#presented completely devoid of context

[almightyrozenidiot]

Han Joon-gi is my new favourite knife cat

[iobartach]

"...No, I will not... clone Santa Claus."

[physalian]

Your colloquialisms are ruining the immersion (or, non-contemporary dialogue)

I am no expert here! Whenever I wrote historical fiction it was anachronistic historical fiction. This advice is from a reader’s perspective and from my experience writing high fantasy.

So what’s the deal with immersive dialogue? I’m going to ignore writing dialects and accents and so-called “old English” with the thee, thy, thou and such. Solely focusing here on the narrative telling me this isn’t set in present times, and yet the dialogue being painfully colloquial like present times.

This is coming from a book I had to read set in HRE times. In it, characters were spouting modern curse words, tacking on verbal tics and crutch words like “or something” and “um” and drawing out words like “daaaamn” and “nooooo”. Rip out the dialogue and toss it in a script with zero context and it would read like two high schoolers from 2009, not two adults from the Holy Roman Empire. Which is a problem, because it completely shattered the immersion. —

1. On so-called “formal writing”

Everybody knows that nixing contractions doesn’t do a damn thing to help your writing look more “formal”, it just looks robotic and stiff, right? We’ve gotten past this as a society? There’s a time and a place for replacing contractions with the full words, but not for every single sentence.

I swear this show keeps creeping into my writing advice but here we go. Transformers Prime. The context for Optimus’ dialogue has a lot to do with his aging voice actor, Peter Cullen, and the perception of the character over the decades from the corny 80s paragon hero everyman type leader to the grizzled and wizened old soul type leader. Optimus isn’t “one of the guys,” he’s old. Very old. He’s the dad of the group (one dad, his grumpy medic is the other dad).

So he gets lines like:

“I fear Megatron’s ambition is at its zenith.”

“But if his return is imminent as I fear, it could be a catastrophic.”

“I bore Skyquake no ill-will.”

He doesn’t curse like the other Autobots. His voice only raises in surprise, horror, or rage. He doesn’t go “um/ah/so/but/eh” and always thinks about what he’s going to say well before he says it. Despite him, Ratchet (the dad medic), and Megatron all being very old, Optimus is the only one who’s “proper” and collected and dignified with his lines. The writers didn’t achieve this simply by omitting contractions, he gets them where necessary and removes them when effective (e.g “We do not.” / “We don’t.”)

2. Thesaurus Rex

Continuing with the Optimus example, no other character in that show would use “zenith” unironically. Or “ill-will”. This doesn’t mean crack open and abuse a thesaurus but there’s a huge divide between:

“Megatron’s gone crazy and he’s going to implode soon” and “Megatron’s ambition is at its zenith”.

I can’ think of a better word to use than dignified, perhaps distinguished to describe his dialogue.

He doesn’t say “what?” when he’s confused, he pauses and says something like “please elaborate”.

This is both word choice and a syntax issue so if you’re struggling to fit a non-contemporary vibe for your work, pay attention to both.

3. When to abstain from cursing

There’s something very special about the dialogue in the Lord of the Rings movies: It’s PG-13 so they can’t curse, but if they had, it would have probably ruined the trilogy. These characters are able to yell in rage and anguish, spit vicious insults at their enemies, and stare down armies that are determined to kill them, all while never breaking the immersion.

Insults like:

“Late is the hour in which this conjurer chooses to appear.”

“Keep your forked tongue behind your teeth, you witless worm.”

“Your words are poison.”

And all three were said by or about Grima Wormtongue.

Characters aren’t dumbasses, they’re fools, with the exception of Gollum’s insults toward Sam, the “stupid, fat hobbit”.

Even devoid of name-calling, Denethor absolutely trounces his second son by asking (and I’m paraphrasing) “Is there any man here willing to do his lord’s bidding?” right after Faramir expresses some apprehension about a suicide charge with his remaining soldiers, completely ignoring him and implying that he’s not a real man.

LOTR is full of juicy lines beyond curse words, too. One of my absolute favorites is: “Dark have been my dreams of late” as opposed to “I’ve been having nightmares lately.”

