#or more like podcast analysis i guess?

[college-cryptids]

okay so i just had this thought and need to write it down before i forget BUT tma is such a fascinating subversion of the "woo spooky cult is actually just christianity" thing so far. I'm partway into season one so i can't attest to later seasons, but it's such a brilliant example of how to use the trappings of religion without actively condemning that actual, real world religion and risk alienating a portion of one's potential audience. every time that my dude jonathan sims has taken a statement that has to do with the church in some capacity (like that priest's statement in episode... 15, i think? 16?) there's always a moment where the person giving the statement is in some way like "oh i thought this was christianity, surprise this isn't the christian God doing this it's actually something different and MUCH MORE EVIL, woo spooky thing~," which is so interesting in a media culture that is saturated with the default idea of cults being people who just have a grossly incorrect image of the bible's teachings and use that to start killing people or whatever. like, i went into that episode (and the one later about that girl and her roommate who joins a cult) fully expecting the message to be "christianity is bad" and instead it was "this particular cult or thing is actually distinctly different from christianity, but is definitely Very Bad," which is neat and just really refreshing in a way i didn't expect it to be. anyway yeah so i knew tma was cool but now i'm realizing it's cool in different ways than i expected

[lizardsfromspace]

So I guess Film Twitter is apoplectic with rage over some people suggesting they have intermissions in long movies. Not over theaters adding one without the director's consent, but like, at the concept of them

...by which I mean, getting mad at disabled people daring to have complaints. There's a lot of "HAHA are you so STUPID you can't go beforehand? You can't HOLD it for three hours?" and implying you don't deserve to experience art if you can't

And, of course, because Film Twitter is a bunch of insular discourse-addled dipshits, they're tying this...to Marvel. Yes, people are only saying they have health conditions that make sitting still for a three hour movie is because...they're Marvel fans mad at Scorsese, or something?

Why is this complaint new? Well, bc runtimes are ballooning to the levels of the old epic filmmaking days of the 50s-70s. And those movies...had intermissions. Multi-act plays have intermissions. Bollywood films have intermissions. Intermissions were literally just abandoned so studios could cram in more screenings, not out of an artistic ideal. But anyone saying "this would make it easy for me to access this film I want to see" needs to be viciously shouted down and called a moronic, lazy child hating on Scorsese bc of "discourse"

I've seen that meme multiple times and Jesus, look at the bizarre disdain for your fellow human beings embedded in it. You dare still bodily exist during a Martin Scorsese movie? You have a disability I don't? Well, I have no problem just peeing beforehand and not buying popcorn or a soda (you should really just sit their quietly until it's done, when you can pull out your phone to log it on Letterboxd), so what's your problem?

Calling people who are into non-blockbuster films "film bros" is mostly untrue, but man, the hardcore Film Twitter types unambiguously check every box. They're certainly dismissive of anyone outside their little box; extremely insulting, in fact, of how anyone who disagrees with them even slightly must be a Marvel-addled hysterical artless moron. Because nothing says "artistic appreciation" like preemptively calling analysis of a movie's choices "discourse" ("Ugh, I can't believe the DISCOURSE about how a movie portraying a morbidly obese man portrays obese people" - what should they talk about, then, if the movie's subject is instantly off the table?) They think the idea that someone out there may have a disability that prevents them from sitting in one place for three and a half hours is a laughable thing made up by the internet; or when people pointed out that a movie only getting one or two screenings a city may be inaccessible to working people, and these bloggers and podcast hosts dunked on the idea that working class people may like art as a hilarious, made-up thing.

I don't know, maaaaaaybe classing the life experiences and complaints of anyone who isn't you as "discourse" and presuming it's made-up kvetching about nothing as a matter of course is bad, cruel nonsense, actually?

[magicstormfrostfire]

Something that confuses me a lot is some people's reactions/analysis to Sonic saving Shadow in the void in Sonic Prime.

Don't get me wrong, I LOVE it, and its parallels to what happened in SA2. That is incredible. But what confuses me is that a lot of people assume that in this show, SA2 happened and Sonic is losing Shadow again.

But I don't think that's the case...? I know it was said that the show follows modern games/everything is canon, but I dont think that means what some people think it means. I've seen some people criticize this interpretation of Sonic BECAUSE they think all of the games happened in this universe.

What I understood is that this is simply using the current ongoing personalities/traits/styles of the modern Sonic characters in games, but this is NOT the same universe. Its a different one. The direction they are going with the characters in Sonic Prime is writing them closer to their mainline game counterparts, just in a different universal setting. The universe is just not as drastic of a difference as say, Movie!Sonic or Sonic Boom's universe. (Which i think is why they made a point to say its following mainline Sonic; because Boom is a universe with its own games, Sonic, and canon as well.)

This is also why I think so many people judge Sonic Prime on what Sonic should know, how he should act, and what he should have learned from. But this is a different universe Sonic! He's a lot more naive and learning to get around. Its why I interpeted that Sonic catching Shadow was not ptsd of losing him again, it was fear of losing him period. This is very likely this Sonic's first world-saving scenario; he's use to just stopping Eggman's latest 'Robot of the week'. He is out of his depth with the shatterverse situation.

Now, I think its totally fair if this kind of 'new & naive' direction with Sonic's character turns people off, or if they dislike/hate it. This is not me trying to pursuade people into liking it if they don't. This is not me saying 'hey if you dislike this, its prolly because you're interpreting it wrong and if you see it this way you will like it.' But I constantly see people criticize the show for not taking into account things that happened in games. Or in this case, praising it for taking account events in the games. Those things didnt happen here! This is a different Sonic!

Of course, I could absolutely be wrong, and if I am, that's fine. But honestly it feels like they're making a different Sonic altogether, and frankly it wouldnt make sense for this to be the exact same Sonic.

So I guess my overall point is that I kind of feel like Prime is being saddled with game expectations it literally cannot meet, via being a different universe. Like I said, hate it, love it, idc I'm not your mom. I just think that this needs to be said and added to the conversation.

('Everything is canon' means 'every interpretation is valid'. Sonic has different universes, so its a lot more validating to fans to say everything happened, instead of alienating entire swathes of fans who all experienced Sonic differently through different media, by saying their experience isn't 'real' or 'true' anymore. And I think the more people realize this, the less people will argue 'evidence XYZ in game and this comic and the Japanese version of this podcast, and this game dev, and this episode, and this writer contradict your theory of Sonic hugging people' you do not need canon as gospel to validate why you like or dislike a certain take.)

Sonic in general is so fun because of how freeform and multiverse and endless it is. We haven't had that in a long time. There are things I love and things I hate, but not because of how closely they follow mainline. Its because I just like or hate it. We should cultivate this new growth and diversity, not prune it to fit into one shape. 🌱

[carigm]

A BREAKDOWN OF THE POTENTIAL S5 EPISODE TITLES!!

Okay, so today entertainment journalist Jeff Sneider shared some alleged insider info about S5 of ST, mainly directors and titles of the first 6 episodes.

Here’s a screenshot

It’s important to keep in mind that this guy isn’t always the most reliable, and considering he also said he believes S5 could come out before the end of this year, let’s not take any of this too seriously. (Many cast members have mentioned they’re filming until December of this year so that’s literally impossible). The information about the possible directors I believe is correct, because it’s been circulating around from other sources too.

The episode titles I’m less convinced about because it’s also possible the Duffers could’ve put out fake episode titles in case they leaked. I remember for S2 all the episodes titles they announced were changed later on lol. But for the sake of fun, here’s an analysis of all of them:

1. The crawl (only confirmed title) is a very broad, open title. It personally makes me think of the UD and vines, or maybe even the idea of Vecna crawling back to life. Could also be an allusion to the military.

2. The Vanishing of ___ Wheeler is arguably the most insane one. The journalist said he wasn’t revealing the actual name of the person because it’s a spoiler ofc. My gut tells me it’s gonna be Holly, mainly because of the recast and her supposedly being involved in the hospital plot, which we have guessed takes place in episode 2. Could explain why she’s suddenly “more important” this season, especially if she’s used as a plot device of sorts. Could also tie into what Ted’s actor said in a podcast back in February about the first episodes being a rollercoaster of emotions, and that comment he made about Ted having a soft spot for Holly. It would be a perfect tie in for Karen to find out about the UD as well. The implications of naming the episode the same as the first episode, which is so intrinsically tied to Will, is very interesting. It’s also a new connection/tie between the Byers/Wheelers that I assume will bring the families closer together. I don’t think it’s about Mike because I doubt he’ll go missing in ep.2, or be dragged to the UD just like Will was. It would be an interesting concept but I doubt it. I also don’t think Nancy’s gonna go missing. Karen could be interesting but I doubt it as well. Ted would be an incredibly funny choice. Imagine he just goes missing while at the house 😭 Nonetheless, I think Holly is the clear choice here, and I do very much worry for her if she goes missing. Mainly because while Will survived this, I’m not sure they’ll do the same for Holly :(

It also ties into Vecna’s threat to Nancy against her and her family.

Here’s an interesting leak from the same anon that leaked the hospital stuff (which seems to be correct)

I think this could be the very same scene Holly goes missing.

3. Turbow Trap 😭 This one is utter nonsense. I have no idea what a Turbow is, so I assume it’s gonna be a code or nickname for something. Absolutely clueless here.

4. Sorcerer is incredibly interesting, and imo a clear allusion to Will. His D&D character being a cleric, basically a wizard. Could also be a reference to Vecna imo. Or both 😉

5. Shock Jock is clearly tied to the radio station plotline. Imo the title could be a reference to Steve, Jonathan, or even Murray (he fits that eccentric, somewhat annoying personality quite well) In case you guys don’t know a shock jock is like a very eccentric radio host.

6. Escape from Camazotz is another crazy title. He’s a figure from Mayan mythology who’s a bat spirit. That immediately makes me think of Eddie, but also Steve ofc. However, camazotz has a larger meaning that goes beyond “bat spirit”, it’s also a representation of death and night. So the title seems to be alluding to someone escaping from death or a perilous situation.

Even more interesting perhaps is that kamazotz is a name of a planet in A Wrinkle Time. It’s the planet where IT resides, the mind controlling antagonist of the narrative. So I guess in this comparison Kamazotz is the UD, and IT is Henry.

[raven-at-the-writing-desk]

You're analysis are always very insightful! Your considerations about Malleus' restricted options in terms of partners made me wonder if Kalim would end up in a similar situation as him. This is of course entirely speculation, since we don't know much about how his parents got together, but to me it makes sense that in the future he might have to deal with something like an arranged marriage. He isn't royalty, but the Asim family still has a great deal of commercial and political sway in the Scalding Sands, so it's difficult for me to believe that they would just let the heir marry whoever he chooses. And despite how carefree he may act, I don't think he would reject an arrangement made by his family. He seems pretty aware of all the obligations that come with being an heir to the Asim. Besides, rejecting a spouse that was chosen for him might put said person under a lot of public scrutiny, and I don't think he would want anyone to go through that

[Referencing this post!]

Oh, hmmm 🤔 I actually never really though about this kind of thing for Kalim so I guess now is as good of a time as any www.

I do think like there would be some selectiveness involved for Kalim too, given the financial power and political influence in the Scalding Sands that the Asims hold (and that's not even mentioning their connections via family, some of which are royalty, and business partners). There's also been several attempts on Kalim's life, so there would probably be an intense screening and background check process for anyone courting Kalim. Who knows if they're actually there to kidnap him or to take his life??? The Asims would have very legitimate concerns, so they have every right to be vigilant and suspicious of those who may try to take advantage of Kalim's kind-heartedness and gullibility.

