a puppet. (I mean, even the clothes she had him dressed in within his coffin literally scream Belial)

Then of course, what I believe to be the nail in the coffin for Tatiana’s involvement is just what she tells Grace near the end.

- Chain of Iron

She literally has the audacity to claim Jesse was to blame for his own death and basically defended Belial. You know, Belial, who was possessing and controlling her son. Belial, who placed an anchor in the soul of her newborn son and has basically robbed him of anything resembling a normal life or even afterlife. Tatiana is taking Belial’s side on that without any hesitation.

If anything, Tatiana might have let Jesse get runed just to be able to tell him off, like “ha, told you you were too weak to be Nephilim” or something like that, despite knowing damn well the reason runes would kill him was Belial. Tatiana had literal demons to do her bidding, I don’t doubt she could have physically prevented Jesse from following up on his threat to run to Alicante if she didn’t let him get runes, had she wanted to.

Belial probably can control the dead like Lucie can, most likely having far more experience at it. Tatiana surely knew that. Belial said Tatiana called him after Jesse died, and that he owed her a favor, hence the preservation of Jesse. Obviously, Belial benefited from this, but clearly Tatiana saw Jesse’s death as an opportunity to bend him to her will, because he never shared her beliefs during his life.

Now, this is actually where I believe Tatiana and Belial’s views of the situation diverge. Belial outright says raising Jesse as Tatiana wanted wouldn’t suit him. He had Jesse kept in that so-called twilight state that certainly proved useful to Belial, but I don’t think whether Jesse was alive or not mattered pre-Cortana. Not only does Belial clearly not care about consent, he also probably wouldn’t need it, because his anchor was already deep within Jesse’s soul. Jesse being dead or alive was likely irrelevant to the possession, since the one part of Tatiana’s statement that’s correct is that Belial probably wouldn’t have guessed Jesse would die as he did.

Tatiana wanted Jesse resurrected for herself, for her own desire to have her son follow her beliefs and intentions. Belial just cares for Jesse as his vessel. While they’re allies, I don’t think those two usages were as compatible as Tatiana thinks they were, which is probably why Belial outright says reviving Jesse wouldn’t have suited him, and honestly both of them seem pretty angry about losing control over Jesse.

(Belial’s clearly salty that Lucie exorcised him and Tatiana’s mad he’s “in the clutches of a Herondale”, but clearly both of them lost something they valued as an instrument, none of them are actually mad about their loss of access to Jesse as a person, because they’re honestly both terrible people, to say the least).

I know I called that other one the nail in the coffin, but in relation to Tatiana letting Jesse be runed even though that was practically bound to kill him, Belial outright says Tatiana killed him, even despite recognizing the rune was technically the cause.

- Chain of Iron

TL;DR: Tatiana definitely knew about the anchor, Tatiana definitely knew Jesse would be possessed and used by Belial, and Tatiana also definitely let her son die just because it suited her.