Do you see?? It’s poetry. The motif of Shadow and Darkness as if they’re real, physical things, all the lines of poetry pulled straight from the books like Theoden’s “where is the horse and the rider” monologue just before Helm’s Deep.

It’s dignified.

—

This one was a bit harder to, ironically, put into words without doing a full-blown case study into either franchise’s ability to write dialogue and monologues. I didn’t even talk about Ratchet’s several monologues (one of which was done perfectly in the sound booth on the first take) because Jeffrey Combs has a voice like ambrosia.

TLDR: Immersion goes far beyond your vivid setting descriptors and the clothing or the names and languages. I mostly write fantasy and sci-fi and whenever I read or watch fantasy and sci-fi that isn’t meant to be a world different from our own, or about characters who don’t speak modern English, and they go off with modern slang, syntax, and verbal tics, it just feels sloppy and weak. Pay attention to the following:

Syntax

Modern slang and jargon

Filler words/verbal tics

Curse words/curses

Flat, unmotivated vocab

*All of the quotes were from memory because I watch both of these franchises way too often. So apologies if I got any wrong.

[asphodelles]

Hi, I found your work on Twitter last year and I really love and look up to your art. If you have the time, I wanted to as if there are there any study topics, artists or techniques that have significantly influenced you :')

I'm at a bit of a complete loss on what to study presently so I thought I'd ask my favorite artists, thank you for reading and I completely understand if this is too open ended a question

Thank you!

This isn't the first time I have been asked this question and I suspect this won't be the last so I'll just lay everything out here. Go to a cafe or get a blanket or something because this will not be a short read:

Foundational:

Anatomy: A lot of my foundational anatomy and clothing illustration knowledge was gained from taking classes and doing observational drawing. Because of this, I'm not going to have the best book recommendations but top 2 books I can recommend for getting Started started are Andrew Loomis or RockHe Kim's books on anatomy (huge asterisk here: they're good at teaching you Basics basics like muscle groups and turning forms and extremely general proportions but will not help that much with making your figure drawings less stiff or how to draw fat or especially in the latter's case how to draw women not built like stick bug anime girls but uh I heard the Morpho books are pretty good. genuinely everything I know about drawing fat is from observational drawing/studies because at some point I got sick of my school for only hiring skinny models in their 20s-30s). I have some diagrams drawn by my friend who studied the hell out of these guys below:

Clothing: I don't know any books that can really help on this front I apologize if I find any I'll update this post but pretty much all of my knowledge on drawing clothes boils down to the following rules: Where are the tension points, how stiff or soft is the textile, how is the form underneath the section of clothing behaving, and don't make even spaces between fold groups

All of this is kind of moot though if it isn't applied through study or observational drawing though

Design:

I have to be really careful here because I don't want to deal in absolutes, the only absolute I'm confident espousing is that anyone who tells you there is only a small selection of methods you should follow to execute a specific type of design are objectively incorrect and just haven't figured out alternative if not more effective design solutions to a common problem. The only real Worst Thing I think you could do as a designer is create a pinterest mannequin devoid of a story, disconnected from its context in the world, and lacking in a clear purpose/personality but this too could be easily be disputed if maximising a character’s aesthetic appeal serves a purpose in its context, and my opposition to this design approach is my personal bias as a character designer for entertainment where emphasizing a character’s function and their relationship to said function is usually the goal

I think the 5 best pieces of advice I've ever received when it comes to designing characters are the following:

Try and follow the rule of thirds/general gestalt design principles of contrast

Always consider what it is you're trying to communicate with the character

Create believable transitions and reinforcements between points of interest

(Entertainment related) KISS principle/Keep It Simple, Stupid is your friend, the way a character wears or wields what they wear or wield will communicate their role in the world (who are they?), their relationship to their role (do they like their job? are they good at it? are they a part of an organization with the means to provide them things to perform their role more effectively?) effectively enough. Excessive information that bloats and conflicts with the communication objective weakens design (example: My favourite childhood toy for years was a pokemon plushie. Would I as a stay at home digital artist be wearing it as a keychain on my crusty paint stained polyester pajama pants when I'm at my desk working my job? is wearing it relevant to my character as a person who both no longer is invested in pokemon and is in this context focused entirely on comfort and doing my job? (no)). I think Elden Ring is an excellent example of a game that has visually complex designs but pretty expedient storytelling with its characters for worldbuilding