Mm, I do feel like (overall) Kalim wouldn't be in as much of a tight spot as Malleus?? I get the sense that his parents are way more open-minded and truly care about his happiness (unlike the Briar Valley senators) so they wouldn't exactly force him to marry someone he doesn't actually love. Rather than a "you have no say in this matter" arranged marriage, they might instead present Kalim with a pool of potential candidates that have already been vetted and encourage him to try them out? Like, go on various blind dates and see if he "clicks" with any of them. There would be more trial and error, more exploration allowed (since there isn't as much of a demand for Kalim to have an heir, especially not right away; he has so many other siblings and family members who could help or assume roles in the business). I believe this is similar to how matchmaking is done in some Asian countries (although I'm not too familiar with the concept, I've only learned a little about it through some podcasts). From my understanding, they try to "match" applicants with someone of a similar social ranking as you (so in Kalim's case, he would probably be meeting people who are also mega wealthy) and based on what you (and oftentimes your family) are looking for. If it doesn't work out, then there's less of a chance for backlash since pretty much anyone can use these services and a perfect match isn't a guarantee, especially on the first attempt. Please feel free to correct me if I got any information here wrong!! ^^

[itsbansheebitch]

More thoughts

I get both sides, but I feel a little confused they couldn't find four people in their +25 employees

Data analyst (Are you seriously telling me you couldn't personally email or even just HIRE matpat's team who do data analytics as part of Theorist Media to help??? The man would be overjoyed to help???)

Editor (Put the first $6 towards a can of coffee grounds, dude)

PR Team (Even, like, a single person, please, for the love of god)

Business Major (Or literally anyone that has taken a home ec/budgeting/personal finance class)

First, the Dish Granted series was started when gold leaf burgers were novel, now it's seen as tone deaf (for obvious reasons) it should have shifted to something like interviews with people who make that kind of food or local businesses (like parmesan cheese shops in Parma, Italy) or the history of food (like talking about the history of modern Native American slavery on Californian wine vinyards). Not to mention the untapped potential of Food Fraud topics. Either shift it, or scrap it. Any data analyst or chronically online person could tell you that.

Second, why did you keep "anyone can afford $6 a month" in? Are the editors asleep at the wheel? Are they overworked? What is going on? You know damn well to not make generalizations about what people can afford. That's NEVER a good idea, especially when you KNOW (because YT gives you analytics) that most of your viewers are young (16/18-30/35 range, I'd guess) who probably, either 1, are still in school and either arent paid well/dont have jobs OR 2, arent paid well and tired of people's shit, like people who own businesses talking about "tough financial decisions." To them, Watcher isn't going to look different from the other people talking like that, because this was so sudden, with no input from fans, and in the video you hear shit like "anyone can afford [X]." To be frank, it wouldn't really matter what the amount is, because that generalization goes against the message they have stood by for years. THAT is a slap in the face.

Third, what are yall doing with the budgeting? Every artist has a right to make art that they are proud of. Every artist deserves to have their work seen if they so choose. Every artist deserves to make a living. HOWEVER, there are MANY options online when it comes to making money, especially on YT. You could get into marketing, data analysis, expanding your demographic, looking at what people are interested in right now VS what will stand the test of time (not gold leaf burgers), etc.

You have to either have these skills, develop these skills, or hire someone to do it for you. It's understandable that you would want a team behind the production, but I find +25 employees to be WAY too many people, especially in LA. Bailey Sarian has a Dark History section on her YT (and Spotify podcast) where she has hired historians to help make sure her episodes are as accurate as possible. You've caught heat before from Puppet History's missing & incorrect info, you should do the same. She has about three (3) "intermissions" per episode for ad breaks. I never see anyone complain. People WOULD listen to yall talk for that long (+1 hour videos), tbh, though that's not necessary.

Why are yall out here with Teslas, expensive food, new gear, scripts (where there weren't scripts before, PH is different, that makes sense), and "better than TV" level sets??? I need to put your accountant in this week's church prayer list what the actual hell??? Ya'll, this video is literally the meme:

Guys help me budget:

LA Rent: 2K per month

Videos: 100K per vid

+25 Employees: God only knows

New stuff for videos: Don't get me started

Like, are you serious?

You have a right to do whatever you want with your art. You have a right to charge whatever you'd like for that art. You have a right to make a living from your art and you have a right to ask your fans for money.

Your fans have a right to be angry when they've been supporting yall for, what, almost 10 years? They have a right to choose when and where to spend their money even when you've made an impact. They have a right to feel betrayed, especially when there are better options (like Nebula or consulting with Theorist Media).

Fans DO NOT have a right to be racist to any members of Watcher, now that they have made a decision they do not agree with.

I personally, think this is a really silly decision and could have been solved (haha solved) with a simple YT poll, but apparently we had to get... this. I respect their decision, I just don't think it was a smart one. I wish them the best, and I hope they find a better solution. Any further comment from me will depend on what steps they take next.

[fairuzfan]

Tbh this may just be me but my patience for certain people getting mad at being accused of being zionists, and specifically pointing at how they have said that they want Peace and Freedom and it's important to focus on the Humanity of People has become fucking negative (which is all different from when Bibi says he's securing Peace and Freedom as he focuses on the Humanity of Israelis, I guess. Or any time the US has tried it in Pick Your War).

Either explain your material goals or accept that people will get mad at you when you refuse to elaborate on your puddle-deep statements. Politics is material conditions all the way down and the current material conditions are that Palestinians are being massacred by a genocidal state whose heads have repeatedly affirmed that intent!

Badly paraphrasing Kwame Ture here, but any analysis that excludes the oppressor will blame the oppression. The presumption of a need to make Both Sides Understand And Communicate assumes that Palestinians hold significant structural power here and have the ability to come to some theoretical political table—that they are thus doing this, effectively, to themselves, because they don't prioritize Humanity and Peace and Freedom enough. That's what good vibes politics gets you.

(I am so sorry for this being long, I am just, so furious with it, especially after I learned today that an old classmate was hurt by former IOF soldiers w/skunk spray during the Columbia University SJP protest. Just. Goddamn.)

I think you put it into words really well in that there are no material analysis of actual concrete steps theyre providing or stating that Palestinians haven't already said better and more often and they tend to pass it off as their own ideologies rather than... you know... recognizing Palestinians have been fighting this fight for 3-4 generations. Like a guarantee you any discussion you've had we've already had amongst ourselves. So like actively excluding us from those discussions — which is nothing new btw we've always been excluded from them but this time it's easier to push back — is in fact doing harm and refusing us a way to advocate for ourselves.

Truly I've seen it all — there is no way to "peacefully" live under occupation and subjugation for Palestinians. Like no, man that doesn't exist. Even within Israel, Palestinians aren't referred to as "Palestinians" they are referred to as "Arab Israelis" like we cannot even claim ourselves as Palestinians.

You have to acknowledge that at a certain point you yourself are contributing to the dangerous atmosphere by making everything "too complex" to get anything done. I remember there was a talk with Amjad Iraqi (a contributor to al-shabaka who grew up in israel but is palestinian) and another podcaster who is... peak liberal zionist lol but i listened to it cuz amjad was there — that the Podcaster was saying (paraphrasing) "there's an equilibrium of 'freedom' for Palestinians and 'security' for Israelis, and one side pushes the other side further and further away from the center where they could meet so how to you think we reconcile differences" and amjad responds in a way that I admire (paraphrasing) in that he mentions that from the beginning of this equation, zionism has always had the upper hand in that all their demands have been met and self determination for Palestinians have never been recognized (end paraphrase) so it's not equal to say "well we want peace for both Palestinians and israelis so let's block off Palestinians from discussing definitions for these terms" that fundamentally impact them in ways they will never impact nonpalestinians who would BENEFIT from maintaining the status quo.

Within the article from Alma they say "do something vulnerable and ask the other person what their definition of zionism/antizionism is" as if there aren't very transparent people in this world that want "peace" and don't want a ceasefire. Like that's actually the predominant opinion in the world. They straight up say "the only peace in the middle east is if we get rid of hamas so we can't allow a ceasefire" and people run by that definition and say "sorry Palestinians :( we gotta get rid of hamas :( there's nothing we can do about this.... its for peace :("

So I think you're doing far more harm by pretending there's a cognitive difference between zionist and antizionists that theyre just not communicating, which, zionists are very obvious about communicating (which also, it's necessary to boost Palestinians when defining antizionism in this case because when we point out the very real harm of things affecting us we would like a say in how people define the movement meant for our liberation). But the article never said that throughout the entire thing. It just said "maybe you guys have a cognitive dissonance of words" but like.... at this point, if you still ally yourself under the term "zionist" with literally all we have been screaming these past few months then no, I don't think you're necessarily operating in good faith.

And like I don't think tri*utary is a zionist necessarily but they're certainly a zionist sympathizer and like I don't trust them either.

[moreclaypigeons]

Mountain Goats fans how are we feeling

Jenny 2... I will put all my analysis about what these things mean under the cut. I would also like to note that after i took these screenshots the 11th (pirate ship sunset) just... disappeared? The post was gone for a fair bit but then came back. may have been a glitch. or maybe a ghost ship.

Here's what I'm getting story-wise:

Someone rode away on their custom Kawasaki with a stinger on the back, leaving the speaker there at the curb so they had to take a bus. But they never saw them again, no one did. Flaky yellow paint of the Kawasaki.. staying up late thinking about how the relationship ended. Time passes and it's winter and they have search parties out for this person. The person crashed while on their bike. And then the speaker realizes it. And the person is dead the end

Now in terms of allusions to the song Jenny:

"You roared into the driveway of our southwestern ranch style house": the house in the first image reasonably fits that description. "Our house faced west": based on the shadows here, the house DOES face either east or west because of the direction that the sun rises.

"on a new Kawasaki, all yellow and black, fresh out of the showroom.": It's the same bike! But, based on the line in the third post, "flaky yellow paint," some time has passed.

"the big orange sun" we see in the 11th image, where the pirate ship sails into the sunset. the image also alludes to "you pointed your headlamp toward the horizon," and "the pirate's life for me!"

post 10 is interesting because it too draws from the pirate's life line, but the imagery is different, and definitely connects/foreshadows the graveyard image. Here is an excerpt from the wikipedia page for jolly rogers: When the pirates' intended victim was within range, the Jolly Roger would be raised, often simultaneously with a warning shot. The flag was probably intended as communication of the pirates' identity, which may have given target ships an opportunity to decide to surrender without a fight.

Miscellaneous:

image 7, with the grecian vase imagery is reminding me of spent gladiator.

i have no idea what the fuck the water tower means.

image 12 depicts a music staff with some notes on it. i know nothing about music but i do know the internet does so i am currently trying to reconstruct it with a program. update mmaybe will follor?

other songs:

According to what John Darnielle has said in hit podcast "i only listen to the mountain goats," Jenny has appeared in 2 or 3 other songs.

"She calls on the phone in Night Light" and "she calls on the phone in Straight Six" and was the sender of postcards in Source Decay. He says, "She is defined by an absence, she has yet to speak. She's in the song Jenny; the other two songs she's in, she's already gone. …She's not there when things are going well, and she's not remembered when things are going well. Jenny is an emblem of more difficult times for people, of wilder times. But also times that they're pretty clearly romanticizing, right, that they're also remembering as the time when they were on a motorcycle with no responsibilities, livin' the pirate's life."

Of course I'm going to listen to those three songs <3

Night light: "Jenny calls from Montana/ She's only passing through / Probably never see her again in this life I guess" oh but we WILL see her again... And then never again. "I was a red dot blinking on a screen up overhead / And then the room went dark" and "Plug a night light in / Leave the porch light on" remind me of the bedside clock and the gas station.

Holy shit Straight Six. I didn't realize this was on Jam Eater Blues until I went to its page on the wiki, but- this is significant cause on their linktree, "stream jam eater blues" is at the top and i was confused cause they also released a bunch of other shit. this is foreshadowing...

Anyways significant moments of Straight Six:

"Dull powder blue paint job / earl scheib special" this could either be the auto station (#2) or the fact that the speaker's car has an earl scheib special paint job (had to research this), which maybe he got from the same auto shop. This song talks a lot about a car. "Rabbit skull hanging from the rear-view" "And I glide down the streets of this city / All night, uptight" "There's a crack in the windshield eighteen inches long / Evaporating snow forming crystals on the chrome" it's hard to tell from the drawing of the van whether there is a crack on the windshield or whether it's just stylized, but..this does intrigue me. And when I heard them mention SNOW immediately after... when the caption to the van post says "searching in the snow".......

Source Decay also mentions driving and cars a lot. Couldn't find anything more significant than what the other songs have though.

If anyone has any other thoughts to share or disagrees or like I missed something- PLEase share i am so eager to hear/talk about this!

[charmac]

Okay so, I got high for the first time in awhile and I'm thinking about Sunny just, It's weird that I always do, near obsessively, have since October of 2022. It's just like, my favourite thing to love and to think about, but I have been watching for a lot longer than that. I'm just gonna delve on my pipeline from casual fan of this show to stan, cos I think it's interesting and I'm high so nothing is stopping me:

For over three years I've been watching this show on repeat, whenever I didn't have a scheduled show to watch, I'd pop it on. But I just watched it casually, normally, like haha funny bad people show kind of way (I am sorry). All I did was watch it over and over, sometimes see a funny viral Sunny Tweet and like it, and then the Podcast came out.

And it weirdly made me more into the show, more introspective about the characters. So I would interact on r/IASIP but they just, didn't really get it properly.

And then S15 aired and Reddit really didn't get it and Charlie Kelly was just this massive presence in my mind, and I wrote a silly little kidfic about him because I was just thinking and thinking. And Reddit didn't get it.

So I I tried to come onto Tumblr, but everyone shipped Macdennis and I. Did Not. like Dennis. I saw him how your average r/IASIP commenter sees him. (So sorry.) I thought shipping Macdennis was fun in a, like, asking Mac to get completely used and fucked over kinda way (again, so sorry). Imagine my shock walking into Sunnyblr with that idea. Tumblr liked Dennis.

So I just kinda did the Episodes on repeat/Podcast/Subreddit kinda vibe for awhile. And then I met Meg and talked to her, and I stood two feet away from Rob and I know it's cringey, lmfao, but something shifted further. I was talking obsessively to my bestie @macdennissurvivor and Twitter started showing me Dennis edits. And then I made a silly little Macdennis edit of my own.

Then I went to the live show in Philly. And the audience was miserable and oh my god none of them get it. But there's so much to get . And Glenn, wow, weird, interesting guy. (And he weirdly kinda clarified that Dennis wasn't straight.) The show was fine but the audience was miserable because none of them get it. They throw out lines and references and it's all a joke. But it's not all a joke, there's so much to get. They're not getting it. Please someone else get it.

And so I dipped my toe back on Sunnyblr. And I got more involved with Sunny Twitter and Nat (legal last name Paddysroyco) Tumblr user @boysareouttonight's Dennis edits were like the final nail in the coffin of being a stan.

I think something shifts when you are able to look past Dennis' facade and actually see the person inside, the character they won't let you see unless you really get it.

And the obsession begins, and continues, and is good to me, keeps me happy and everything here just tickles my brain and makes me engage and talk. And like there's real, actually insanely intelligent discussion on here and meta and analysis and theories and then there's the most cracked out post you've ever seen and then there's something that's somehow both and it's just something else.

I'm at an all-you-can-eat buffet after reaching into the depths of my cupboards for a month straight. And we're getting more, and a lot, and whatever it is is more content. Every frame, every title, every crumb we find, there's other people here who get it all and make it fun, in a way that's not tiring or eye-rolling or completely off the mark, in a way that keeps me full-steam rolling ahead and coming back.

This devolved a little, as thoughts do, but I am happy to be here, I guess. I'm looking forward to this fucking season and whatever lies ahead: whether it's dry for Macdennis or overwhelmingly wet, whether we get solid character development or some weird backsliding, a mix of both, if there's strange retcons or really fucking-good ones, any unexplained moments or looks or props, or expressions, I'm experiencing it all with people who get it. Maybe in a completely unhinged way, maybe in a crazy smart way, or a reasonably sober way, but always from a place of getting it.

We're getting Season 16, it's real, more to the story, more to piece together and layout and pick and prod and compare and re-tell (and re-write if you really want). In, like, 18 days. Fuck me up.

[neallo]

(girl who was supposed to write 3k of vaguely serious pining tonight, or at least some weird smut) so about the furby au...

uhhh okay im gonna TRY to come up with some additional thoughts since i am going to the trouble of making this post. i guess one question is— does mello RESPOND to the emails??? probably. he loves to be mad about stuff and he hates not being heard when he's mad about stuff. so like. initially he's just replying to the emails from matt with “i hate that stupid fucking furby” and “how much money do i have to give you to set it on fire, or at least stop emailing me” but when matt points out that mello could just auto sort the emails to spam mello pretends as if he doesn't see that one. eventually, as mello's responses become marginally less hostile, matt is like 😌 it's time to up the ante. and begins including his Fun Near Facts. these include but are not limited to:

- he took college level differential equations when he was 14! 🤓 (mello response: okay, so he's a loser??)

- he's not a loser he's REALLY cool (note: matt loves to lie. or he actually has an unrealistically kind view of near's swag levels) (mello does not dignify this with a reply)

- he loves talking about math! don't worry though it's really easy to tune it out and he doesn't really care if you're not listening (mello response: i don't know why i would need to know that.)

- one time he saved me from drowning 😳 (note: matt also loves to embellish. near “saved him from drowning” by telling matt to not try his luck at jumping over a river, which wasn't actually even deep enough for him to drown in)

uuhhhhh okay running out of matt's fun facts about near BUT. the point is that he is wingmanning so hard. i guess another question is whether or not near picks up on the fact that matt is regularly taking candid photos of him? my thought is no. i could see near being sort of a space cadet in this respect tbh; if he's absorbed enough in something he tunes everything else out)

hmm. genuinely running out of steam so lemme just jot down a few more ideas and then someday maybe i will add more when more comes to me.

- near: lives in... actually, fuck it, NOT new york. he and matt room together in minneapolis. near is in a PhD program for math— either complex analysis or topography. idk. something. matt is a programmer of some kind bc i am not creative.

- mello: i think i already said but he lives in LA, works for the mob. probably isn't really that Into It but he got in when he was pretty young and it's not like he has a lot of other options at this point? i imagine it isn't something he spends a lot of time angsting over but he's probably kinda unfulfilled.

OH okay sorry i got an idea. these stupid emails from matt go on for a few months, with mello gradually responding in very slightly less mean ways & occasionally asking questions,,, and then one day the Daily Near Email comes through and it's a picture of near somewhere in LA. probably griffith's observatory actually. and matt (knowing full well from mello's social media that he lives in Los Angeles) captions the image something like “where did you say you lived again??? 🤔”

okay now i'm REALLY out of ideas. not sure how the fact that mello has barely Actually spoken to near would be resolved!! thanks for listening to the Morgan Being Deranged podcast, tune in next time for another incredibly niche stupid idea 🥰

[teenagemutantninjatrauma]

*sigh* 2003 turtles should’ve made a radio station

Did anyone see that one video of Raph and Mikey doing a podcast and answering questions? How neat would it be if they just… had a radio station??

Imagine, right, Mikey reads scary stories and he and Donnie are writing an episodic murder mystery story. Leo does mini-lessons in Japanese language and culture. Raph blasts absolutely banger music and gives updates on any new happenings New Yorkers should watch out for - ongoing gang wars, aliens on the loose, but also charity events outside of Oroku Saki’s work because. Fuck Oroku Saki lol

Whenever they get into trouble and can’t get to their radio station or are too busy fighting something, the few New Yorkers that listen to them worry, and as they worry, they talk, and so ironically anytime the station goes quiet, the awareness of it spreads. The turtles keep coming back to new listeners, and they make more stories, more little lessons, they share little censored bits of their life. Mikey does in-depth analysis of superhero comics and shows like Star Trek, and very often reminds his listeners to Be Fuckin Weird!!! Be you be fun be interesting, your interests and hobbies are so cool I promise you, your outfit is banger and your hair is stylish and you deserve to feel confident in yourselves!!

Donatello shares hacks to make putting together machines easier for yourself, especially encouraging women to not feel intimidated or ridiculed by men for never being taught stuff like car mechanics — once you know where to start and what things look like, it’s easy enough! He researches reliable resources both online and offline, and occasionally rambles about new breakthroughs and what they mean in the bigger scope of all things science.

Leo has little episodes about exploring the soul - learning to understand yourself, meditating on who you are and want to be, but also how to cope with dangerous or traumatizing situations (shoutout to the Ancient One). Lots of queer folk lightheartedly agree that they would come out to him without hesitance because he “would be so so nice about it I bet.”

Raph starts setting up interviews, at first with the humans he knows - the kind Mrs. Morrison, talking about the horribly unfair housing policies making her life harder, the Professor, to humanize the homeless, but then he gets a little braver and starts interviewing nonhumans that live in the city — Leatherhead first, and then Sydney and the other people from the Underground City. A stray Utrom that settled down here and opted to stay when their peers left for home. Professor Honeycutt, when he visits - that interview sort of cements that he’s not making these people up, because, well. Everyone had seen and heard the fugitoid during the invasion. He interviews superheroes, both those that work during the day, and those that work during the night (and yes, he does interview the Turtle Titan). He invites the Battle Nexus Daimyo for a visit. But the interview most beloved by the listeners… is one Raphael conducts with his dad.

They never mention they’re mutants, but I wonder how many people feel something click in their minds when Raph starts the interview by going “so. Just you and four kids, practically homeless, hiding in the shadows. How did you manage, those first few years when we were really little?” And they talk about being a single dad who was “barely an adult” (read: still learning himself how to be a mutant) and all the folks out there who maybe had to deal with having kids too early or at a time where they couldn’t properly take care of them as much as they wanted to, they all lean in, because this man sounds like he’s about sixty now - surely he’ll have some wise words of advice? And he does, Splinter talks about having to learn what kids are even like, never having had interacted with that many people in general before, he often had to guess at what was a serious ailment and what was simply a byproduct of childhood and later puberty, he talks about how visiting his few friends (the Ancient One, and the Daimyo) helped him remember that he’s not all alone to do this, he talks about how what worked for one of his sons didn’t work for the other three and how a parent should always remain flexible and open minded and accepting of change, as change is natural to life and inevitable especially during the early years. And they talk and talk and I bet a bunch of New Yorkers go “wait a minute.. four guys that live on the streets with a dad they occasionally call a ‘master,’ one of them constantly talks about machinery, they all speak fluent Japanese… could these possibly be the fucked up little guys that saved my ass that one time? Could this be the guy I punched that one time cuz I freaked out?’

Like. Just consider it okay. A turtle radio station.

[hartenlust]

reading gods worst article on tma (Narrating the (Queer) Gothic in the Podcast The Magnus Archives, Maria Juko) and its so bad that its funny. btw this got published in a book (Rethinking Gothic Transgressions of Gender and Sexuality, edited by sarah faber and kerstin-anja münderlein, 2024) and I can only assume the editors didn't listen to tma themselves because good lord what are these takes. come with me as I read this mess

strong start when it claims the entities seek to torture and destroy humanity. patently untrue. we know they have some sentience, but the focus on humanity does a disservice to gerry explicitly saying "you think people are so special its only our fear that counts?". also "destroy". how are you going to get fear if the entirety of humanity is destroyed. we know what the entities wanted (or at least what the web wanted) it is explicitly stated in mag 200. it says so right there so explicitly that I find it impressive if Juko missed it.

calls the beholding the antagonist? if you want to call Any fear the antagonist id go for the web, but even then, antagonist is not the role id ascribe to a lovecraftian entity

"with the podcast’s final season set in a world dominated by the Eye that Jon et al. ultimately overcome to save the world" / "The world comes to depend on [jonmartins] relationship, with the two of them becoming queer heroes." save the world??? heroes?