Study things that aren't just character design, to borrow from Lynn Yaeger borrowing from Sally Singer "If you're interested in fashion learn everything except fashion... Politics, art, painting- anything except fashion". Because people in different disciplines who work with different mediums or fields of study approach problems in different angles you may not have considered which can help give new ideas + often times the stuff you like was inspired by stuff that isn't at all what you would expect or enjoy yourself (To pull from a very popular example, Arcane is a League of Legends joint which was highly influenced by Warcraft which was highly influenced by Warhammer which was basically a giant response to western pop culture of the 1960s and the history of European warfare something something coconut tree).

Character design is kind of a hard thing to Get Good at considering how much of the actual process is super psychological/not bound by a *ton* of absolutes and has to account for medium and function (you kind of just have to have The Sauce) so I don't recommend Just studying independently only (possible, just very difficult). If you can and are interested in learning more about the specifics take some classes taught by people whose styles you fw who both know what they're doing and are good at explaining their process. For design for entertainment you can always check out Concept Design Academy or The Workshop Academy and see who's teaching there

As far as artist inspirations are concerned I think looking up the artists who worked on projects you like are a good starting point to figure out how you want to stylize. Going off of that at least currently my favourite designers/illustrators for entertainment with The Sauce are probably Evening Monteiro, Sergey Kolesov, Mindy Lee, Tonci Zonjic, Sasha Tudvaseva, Claire Hummel, and Yoshitaka Amano

My favourite book currently for tackling character design at least from a narrative consideration is probably Talking Threads: Costume Design for Entertainment Art (one of the authors is my friend and an excellent teacher!) and a lot of the stuff they espouse really helps to take into consideration individual and external factors when designing a character/how they can be used as vehicles for both individual storytelling and worldbuilding, gigantic reference point for my most recent casual project

Besides that the only other way I can really recommend studying character design is to just look at art, history, architecture, nature (pretty much Everything) and think about how ideas and concepts from those things can be applied to or communicated through a design or figure out what it was about a design or designs you like made it appealing

uhh tldr this is just how i as one among millions of artists got to where i am today as of January 16th 2025 my word is not gospel the advice I espoused here may very well spell my downfall tomorrow

[dykedvonte]

The Color of Captain Curly

The color white and Curly are very interesting as we can talk about how white is very bland, neutral and devoid of a lot of connotations in regards to how it is typically used. The function of white is often as a background that makes a lot of more vibrant colors stand out, in and of itself very nothing and easy to stain or impose upon. However, in discussing the function of white as a color or pigment, its subjective use, Curly’s personality and purpose within the crew becomes a lot more critical as does its distinctiveness.

I want to first start off talking about the color white alone. The color white itself is a combination of all the colors on the spectrum, a far cry from the common misconception that white is actually devoid of anything. It is not visible on the color spectrum as it truly is an optical illusion in some way, just like the color pink (but this post isn't about Daisuke). We can make a lot of inferences about something that is not necessarily its own. I think this is a key factor of the function of white as being something that encompasses than is left out, white is simple but faceted. As a color in application it helps tint and lessen tones in a way. This is considered changing the hue of the color creating the ability to make other colors less garish and more cohesive. It is commonly referred to changing the brightness of the color but that is factually incorrect. The brightness does not change but the hue as mentioned before, our perception of it changes but it remains concrete, its own.

When this effect is added to white the color itself with some other color, it can be seen as white being altered by the more vibrant color, however now knowing that white is encompassing rather than devoid, we should rather discuss it as this color brings out what is already there. When white is present, it means all colors of light are being reflected equally, very important for the context of the story.