4. stupidly funny implications. interesting citation for georgie but that's not important right now. the point is the fight against evil and the reading alleging tma says being queer will get you Heroic Powers. Juko's forgetting about the queer characters that get Evil Powers (all of them. all of the powers are evil. that's the point.) did the archivist utilize ace and bi power when he became the lynchpin of the apocalypse and tortured strangers

5. "As a case in point, inclusivity starts at the level of casting: female police officer Basira Hussain is voiced by Frank Voss, who uses they/them pronouns." very true but idk. frank voss and jonny sims are just pals, ill allow Some implications from this but the author is using it to imply more intentional focus on inclusivity then I think jonny was doing

6. "First, the podcast’s main character, the asexual biromantic Jon, is bestowed with supernatural powers, challenging not just heterosexual but all sexual norms of society." BESTOWED? stop using the word bestowed here oh my God. he is not a superhero!! did Juko listen to the entirety of tma without any moral grayness happening here??? also ?? jons bestowed supernatural powers are in no way related to his asexuality & biromanticism??

7. christ. this isnt a bad tma take but it is reminding me why I wanted to quit my literature analysis bachelor

8. did jon utilize ace and bi power when he betrayed martin. did martin utilize gay power when he stabbed jon. jesus christ what do you mean humanity's salvation. the apocalypse isnt fixed at the end by the power of love.

9. i guess? if you felt like it? tma really isn't a queer narrative in my option but I guess?? you could read it like that. if you wanted to. I'm unsure if you should though because these people are deeply unwell

10. "And particularly in the first seasons, Jon and his colleagues often fail to control the evil entities, losing for example colleague Tim at the end of the second season, which leads to a rift between some of the Institute’s members" yeah because truly they were thriving before that. they were the bestest of friends before tim died. they all held hands and danced in circles

11. unsure how much longer i can take this. this isn't the X-Men

12. "[Jon] could be defined as an asexual biromantic who uses his love for Martin as a form of power to save the world." no he couldn't. next

13. "With this in mind, Jon’s exploration of the Archives becomes a metaphor for accepting his (a)sexuality." HUH. NO IT ISNT? jons asexuality isn't relevant narratively At All. go home.

14. for the love of god can anyone hear me. its so dark in here. were the beholding and jonah magnus asexuality allies when they helped jon become an avatar. the sentence after this calls jon the hero of the narrative again btw. patently untrue

15. "Only by accepting his power can Jon save the world." jon didn't save the world.

Juko discusses melanie & georgie but her takes on them are pretty normal and decent in my opinion. if anyone wants a pdf of this horror let me know & ill send it. I'm so annoyed I'm considering writing an email about this. btw it called jonmartin "enemies to lovers" trope and also said their relationship "starts heteronormative and changes to a more equal footing, whilst retaining heteronormative elements". about the gay couple.

to conclude: I don't know which podcast juko listened to about a heroic narrative about queer love that saves the world, but its not the magnus archives. did you know that the eye is an asexuality ally?

[malachiwardyt]

Hello again, podcast side of Tumblr.

This time around, I did a video on Ethics Town, a relatively new cosmic horror podcast about a British valley town where nothing is quite as it seems. Right now Ethics Town is a terribly underrated series, so this video is both my analysis of it, and also my attempt at getting more people to listen to it.

Anyways, yeah, watch the video if you want, or not, it's up to you I guess. If you want to, though, I really do suggest you take the less than four hours and actually listen to the podcast, it's well worth your time.

SPOILERS FOR ETHICS TOWN SEASON ONE BEYOND THIS POINT. CONTINUE READING AT YOUR OWN RISK. / / / / / / / / / /

As with the last post, I also want to share the art from the video. For the first one, I wanted to do something that captured the feel of the Ethics Town logo, which is all black and white and red, so I stuck with a pretty monochromatic colour palette here. The image depicts the Mayor of Ethics, Ian Jacobs, moving the wrapped body of Natascha Flynn to make space for a nearby factory's planned expansions. It was one of two scenes I considered, and I think this was the much better option. The skyline in the background, while not perfect, is meant to mimic the same skyline seen on the Mayor's hat in the logo. The other weird detail here is that everything was done linelessly, which was very weird for me, because I thought it created an interesting look. Oh, also, yes, I did give Ian a ponytail.

The other art piece is a sketch of Ian Jacobs and January Johnson, because I wanted to experiment with how much I could push their designs before they stopped looking like the same person. I also wanted to have their outfits at least be a little similar, so both of them have outer coverings closed around the middle of the chest around a shirt beneath, and both Ian and January have black headware. I considered giving January a white band on his headphones, but it just wound up getting lost. Another notable difference is in the hair, which I imagined here as blonde, probably in a more platinum direction, though you can't tell that very well from the greyscale. Ian's hair is pulled back in the aforementioned ponytail while it's left loose when he's acting as January. January also has a little more stubble, and his eye bags sag a little more. Finally, even though I only really had two colours to work with, I wanted to try expanding on how he acts within each role using the clothing. January's clothes are lighter, thanks in big part to the grey and white striped hoodie, which is designed to make him seem more emotionally truthful than he actually is. Underneath that light tone, though, is a plain black tee, which ties him to the darker colour scheme of Ian and also hints at the fact that, below his friendly and approachable personality hides the dark secret that he is, in fact, the Mayor who has been making such terrible decisions. Going back to the sweatshirt, the grey and white striping is also slightly reminiscent of the stripes on prison jumpsuits, which is a way of representing his feeling of being trapped into bad decisions and being ensnared by Ethics and his secret role as Mayor. Speaking of the Mayor, Ian is a lot simpler. I considered giving him a big, slightly cartoon-y MAYOR sash, but I wound up preferring how he looks without it. Generally, I tried to keep his wardrobe darker and more formal, and, of course, I had to include the fancy hat we see on the logo of Ethics Town. I also reduced the amount of vape cloud around him for two reasons. First, the in-story reason, is that Ian has accepted who he is and the role he plays in the "narrative" of Ethics, so I imagine he's a bit less stressed. It also works really well metaphorically, though, because he's not disguised anymore. When we see Ian at the end of "The Identity Issue," the mask is fully off. Artemis knows exactly who he is, which means that his identity doesn't have to be clouded by as much smoke. Oh, also, it's a cosmic horror podcast, so if I didn't put something tentacle-esque around the main antagonist, there would be problems.

And I think that about covers it. I had a lot of fun listening to the podcast and making the video, and I hope it can bring joy to y'all as well. Catch y'all next time around for The Buried Explained!

[puckgoss]

What are your hockey podcast recs? And I love last podcast on the left and behind the bastards and then like … the blonde files and lipstick on the rim lol

oohh i haven't heard of those last two before! i'll give them a try. thanks anon 🥰

hockey podcast recs:

32 thoughts

this is the most popular hockey podcast by far. hosted by elliotte friedman (NHL insider) and jeff marek (sportsnet radio host), this podcast releases episodes every monday & friday and includes a recap of the week's top storylines & news from around the league, insider information, and player interviews. many current players listen to this show as well.

they can have a slight focus on canadian teams, considering the podcast is produced by a canadian company, but they do talk about all teams.

vibes: informative. lots of news is broken/rumors start from this show. goofy gen x dads hosting a podcast about the NHL.

the chris johnston show

this is hosted by the SDPN (steve dangle podcast network). the show is hosted by julian mckenzie (writer for the athletic) and features chris johnston (NHL insider).

this show is similar to 32 thoughts in that it recaps the week's top storylines & headlines and updates biweekly.

vibes: informative. goofy millennials hosting a podcast about the NHL.

the hockey PDOcast

this is run by the same network as 32 thoughts (sportsnet). hosted by dimitri filipovic, this podcast takes an analytics-focused approach. they do break downs of players and teams from around the league. episodes are posted monday-friday.

might be hard to understand if you don't know much about analytics, but if you want to learn more about it, it's not a bad place to start. they won't explain in detail what everything they're talking about means, but you can always pause and do research if it interests you

vibes: let's talk about math but make it hockey!

the athletic hockey show

this pod is produced by the athletic (sports new department of the new york times). it's hosted by various staff writers at the athletic, and they release 1-2 episodes per day.

this show goes into the top news & storylines around the NHL, and also goes more in depth into certain topics like how a particular team is performing, how certain players are ranked, etc. the episodes are essentially podcast versions/breakdowns of the articles they post.

vibes: opinion-based analysis on the latest news and storylines around the NHL. different vibes depending on which writer(s) are hosting each episode.

the DFO rundown

hosted by frank seravalli and jason gregor of the nation network, the daily faceoff rundown is a daily podcast covering (you guessed it) the latest news and storylines around the NHL.

frank seravalli is probably the most controversial "insider" in the NHL world. he gets in trouble for spreading false information sometimes, but has also broken multiple stories before anyone else has. he's super tight with some player agents and will unashamedly be their mouthpiece, which also allows him to get some breaking news before other insiders do.

vibes: very opinionated reporting on the latest news & storylines around the NHL, including rumors that sometimes turn out to be true, and sometimes don't.

spittin chiclets

this is the preeminent, infamous dudebro NHL podcast. it is run by barstool sports and hosted by former players paul bissonnette and ryan whitney.

i'll be honest - this show can be very tough to listen to. very crass, quite misogynistic, etc. i mean it is run by barstool, enough said.

the reason i am including it on this list is that they have, by far, the best current & former player interviews. players feel comfortable with former players like biz and whit, and so the interviews with players on this podcast are far more interesting and in depth than with traditional media members. they really show their personality more than they normally would.

they release episodes once a week, and the episodes are obscenely long. i would recommend just listening to player interviews if you're interested in listening to them in more of their "natural habitat"

vibes: imagine this podcast being recorded in a frathouse. if that disgusts you, don't listen

locked on NHL: prospects podcast

the locked on NHL network has podcasts on general news and news for each team in the NHL. this particular show that i like to listen to is focused on prospects specifically. they analyze both undrafted and drafted prospects and go into what their game is like, the type of player they project to be in the NHL, do mock drafts, etc.

vibes: hockey-nerd analysis of young players who are not yet playing in the NHL / are in their first few seasons in the NHL

bonus youtube channel: the hockey guy

the hockey guy on youtube posts multiple videos a day. shannon is a legend plain and simple. he posts a video previewing each game happening that day, and reviewing each game after it happens. he also posts daily news videos and videos on other topics such as NHL expansion, deep dives into particular teams, etc. he makes things very easily digestible for all fans of the game.

vibes: your wholesome, nerdy neighbor talks about the NHL with the aid of his trusty whiteboards. he has many cats and bunnies who make guest appearances in his videos, alongside his lovely wife yvonne.

[braintapes]

The Hotel Podcast Season 3 Analysis: Part 4 - The Hotel Herself

Today, we'll start to wrap up anything left to cover for the Owner's arc, then dig some more into the Hotel Herself, her character, and her relation to the Staff.

I have little in the way of fancy preamble this time, except for that I'll consider this my big treatise on the character of the Hotel Herself and I will be discussing more than just her presence in Season 3. I really can't talk about her without getting into...everywhen and where else.

This is also the longest post in the series, at 8 full pages long. Not that much longer than the other posts, I guess, but it feels long to me. Take breaks if ya gotta. Here's some links to Part I - The Manager, Part II - The Lobby Boy, and Part III - The Owner.

It is a joy for me to write this up and to share it with you. If you read even a little bit, I'm grateful. If you read all of it, I'll be over the moon. So I thank you very kindly for your time :-)

Let's get into it with 3.10 In Which We Burn. This episode is about both of them, all of them really. This is where we start to get into that whole, 'interconnectedness of the self within the Hotel' thing I put a pin in before. Strap in for the ride.

The Owner begins again in the void. There is nothingness all around him, yet he wanders forward to somewhere, something he can't quite perceive yet with only a vague idea of what he's going to do:

I would know if I was going the wrong way. Returning from somewhere to somewhere. I don't know where I'm going, but I know how to get there. I think there's someone there already. I think I'm going to kill them. No, that's not quite right. That's not it. But it's all I can think of as I walk thru endless endless nothing. "I'm going somewhere. Someone is there. Someone to kill." Over and over I repeat the words, trying to make them make sense. Trying to find the parts that stick out in sharp directions. Like a mountain crag that needs weathered down by time to dust.

...There's that mountain again. This is a version of the Owner reforming after his last death, one that strikes me as prototypal, almost. He exists in the void for what's implied to be a long time and seemingly has no memory yet of the previous episodes events? He has no memory of...anything. Just him and the endless darkness.

I think that the Hotel is forming him slowly here. Experiencing through him. The Owner doesn't fully exist yet, he's still baking in the metaphorical oven. Without any memory or experience besides the void, she seeps through into him as he fumbles for something.

"I'm going somewhere. Someone is there. Someone to kill."

Consider the creature versions of the Staff ala season 2 or 5, how they seem to have foggy memories that slip away until they settle into being whatever monster of the week they're going to be. This feels the same way to me. Compare the above line with the following from early on in 2.3 Mr Heavy Bones:

Something in me, not me, something separate, needs to kill them.

I also want to point out not just the similarity of those two lines, but how said lines could easily refer to the Hotel herself. Hear me out - If I wanted to describe how the Hotel operates in as succinct a way as possible, it'd be something like the above! Someone is there, somewhere. Someone to kill, someone needs to be killed...

He approaches, or perhaps the lobby approaches him as it comes into view. He's disoriented, the ceiling and the floors mixed up and everything is going by too fast, he's completely disconnected from the sense of time and space of the Hotel's shape. In a flash, he remembers and is immediately reset again. The Hotel instructs:

Watch it again. And pay attention this time.

On it boss!

The music has changed to The Hotel Herself's theme, Cosmic Heartbeat, and continues to play as the Owner goes through another run. The perspective is slowly starting to shift - although we're still seeing through the Owner's narrative eyes, understanding is on the horizon. The Owner goes again and looks at the Manager.

THE OWNER: She's already been killed. Is that what was sticking out? Is that what I needed to weather? I don't think so. I don't believe it, but I do as I'm told. Dying isn't easier the second time. THE HOTEL: (Yyyyyyyyou've) You've died much more than that. You've died again, and again, and again and again. Here comes another one, don't miss it or we'll have to start over.

She's responding not just to his words, but to his own internal narration. The line between them gets a tiny bit blurred, line by line ;)

So, then, if it's not the Manager he needs to see, maybe the Manager's murderer? He takes note of the gibbering creature, starts to remember more but the Hotel grows a bit frustrated with him. The Owner's not quite picking up on everything yet.

So we go back again for another round and the Owner grows more harried. With each death he sounds more and more ragged and I have to give huge props to Graham Rowat. Like I said last post, his performance as the Owner is always wonderful but this episode in particular has always stuck out to me as a high point. The Owner sounds so desperate here, so battered. He's lost and in pain and so afraid of dying yet still trying so hard...

He goes through again, makes it past the Manager and the gibbering creature and sees the Lobby Boy cowering in the corner. He's so overcome with disgust at the Lobby Boy he loses sight of what he's supposed to be understanding and the Hotel kills him again. He's getting lost in the details, not paying attention to the bigger picture. He needs to see beyond himself.

THE HOTEL: We have nothing but time here. (here here h e r e) Time (time time time) and pain(pain), if you want it. I already understand (everything)everything(everythgibber) WINGS FLAP THE OWNER: PLEASE! No more! THE HOTEL: But you don't understand yet. (don't don't don't understand yet ) Until you have an understanding you will receive only pain and time. AGAIN!

There's a bit of implication that this goes on for longer than just the exchanges we get in the episode. Now can see that the screams of his that echoed throughout the season, such as at the very very beginning and on the second floor, were the result of him witnessing these events again and again from his own jumbled perspective. I picture the Owner in my mind's eye falling, hurtling upside down through the Hotel, flying through time and space at Her direction.

I also want to talk a bit about the Hotel's part in these exchanges, and on her broader relationship with the Owner. To my understanding, official word on season 3 is that it's the Hotel experiencing her own origin like a memory, but because time, self, etc. aren't separate concepts for Her, it's experienced in this weird distorted kinda way. But nevertheless, she is here, experiencing all of this alongside the Staff and alongside the audience. She's watching and reliving these events and the Owner seems to be a sort of...Dante, almost? Sort of. He's there to watch with her.

What is the Owner's role through most of the series? His very title the Owner is superfluous because he very obviously doesn't own anything. He has no authority whatsoever, only the costume of it. He holds the threat of replacement over the heads of the Manager and Lobby Boy, but he can't actually do anything to them. The only time he tries to do something during season 4, he gets his ass handed to him just as much as he beats the Lobby Boy. He has no real authority over the guests – he certainly scares them, but he doesn't build the rooms or check them in.

What is he tasked with doing, then? He is to observe the proceedings of the Hotel, observe the guests and the Staff, and file reports to the Hotel. Again, he has no meaningful authority. His reports are meaningless in terms of running the Hotel. She can and does do whatever she wants regardless of what he has to say or think about the matter. So what purpose does he serve to her? This is what drives the Owner fucking bonkers in a 'constant accumulating dosage of radiation over time' type of way. It's the main reason he has such a hangup about not being insignificant, it fuels his hatred (read: JEALOUSY) of the Lobby Boy, it's why he makes it his business to shout at everybody else for not doing their jobs right, it's why he breaks down in season 4, I could go on.

For her, his reports may not have a purpose vis-a-vis hotel operations, but that's not the point. He's her confidant, her right hand. To him, that's an ideal he must constantly strive to live up to and fulfill. To her, she enjoys the company. Someone to watch it all with her. The Owner is so different from her in temperament that in his unique position, I think he gives her fresh perspective, a way of seeing things from different angles. I'd offer this excerpt from 4.8 AJ, Taylor, and Wayne:

I know he wants to understand though, the Owner, for me. He's such a sweetie. Always thinking of me. He wants to do a good job on his "reports". I like his reports, I like hearing about his day, and hearing about the staff, and how they like it, and how he likes it, and if I can do anything to make it better for everyone. I can, of course. Heh, I can do anything.

In 4.11 The Owner - V she tells him:

Now wait just a damn minute. I know you don't like my Lobby Boy, but you have got to get it together. The floor staff are absolutely necessary to running the day to day, but you and I are supposed to support them, drive them forward to new fantastic heights!

The Owner responds, then the Hotel responds:

They were! They are! But it's you and me, kid. I really thought you and I were gonna be able to work together more closely on this. And it's supposed to be fun! You may be like them, one of them but when you come here you're on my level. I elevate you to singular significance, even if it is just to chat.

I know those are long excerpts, but I feel they're necessary here. The Manager and the Lobby Boy have each other. They improve each other and work well together. I strongly feel that their interactions fuel their character growths. The Hotel sees the Owner as the Lobby Boy to her Manager. It's the two of them, working together! He's beneath her, of course, everyone is, that's just how it goes. But they're a team!

The Owner very much doesn't see it this way. He conceptualizes himself entirely from his place in the hierarchy, his title as The Owner. He is above the other Staff and exists to further Her will. He's so god damned worried about running everything that he cannot see past this through to what the Hotel actually wants - his company. The Owner ties himself up in knots partly due to his internally and externally imposed isolation from the Staff. I wouldn't say it made the Owner the way he is, he did just kinda come out of the box like that, but it absolutely exacerbates his issues in a feedback loop. It drives the Hotel mad because she can't understand this. For all she says she understands everything, she struggles to get why the Owner gets so wound up. Something something divorce core or what have you.

...That, um. Got away from me a little bit.

Anyway.

Aaaall of that is to say, if the Owner isn't there to actively affect things, then he must be there to watch. That's been his role, to me, from all of his season 1 episodes to now. His role here, in season 3 specifically, is to watch and learn. And She watches through him, watches him watch, and he is the vehicle through which she makes meaning of Herself all over again through new eyes. Ties it all together.

[More could be said on this about this being the Owner's on-boarding - the exact word he uses to describe this later on in 4.11. But if I start up again I don't know where I'll stop so I need to move on for now.]

The Owner's arc is pretty much done here anyhow. He goes around again and eventually he starts to understand. Starts to! He sees himself in the Manager's place, dead on the floor. He sees himself as the Lobby Boy, cowering in the corner. He sees himself as the gibbering creature.

You're so close to understanding.

THE OWNER: No. No! As the lobby passes I see my own reflection at my feet. The Hotel begins pulsing rhythmically. THE MANAGER (echoing): I see her standing here in the void, fear carved into her face. THE LOBBY BOY (echoing): I see him, and the fear turns into awful understanding. THE OWNER (echoing): Killer and killed. Predator and predated. Ashes to ashes.

The Owner becomes them all one by one, and they, in death, become each other. Cycle through being each other, it seems. Here is the moment of understanding. They are all one in the same. None of them are separate from or above death. They are not separate from the Hotel – they are the Hotel, split into distinct parts which are separate yes, but inextricable from Her. A long silence passes before:

THE HOTEL: The mountain has been weathered. Do you see? MANAGER/LOBBY BOY/OWNER: Yes. THE HOTEL: My will. My purpose. You kill for me. MANAGER/LOBBY BOY/OWNER: Yes. THE HOTEL: You die for me. MANAGER/LOBBY BOY/OWNER: Yes. THE HOTEL: Darkness is the universes natural state. MANAGER/LOBBY BOY/OWNER: We are the light, one and separate, existing briefly, extinguished and anguished. THE HOTEL: Now, at the end, our work can begin. Front desk bell DINGS.

AaaaaAAAAA!!!!! AAAAAH!!! THIS. THIS IS MY TOP FAVORITE SEQUENCE IN THE PODCAST EVER. This is what got me. I already liked the series since I'd made it up to this point, but this is what made it feel special to me. The timewarp end-beginning stuff, the interconnected self, the cosmic nature and presence of the Hotel Herself, all of it resonated somewhere deep in me. This contextualizes the entire thing for me in one line I think about Frequently:

Darkness is the universe's natural state.

That is why I honed in so hard on the light/dark fire/death imagery. The implication that darkness, void, nothingness, death - that all of that is a resting point. The light is an aberration, something new and anomalous which exists for a time before resetting back to default.

The way I picture the Hotel is as a cosmic entity of, well. Cosmic proportions. Too vast to comprehend on a meaningful level. She's not the representation of death in general, she's simply a part of the universe that embodies some of the void. The space between.

After all, a hotel is a place between where you started and where you want to go, isn't it? You go there, you stay there, you leave there. A candle is lit, it burns, it dies. Leaving only cold, empty darkness behind.

It's the inherent contradiction that makes the Hotel Herself in my mind. She exists as an entity, yet is as a void. Symbolically representative of death, yet she contains life and light within her in the form of the guests and the Staff. From her void, she Becomes in infinite fractalling, spiralling shapes. Hotels and lobbies and rooms and doors. Something from an underlying nothing.

Note, I don't mean the terms 'empty' 'void' and 'nothing' as derogatory. She is not hollow (though she does contain hollows). In terms of symbolism, 'nothing' is as much Something as 'something' is. It's like...In art, you have negative space. It's defined by being the absence of something. The interplay of negative and positive space creates the artwork. That's what I'm getting at with the light/dark stuff here.

Another food for thought: How about 'light' in terms of seeing, or perception? Not only does the Hotel take on infinitely many forms in shape, but she also influences and manipulates how she is perceived. The guests, Staff, and New Crew all perceive the Hotel differently - I made a post about this subject a while ago that you can read, even! [That post is outdated now re: the New Crew stuff at the end, but I thought it worth including anyway.]

Incidentally, I think the Hotel does have trouble seeing back at the Staff. She knows them inside and out, don't get me wrong, and she can twist them any way she chooses. But they have gotten out of her grasp before. Her tensions with the Manager and the Owner in season 4 come to mind, she has trouble seeing things from their perspective and vice versa. The Hotel is above them, and that is its own position with its own perspective. The limitless is, ironically, limited.

Now let's talk about the Mountain.

The mountain has been weathered. Do you see?

It's the most predominant recurring motif of the season alongside the fire. I consider it complementary and even entwined with the fire. Firstly, on its own, I consider it to represent structure. The mountain is at once something to be scaled and something to be weathered. In both (contradictory) cases, it is playing within space. The painting process, as opposed to the proverbial color palette.

It directly represents the structure of the Hotel as, like, a hotel - the Staff's roles each represent a floor. The Manager is the lobby, the entryway, the ground/first floor. This is why she has to be the one to search for the place the Hotel will be in the forest, why she has to introduce the season and the series (she opens season 1, too!) while the Lobby Boy is already just kinda...there when his turn comes up.

Second floor is the guest floor, a horizontally infinite maze of hotel rooms, hallways and doors. This is the midpoint, the journey from life to death. Of course, the deaths don't have to happen here, but many do. This floor is a role of its own. It exists dedicated to this purpose. Then, there's the third floor. A dark office that is at once a void yet also filled with paperwork, desks, computers, so on. As I write this, I realize I said all this in the last post so I won't drag this out.

Point is, as we ascend, we zoom out more. The lobby is only ever the lobby. It's a personal, one-on-one entryway. The second floor is broader – there are many rooms for many guests. Only one may check in on a given night, but since time works differently here, all the guests are already there and already dying and already dead etc etc. The third office overlooks the floors beneath it, overseeing not just the guests but the Staff, too. What's above the third floor? Darkness.

These correspond directly to the Staff's roles and we've had PLENTY going on across this season that makes those connections as well. The Manager in 3.2 Hammering Bones experiencing the building of the Hotel first-person style or the Lobby Boy's whole thing kind of tying him to the burning rooms, for example.

[Stray thought: If I wanted to get real artsy with it I could talk about the hierarchy here not just a physical building structure and corporate structure, but also as structure of the human body - Starting from the ground, standing firm as the Manager does, going up to the hands which build, to eyes that watch, to the brain that is. well. everything. But thaaaaaat's leaning a bit too into my own personal projections as I see barely any canon basis for this so. Take or leave at your discretion. I just adore symbolic trios.]

Form and light. Mass and shape. The Hotel as a tiered yet deeply interconnected structure containing fire and light that exists in service of snuffing out the fires that enter her. Do you see my vision here?

Weathering the mountain is grinding down 'something' into 'nothing.'

When the Staff have all been weathered, they are Her again.

There's a little bit more to the ending of this episode, echoes of the old Managers, Lobby Boys, Owners, ending with:

THE HOTEL: …We hope you enjoyed your stay with us. Your Hotel for the night. We hope you'll enjoy all your nights with us. THE MANAGER/LOBBY BOY/OWNER/HOTEL: WELCOME! The Hotel theme plays over credits.

This is a lovely ending to the season and I like it very much. I apologize that I don't have much to say about it beyond that, I just got so lost in the symbolism sauce back there.

I still have more to talk about, actually, while I'm still here. Before I spoil and rot in this text post. It's been 7 long pages now but there's still work to be done before the skin sloughs off my bones. Because in all my talking about the Hotel as she exists, her how and her form and all that, I never really talked about the Hotel Herself, did I?

Maybe I did a little, here and there, but that's just not enough for me. The Hotel Herself is such a character and while she's always been here in this season, yes, we don't get a lot of her directly. And there are still questions that might arise from the whole 'the Hotel is also the Staff and they are all each other' thing that need answering.

Namely, why would she do this in the first place?

[Well, aside from the whole 'well there wouldn't be a story at all otherwise' thing]

The Hotel exists as. ah. the Hotel. Like I said earlier, she chooses that form for Herself, that's who and what she is! A hotel is that positive space 'something' and it has a structure, a prescription just like the archetypes of the Owner, the Manager, and the Lobby Boy do. She has many variations, from a cabin to a rental home, to a dingy roadside motel to the fanciest most elaborate 5 star resort, but these are all her own kind of instancing as defined in my previous post. The only difference is that she, at the highest level, exists simultaneously as all of these instances at once and thus has an eternal awareness of Herself that the Staff do not.

I draw a distinction between the Hotel Herself and Madam Hotel because of this. To me they are NOT interchangeable. Madam Hotel is a specific instance, a specific form that is her, but not all of her. Not fully. She seems more...cloudy, I suppose, as Madam Hotel. Everything is all new to her. Existing in a human body is new to her, seeing things from this perspective is new to her, and she lacks the cosmic clarity of the Hotel Herself in her vast endless entirety.

Still, she retains the same personality. And I really, really want to talk about the Hotel's personality. She's so fun!

She is endlessly curious, always excited for novelty. She likes watching the lights inside her twinkle and interact just as much as she likes putting them out. ALL of it is wonderful fun to her. There's an infectious enthusiasm about her in her season 4 narrations, where we see her fully in her element as Herself. Some excerpts:

[Stretching noise] MMMMMMMM-MM! Sometimes you just have to stretch out and take up some space, am I right? And we have THREE guests tonight! THREE! They aren't getting a room though, so I thought it would be okay to to relax a little, let it all hang out. Well, let some of it hang out, anyway. Really explore the notion of unwinding. My lobby is still rooted firmly, I mean we do have to meet the guests halfway you know. But tonight I just let myself unspool up and up and up and up up up up [giggles] ohhh it's really almost just like doodling. Filling in the fiddly-bits with scrabbly brick and twisted metal and I'm even experimenting with the windows tonight. Kind of greasy and yellow, I don't know, stained with nicotine or some other poison. Just one of those little subtle touches that's more for me than the guests. They don't notice almost anything. Sillies. They just see me as a normal old building, red carpet under an awning.

[4.8 AJ, Taylor, and Wayne]

I lay down, lounging on the side of a very green and bushy highway by an airport. I'm the kinda place people go when they don't have anywhere else to go. Or don't want anyone to know where they went. I fill my dull yellow paint with cracks, for character. The staff barely even have uniforms here, and they look pretty rough themselves. Gotta look the part, right? I put the Lobby Boy's Supply Closet around back this time. The lobby is pretty small, but the fresh air will do him good.

[4.11 The Owner - V]

Look at how much FUN she's having being herself!!!!!! I love her so much!!!! Each instance is an experiment and exploration in self-creation. Okay, hang on, let me have one more. I know the bonus episodes aren't canon, but The Garden has stuck in my interpretation of the Hotel Herself since it aired, let me have this.

My hands shoved knuckle deep into the cool, dark soil of the universe. I flex my digits and churn it into a place something could grow. I plant seeds there and nurture them best I can with water and food and little lights. There are things that live down there that suck up mud and chew on slime and help it all flourish. It's an entire ecosystem. Carefully balanced and tended too. I don't know anything about plants or gardening so I have to make up the rules as I'm figuring them out.

I won't rehash the whole episode but the whole thing really gets across that she is at once the garden and the gardener, every single part. The metaphor of the garden, of growing plants and flowers and hoping for the best, figuring it out as you go, feels SO in-line with what we see of her in the main episodes.

Back to my point, the Staff are integral parts of the Hotel. How could you have a Hotel without Staff to run it? They are instruments whose tones and timbres affect the sound of the night's composition.

They are her, but they are also themselves, too. The reason they can individuate is to allow for new variations, new shapes and forms, a new angle to look from or new idea to explore. I realize this paragraph runs the risk of getting meta very very quickly but I don't know how else to explain my thoughts here. In-universe, the Hotel Herself made these constructs, but if they were all the same, they'd be only darkness!

It at once excites and frustrates her when their tensions come to a head. She tries to bond with the Manager and the two ABSOLUTELY DO NOT see eye to...eye...The Owner goes completely off the rails in his breakdown. Even the Lobby Boy sides with the Manager and is starting to show signs now of getting a backbone.

The Hotel takes on her own roles, then, in responding to them. Becomes at once the workplace and the workplace CEO who is so obscenely rich they are effectively disconnected from reality and consequently the people working at the company. She is the matriarch of the family, for all of the good and bad that entails in her dynamic with the Manager. [This is why I kinda took the punishment angle in the first post of this analysis series. I don't view it that way anymore, not fully, but I feel this is an important part of their relationship as it currently stands.]

Through it all, even then, the constant push and pull is part of the fun! The contradictions, the interplay of something and nothing...I feel like I'm starting to repeat myself. On the one hand, I feel like I have so, so much more to say that I didn't even scratch the surface of yet. On the other...I feel like I've said the same things three times over.

Fitting, sure. But I'll have to end this post at some point. I'm getting tired. My vision is blurring. And on the metaphorical side, something something turning into a pile of rotten flesh on the floor something something.

One last, laaaast thing for now: I've gone over the cycle, the endless loop, the endlessness, all that good stuff. But the Hotel Herself also has linearity of her own. She goes from an it, from the Powers That Be, distant and impossible to understand, to the Hotel Herself, present and full of verve and energy and personality. She revisits her origin, but from a perspective of herself in time in which she already understands everything.

She's always been here, and all that. I just find that really poignant and I wanted to get into it more but couldn't find alllll the words I wanted.

I'd love to keep writing more stuff like this, it's been an absolute blast for me. Reading the transcripts, listening to the episodes, getting my little snippets in the word doc and writing about them...I hope you've enjoyed reading my work just as much. Like I said at the top, it means a lot even if you just, like, skimmed through. Thank you so much for your time and have a good one :-)

[tellthemeerkatsitsfine]

I listened to Elis James and John Robins on the Comedian’s Comedian podcast, as I somewhat recently passed the point in their radio show when they recorded it. It was a really good episode, even by the standards of that podcast, which are high. Very little messing around with basic explanations of stuff that we could find on their Wikipedia pages anyway, they jump straight in with analysis.

I cut out a few clips as I was listening. I meant to write a paragraph or so about each of them. I am coming back here after finishing the post to say I ended up writing a lot more than that. This one gets out of hand. It mainly stays on the topic of the podcast episode and the radio show, occasionally veers off into some personal stories of my own, makes tenuous connections between the two. That's what's below the cut that I'm adding because not everyone needs to be subjected to that.

I particularly liked this one, from the very beginning:

First of all, Elis James definitely has met another person who will start a radio episode by sighing and just saying whatever's actually in their mind instead of trying for slick broadcasting. Elis knows him very well, the mother of his children is frequently recording lines to put in that other broadcaster's shows. However, there is the key difference that Daniel Kitson's doing that on an obscure radio station (well, two obscure radio stations as he used to do Triple R in Melbourne, but hasn't for a long time, so I mainly mean Resonance FM in London) that doesn't pay him any money, while John Robins is doing it on a commercial radio station that was presumably a significant source of his income and is definitely the main source of his career success. It's definitely more a risk to try in that context.

Anyway, I'd like to put the above clip next to this one:

I'm now three years into following this radio show/listening to various podcasts and other things they've done alongside it, trying to go mostly in chronological order, and I would say they do this in one form or another approximately every six months. Just explicitly state the status dynamic between them, which is that Elis is more successful but John is funnier, this creates a couple of sources of mild tension that can be funny to listen to and give them something to play into as a double act, but it also balances out enough so their entire relationship isn't going to implode like Jon Richardson and Russell Howard. It's always a bit weird when they actually say that out loud, comedians aren't really supposed to tell us what level of status they've decided to assign themselves/each other for any given moment.

Elis James frequently says John Robins is a better comedian than him, which also a bit weird because it's the sort of thing you'd say as a joke, but he never sounds like he's joking, and it's... I mean, I was going to say it's objectively true, I guess it can't be given how subjective comedy is, but it is pretty clear cut. And it seems to genuinely not bother Elis James, which I used to think was odd, but I guess it makes sense. I've been teammates with people whom I know are better athletes than me, and we can still be friends, and if anyone asks who's better I can be honest about that. It sure would make that easier if I also somehow won more medals than they did (to continue the somewhat stretched analogy of Elis James having more TV work so that balances the scales), though sports tend to be more of a meritocracy than arts so that doesn't really happen.

There's also truth in the thing John said about how one of them has to come up with content for the radio show - they're on the same official footing, co-hosts rather than calling anyone a sidekick or whatever, but the vast majority of the funniest stuff gets said by John, and more than that, John drives most of the discussions. He usually comes in with more features and stuff prepared, he establishes a lot of the running jokes and keeps them going, he's the one who will lead most of their offshoots into weird little sketches and characters. His timing is incredible sometimes, every once in a while he'll have an episode where he's got Lee Mack levels of being able to jump on everything that gets said almost immediately and be funny every time. He seems like he can decide, pretty much based on how he's feeling at the moment but possibly also based on a sense for how much potential something has, whether to wrap up a thread in one incisive sentence or to draw it out. And it's almost always John making that decision (if it isn't the producer telling them to get on with it, that is, but it's rarely Elis' decision). Sometimes I can hear John work out the comedic potential in something they're talking about before Elis does, and Elis will start to move on but John will bring it back and guide him toward it, and eventually manage to push Elis into whatever joke John had figure out would be funny but only if Elis said it.

Having said that, and this is a tangent but discussing whether Elis James is funny just made me think of it, I've been wanting to give him credit for something. At some episode sometime in 2016, Elis James was telling a story about someone he admired, and the story was about something fairly serious, and at the end of it, John asked "Is he a laugh?", which was quite a funny thing to say in the context, it's annoying me that I can't remember the exact story but it was something like that. And it was funny to hear John be so efficiently dismissive of the sort of weird story. But later in the episode, John told one of his stories about one of those vaguely depressing things he does, like obsessively do his taxes four months in advance or drink rum alone at 2 AM and get sad while watching Queen documentaries - one of those types of stories - and at the end of it, Elis asked "Are you a laugh?" And after that, for several months, Elis James brought that back the exactly perfect number of times. I don't know how he did it, how he got it so perfect every time. He didn't drop it for long enough for regular listeners to forget that he'd made this a running joke, so it would lose its power as a callback. But he didn't say it often enough for it to start to get overused and less funny (not that those guys would ever try to milk more from one bit than it should be expected to bear... but of course we're all on email). There is such a small sweet spot, such little room for error in the frequency with which you can bring back a joke and not fall into either of those traps, and he got it perfect every time. Every time he'd said it, I'd have a moment of surprise because he'd left it just barely past the point at which it had been long enough since I'd heard it for it to get really funny again, and every time, I'd take a moment to admire his timing. He kept it going for quite a while, occasionally responding to John's depressing anecdotes from his own life with "Are you a laugh?" So, well done to Elis James, he can be funny too. Also, I mean, obviously he is regularly quite funny on the radio show, just not as funny as John Robins. It's fine, most people aren't as funny as John Robins. I'm not as good at underhook setups as my friend I hung out with the other night, but it's fine, we manage to get on with our lives.

Anyway, that was only very tenuously related to the topic of this post, let me see if I can find my way back. John Robins and Elis James having an odd balance of tensions created by John being funnier but Elis being more successful. I'm not sure that's as true now as it was in early 2014 to early 2017, which covers the period of radio episodes I've heard so far. At that time, Elis had recently had major roles in two sitcoms (Crims and Josh). He'd had one Welsh-language stand-up special released on the BBC and I think was working on recording another one. He'd done some panel show spots, more than John I think. I think he's started on his BBC television travel show with Miles Jupp. He'd gone to Europe to do TV and radio things about the Welsh football team. John Robins, meanwhile, had released the audio from a couple of his stand-up shows himself on Bandcamp, had been on Mock the Week twice and one of those times was a fucking disaster, a couple appearances on As Yet Untitled, and I think he occasionally got on things like The News Quiz but less often than Elis James did. I think he had a pretty good stand-up career going by then, but it hadn't really translated to other stuff. And John complained at times that he didn't get as many reviews and publicity as his stand-up profile deserved, though it's hard to tell if that's true or just his bias. He had a job for a while doing TV warm-up gigs, but then he got fired for what sounds like a combination of drinking too much and being too harsh for the "keep it light" atmosphere. The disparity between his profile and Elis' was probably for two main reasons: 1) Elis has the significant USP of being one of the only comedians who's fluent in the Welsh language so that gets him some stuff, and 2) the reasons outlined in that second audio clip about John having pissed everyone off.

I think their positions are different these days, though. I'm into the March 2017 episodes right now, in a few months John Robins is going to win a Perrier Award, so he can't keep complaining about not having a significant enough stand-up profile after that. That turned into a Netflix special, a significantly bigger deal than Elis' Welsh-language BBC iPlayer special. And then in 2018 he hosts a panel show, which I have downloaded but haven't watched yet, I'll wait until I get there chronologically. To be honest I'm slightly dreading getting there because I have a feeling it might be terrible. I don't think it was hugely successful because I'd never heard of it before I started looking up John Robins things this year, and I went really deep down the panel show rabbit hole in the last few years, I watched some quite obscure ones but never came across this. It also only lasted one season. But still, he hosted a panel show on Dave. That's a TV career.

And now, obviously, he's on Taskmaster. And seems to be playing large rooms in his latest stand-up tour. A tour that I'd assumed would get filmed for another TV special, though he's mentioned recently that he's planning to put it on Bandcamp like his earlier shows, and I do appreciate him keeping it real for us despite now being a Taskmaster star with a huge tour (as much as this shouldn't make sense because there can be visual humour in stand-up, I tend to prefer audio-only stand-up that's usually closer to how it actually sounded in the room, over filmed versions that get more edits). On the other hand, Elis had a TV series about Welsh comedy a few years ago. A podcast with some football players. I've just looked it up and apparently he hosts a football-based TV show on Sky, so that's nice. But the gap in TV-based success has probably closed.

But that discussion they had in that second audio clip - about John Robins not getting stuff because he's (rightly and justifiably) reaping the consequences of being a dick with a substance abuse problem, and Elis James valiantly taking on the role of Robins Apologist - that really nails, for me, what I enjoy so much about their dynamic. I think that my favourite dynamic. I fucking love anywhere where two people get that one going. That dynamic that's summed up by this post htat I remember from ages ago and have somehow just managed to find because Tumblr's terrible search function decided to work for me today:

It was about a year ago that I had the extremely clever idea of adding that Taskmaster screenshot to that other person's text post, but I maintain that it's hilarious. Guy Montgomery and David Correos were so much fun because of this. At the time, I considered instead using a screenshot from Taskmaster UK season 5, with the speech bubble pointing at Mark Watson looking at Nish Kumar. There are so many example of two people whose comedy show interactions have been hilarious because they're based on one person making terrible decisions and the other person looking at them like "I'd follow him to hell and back but I wish he'd just stop going there." And not always a him, it doesn't have to be a him! Danielle Ward and Margaret Cabourn-Smith had some good "I'd follow her to hell and back but I wish she'd just stop going there" energy on Do the Right Thing (with Danielle Ward, of course, in the Correos/Kumar/Robins position).

I'm sure I realized until right now, as I write this, how much this might be my favourite dynamic in comedy because it also characterizes my favourite relationships in my own life. And I am genuinely not sure whether that's a me thing or whether most people can slot most of their relationships into one where someone's the David and someone's the Guy, in terms of who keeps driving things to hell and who follows out of loyalty but also apologizes. When I was in high school, and also for most of my twenties, my nickname among my friends was "loose cannon" because when they were trying to be careful and diplomatic in the political battles within the increasingly high levels that we reached in the sporting world, I was the person who once yelled at my coach in a hallway because I was so angry at the way he treated the athletes, and had a letter in my coaching file by age 22 that accused me of not caring about common courtesy. A letter from a coach who refused to work with me anymore because I was insufficiently courteous, so my best friend had to liaise with him on everything while asking me to please not upset more people and further alienate our team. And I have wonderful friends who tell other people that I don't hate them, really, I just seem standoffish because I'm shy, and later on they tell me that I really need to work on my poker face/ability to be around people I hate without making it incredibly obvious that I hate them. In addition to being genuinely shy. When we tried to get someone from my team elected to the provincial board, we knew from the beginning that 1) I would do all the actual work for both the election campaign and, if successful, the role itself, because I know and care the most about the issues and am good at admin stuff, and 2) I could not be the candidate because I hate most people and everyone I hate knows I hate them because I have no diplomacy skills.

Though I do also have one friend who coaches a team in another city and he knows he can call me pretty much any time and ask me for pretty much any favour and I will do it, and I will edit his emails and do his research for him to help him fight his stupid pointless battles and to try to keep him on top of things even though he can't keep track of anything and keeps making wild badly planned decisions, and people ask me why I don't just let him fail and walk away, and I say I know he seems like a brash asshole with no ability to think ahead, but he's a really good guy, really, once you get to know him. It's got back to me that most people in our sports community assume I am or was sleeping with him, as that seems like the only explanation for why I would stick by a guy who's clearly an idiot. The truth is much weirder, he was my university teammate in 2013 and one time he was in my corner when I had a panic attack in the middle of a match at the university national championships, and he saved me and got me through it and I managed to go back and win, and that's why I had to do things like sleep on a hotel room floor for a week in Atlantic City because he'd talked me into going on a provincial team trip where he hadn't booked enough rooms (or planned anything), because he'd earned my eternal loyalty. Oh God, I just remembered how during that trip he stopped to gamble in front of children, and I ended up yelling at him in the middle of the street in Atlantic City, "You know, I argue with people about you!" And he said, "What people?" And I said "People who think you're not responsible enough to run a provincial team trip! Which is everyone! I get into big arguments with them and you make it hard when you do shit like this!" But a few years later he was the first person I called when our mutual friend died because I realized in that moment, that's the person I trust most in the world.

Anyway. What was I talking about? Elis James and John Robins. I think I was talking about Elis James and John Robins. Okay, turns out listening to people talk about the friendships that you base on blind loyalty and apologism brought some stuff up for me. I think I have, in recent weeks, at times blamed my overly emotional posting - my posts that start out as comedy analysis but then go into oversharing about my person life - on the fact that I'm going through some emotionally difficult stuff as I'm trying to avoid drinking. But that's not the case here, I think I was always going to go on that tangent. I haven't seen my friend from out of town in a while, I'm a bit worried about him. I think he might be ruining his own life again. Something was going to connect to that. Rhod Gilbert reminds me of him.

Anyway. Anyway. Elis James and John Robins. Solid double act dynamic. Weird balance of status and tensions, enjoyable running thread of loyalty and apologism. Amazingly, I'm not done, here's another clip I cut out of that ComCom interview:

This is the second time I've heard John Robins tell this story, and I had the same reaction as the first time, which was: Oh my God oh my God oh my God, how were you ever able to sleep again? The horrible sharp pain of this story keeps me awake at night, just imagining what it would be like if that happened to me, and it didn't even happen to me. How could you ever sleep if it did? John Robins frequently tells stories from what he calls the "shame well", those things that happen where you obsess over how you did something wrong and regret it. John is constantly making jokes (or just statements) about how he lives a life mired in shame and regret. But still, I don't see how he can just casually throw this one out there like it's just another shame well story. It's so much worse. It's the worst one I've heard. I would hide under my bed for the rest of my life.

John Robins went on Adam Buxton's podcast in 2016, I have listened to that episode and it's not great. You want to talk about dynamics created by a differential in status - I think that one went way too far, to the point where nothing could really happen. There was this huge discrepancy of John Robins meeting his hero, which will often make someone sort of adorably giddy but not in this case, he just seemed a bit out of it and subdued. While on the other side, Adam Buxton appeared to have no idea who John Robins was, so not much discussion got generated. It wasn't a complete disaster, but I could understand why John didn't plug that one on his radio show, despite plugging most of his podcast appearances.

Anyway though, if I can manage to get past the sheer horror of the first part of that clip, the second part was sort of nicely validating. Because I am slightly weary of how much my trip down the Elis and John rabbit hole has got quite intense quite quickly, even by my standards of comedy obsession, and possibly taken a turn for the parasocial. I mean, I am currently writing a multi-page post about an interview they gave and it includes several paragraphs about my own life that are only tenuously related, in a way that I can say "Look I do the same thing as these guys I've never met."

The intensity of that has definitely been accelerated by the fact that I happened to, by a genuine coincidence, get into this show at the same time as I decided to try to slow down and/or stop drinking, and God, a lot of the ways in which John Robins talks about alcohol and anxiety resonates. And yep, I'd feel weird admitting it because I know it's sort of inherently creepy to say "they feel like my friends" about some people you've never met, but since John Robins said it first I think I can admit those headphones do make a difference. Might be another reason why I prefer the Bandcamp comedy to a Netflix special.

They touch on this throughout the ComCom interview - not so much in the clips I cut out but throughout the whole thing, it really is worth a listen if you're interested in this - the way their radio show gets so many letters from people who thank them for talking so honestly about mental health issues, people who say they've dealt with their own difficult shit and find this radio show has helped. Probably lots of shows get similar letters, but I think it's safe to say this one gets more than most. The Bugle used to read out their correspondence and Andy Zaltzman wasn't getting people every day saying "Thank you for making me feel less alone in my depression."

They really are good at that, at hitting the exact right balance of honest without being overbearing about it. For a show that spends so much time talking about symptoms of mental health problems, they almost never use the words "mental health". They never sit down and say "let's have a talk about what it's like to live with anxiety." They just describe their week, in more honest detail than you would normally hear on commercial radio. And leave in the parts where they panic about every decision they've ever made and get drunk alone in the middle of the night and cry because they think they've done everything wrong. And by "they", I mostly mean John.

I do like their word, "darkness". I didn't realize, when I first watched The Darkness of Robins in 2022 (a show John first performed in 2017, won a large award for it, released as a Netflix special in 2018, but I watched it in 2022), that that title's been around for ages. Elis James made a joke in an early radio episode, from 2014, about how someday, John should do a show called The Darkness of Robins, where he just lays bare all his anxieties, all his weird toxic quirks and control freak tendencies and oceans of shame and regret and various addictions/self-medication and cynicism and bitterness and anger and deep self-loathing. Elis said this as a joke, the joke being that you can't just put all that in a comedy show. But they kept the joke going for years. John did the Richard Herring podcast, in which he talked a bit about some of the more difficult mental health struggles he's had, and when he plugged it on the radio show, instead of saying "I talk about some of my more difficult mental health struggles", he said, "There's a fair bit of the darkness of Robins in it." And then he started casually referencing it on the show, describing a night when he might have drank too much and had a panic attack with a causal and sort of joke-y "I got overcome by the darkness for a little while." And then they started describing those emails from listeners who say it resonated with "[Person] has emailed in to say they've been afflicted by a touch of the darkness, sorry to hear that." And I just love that word. It's used with enough genuineness to make it clear that they're not making fun of mental health problems, they really do have them and it does feel dark. But also with enough irony - obviously there is irony in using a term as grandiose as "The Darkness of Robins" to describe panicking at 3 AM about something bad you said in school - to make it feel like it's not an after school special. I also like that they found a way to let that word mean no one has to name a diagnosis, to narrow their issue down to a loaded term like "I suffer from clinical depression", when not everyone who has that is diagnosed, not everyone is comfortable naming it, not everyone finds it easy to separate their symptoms into clear-cut causes. They can just use a shorthand like "the darkness".

It has been good, to have this radio show for the last couple of months that have brought some darkness into particularly sharp focus, as I decided to quickly remove the maladaptive self-medication. I've tried to stop writing about it so often the way I did earlier in the year, but as a little update on how that's going, still bad. Not enjoying it. Getting mildly parasocial about some guys on the radio might not be hugely healthy, but it's a healthier coping mechanism than whiskey, I guess. I'd really like some whiskey. Anyway I'm fine.

I do think that's why I find that Adam and Joe story so incredibly painful, though. I get paranoid about whether I get too parasocial about the comedians I like, I try really hard to be self-aware about it and be super clear that I know what I'm getting is a curated public persona and I do not actually know these people, and I am mortified at the thought of being one of those fans who thinks they actually are my friends and therefore they should know something about me. No one should know me. I hang out on Tumblr because it's the one social media platform where I know no famous people are searching their own name or anything, everyone's just an anonymous nerd. The thought of anyone knowing me makes me want to hide under my bed for the rest of my life. Though having said that, John Robins and Elis James are always very nice about people who write in with darkness emails.

Amazingly, I'm still not done this post:

Throwing this in just to say, once again, that I'm sorry for having also thought this but in my defense it's not just me. I am truly sorry that when I first heard John Robins got sober, my first thought was... but he's still going to be bitter and angry and annoying and plagued by regret and self-loathing, right? Because that's kind of the cornerstone of his comedy and is what I love so much about it. I mean obviously I want him to be happy, but could he release a couple more stand-up hours first?

I feel genuinely guilty for having thought that, especially because I do hold the sort of political belief that it's bullshit to say one must suffer to make great art, van Gogh did his best work once his mental illness was being treated, and all that. I do believe it applies to more contemporary things too. Jason Isbell made his best music after getting sober. I think James Acaster's best stand-up show might be his current ones, and it's a "let me tell you how therapy has made me healthier" show. But John Robins did base a lot of his comedy on being bitter and angry and annoying and plagued by regret and self-loathing. That's sort of my favourite thing about it.

I felt slightly better when I re-listened to his 2014 show (recorded in 2015) This Tornado Loves You, and was reminded that he admitted that himself:

That's John Robins talking about how his comedy has suffered because he's too happy in his relationship with Sara Pascoe, a relationship that has ended a 20-year search for happiness. And it goes with the clip I posted before that from the ComCom episode, of Elis James saying it's nice that John's relationship with Sara Pascoe recently ended, because it's given the quality of his comedy a real boost. And maybe they should just ruin John's life regularly to keep it that way. So it's not just me who had that horrible thought.

I'm feeling the need to clarify, once again, that of course I don't genuinely think that's a good thing. Obviously it's good that he got sober, for his sake but also, reports suggest his latest show Howl is excellent. I think Howl was written partly while he was drinking and partly while he wasn't, but performed after he'd quit, and the fact that it's done so well suggests that people can, in fact, make their best stuff after getting their shit together (I haven't actually heard the show, he's said he'll release it on Bandcamp sometime soon-ish, probably). And even if his comedy did get worse, which it clearly hasn't, it would still be best that he quit drinking because suffering wouldn't be worth great art, even if it were required for it. That's how it works. Drinking is bad for you. I definitely don't want to drink any whiskey right now. It's fine.

But. But. I recently re-listened to John Robins' episode of Isy Suttie's podcast, The Things We Do For Love. This is a rare instance that I've heard of a comedian being genuinely drunk while recording something. It's happened before that comedians will claim to be a bit loose and tipsy, but not usually so drunk that they're slurring their words. John Robins on Isy Suttie's podcast was slurring his words. He kept losing track of the question and interrupting at inappropriate moments. It's one of those things that makes me say "Oh, yeah, you really needed to quit drinking. This really was affecting your career, that's just a guy who showed up to work too drunk to effectively do his job."

But it was really funny. It made me laugh so many times. At one point he gets furious because Isy Suttie asked him whether he knows how to drive a car. Later on he threatens to murder her and Elis for their sitcom money, which would have been an okay joke but tbere was a bit of a sense of line crossing when he also threatened their child. (Fun side note that has nothing to do with John being drunk: at one point Isy tells a story about her ex-boyfriend, John Robins asks what the ex's name is but she refuses to say, which is weird because I know. It's weird that I know something about Isy Suttie that John Robins didn't, at least on that day.) It's a mess. It's hilarious. I feel vaguely guilty for finding that so funny, the same way I do about the episodes of No More Jockeys where Mark Watson gets properly drunk - that guy's probably got a problem too, I probably shouldn't laugh at it so much, but I also find those the funniest episodes. I have the say, the episode of Adam Buxton's podcast where John Robins was sort of awkwardly reserved would probably have been funnier if John had gotten drunk before it.

My best defense for that is I would not want John Robins to actually be drunk when he performs stand-up, or certainly when he writes it. Being drunk made him funnier on a podcast interview where he's supposed to tell off-the-cuff stories, because off-the-cuff stories get better when someone's filter has been broken down. But also, in his actual stand-up, or even his actual radio broadcasting, John Robins is doing a thousand little things at once to make what he's saying funnier. He's the master of the well-timed pause and the carefully chosen word. None of that would be any good drunk. So I maintain that you don't need to suffer addiction to make great art. It might help a bit to make funny tangents on an interview podcast, but not the actual substance. Also, however funny I found it, I don't think he was proud of that one. On the radio show, John plugged his appearance on Isy Suttie's podcast before he did it, but not one word about it on the radio after it had been recorded, even though most of those things he'll plug both before and once they're released. Though in a later episode of her podcast, Isy mentioned that the first guest she'd had on was a very drunk John Robins, who called her the next day desperately asking her to cut out the sexually explicit story he'd told using an old girlfriend's real name.

And she did cut it out, it's not in the podcast, as it shouldn't be, because it's not responsible to tell sexually explicit stories in something that's being recorded and will be published, if the audience knows the real name of the person you're talking about. Having said that, I've finally reached the point in the radio show where John's doing WIPs of The Darkness of Robins, where he does just that about Sara Pascoe, and I'm having a bit of trouble morally justifying how much I like the show in spite of that. I think I'll re-watch that show tomorrow, for the first time in nearly a year and a half. I'll see how that goes. I remember it as being very, very good. But also, in the last few weeks, I've had three different people watch it because of my posts about John Robins, and all of them came back to me to point out that the stories about Sara Pascoe are pretty inappropriate to tell on stage. I'm still holding out hope that I'll hear him clarify on the radio show that he did run that stuff by her before saying it publicly, or at least before recording it for Netflix.

Anyway, this post got a bit out of hand. I've tried for the last couple of weeks to slow down on my posting about the Elis/John radio show, and the posting about my personal life, but I seemed to have built up a lot to say and put it all in this one. I'm doing fine.