Keeping in line with all of this and Curly, I want to bring in the board game and how the pieces are being played on a white backdrop. The pieces cannot move on the board without it, it is the path, the guide and what makes those pieces stand out. Even the home bases are not colored with the pieces' own shades but white. White is the most important aspect of the board game and is the constant, win or lose, the path will not change, will not move and shapes the way of play more than anything else. Trying to skirt around it is nearly impossible if you are playing fair. Metaphorically with the pieces being the crew and Curly being the board game path, we know he does not play the game, not actively. We know from flavor text that he is at least present even if not involved just like how the path does not fully affect the way of play but guides, monitors the way the others would strategize and play. It, like Curly, is not something you think of but need to make the whole thing work.

Curly is white (no shit sherlock). The color that is so encompassing that it can feel as though something is being left out. The identity in the crew that tints the others into lighter, more cohesive hues we can see fall apart when they try too hard to impose their colors onto him. In his absence we see the struggle to have their colors be the most present but the issue is they simply cannot exist as they are without white. Subtracting white alters colors completely but it takes much more to completely wash out white by adding something new. There is a consistency we see with Curly in his reactions and way of being both in stressful and mundane environments.

When he is stressed he is typically panicked but forced, very intense rather than completely sputtering as we see his biggest reaction is frustration: He is only gentle with Anya after he is no longer concerned with her or the crews wellbeing with the absence of the gun, he swears, not directly at her, and is focused solely on finding it (not cool dude). Likewise when he goes to stop the crash, he reacts similarly with that calm neutral panic before having a brief moment of lashing out at Jimmy. Here we see him tinted by the others but still wholly encompassed by his own reactions. This is just a small interaction, a minor example really, but is good for understanding the connection of white, Curly and how the color is used to paint his reaction as a character.

Curly is the sum of a lot of the crews parts. You can see a lot of the crew in Curly, not because he absorbs the light of those around him to color him as something distant but because it is already existent and you can see the coat of paint the role of captain covers him in, washed away through his reactions, affects and thoughts. More importantly you can see exactly how he painted the crews personalities in both his presence pre-crash and his absence post crash.

[sophie-frm-mars]

Liberal Dissociative Amnesia

The Cass Review is the most discussed political topic among trans people in the UK right now. The 388 page report by Dr Hillary Cass examines the gender services available to young people in the UK and concludes that young people are being let down, gender services need to be taken out of reach for trans people under 25 and a new system which urges avoiding transition at every turn needs to be created which will refer people at age 25.

I just watched Michael Walker on Novara Media say "I think there are some very difficult questions here that I really don't know the answer to", and I find myself baffled by statements like this. I did actually understand in watching what specific questions he thought were "difficult", and I think someone could probably answer them pretty effectively to a standard he was happy with if he had a well informed trans person who he trusted in his life. The problem is, the whole segment was presented with as much equivocation and both-sidesing as possible, this constant air of "what if"

I feel like I'm observing a dissociative amnesia that people like this run into when discussing something that people they can easily see are bigots have declared to be scientific and complicated and requiring serious scrutiny. The Novara team understand the broad wave of anti-trans attacks happening across much of the world, particularly America and Britain, right now, even if they won't necessarily call it genocide - so why does this story exist completely devoid of context? Why is it suddenly time to ask "difficult questions"?

Walker wonders out loud about people on a spectrum where at one end people would have always been cis under all circumstances and on the other they would have always been trans, and in the middle of course are people who might transition if it's easier and there's less stigma. His point as far as I can tell is that somewhere in there it could get TOO easy to transition and then people will do it and regret it. Do I need to bother saying this is why we have informed consent?

It's like the people trying to wipe us out are playing Simon Says with the most progressive of our liberal media. The progressives can see bigotry for what it is most of the time and then somehow suddenly it becomes ✨special science bigotry ✨ and, perhaps because there's an institutional weight behind it, perhaps because it claims to be a serious study, or perhaps just because of the aesthetics of intellectualism the progressive journalists mysteriously forget about the whole wider context of transphobia around the world and have to apply rigorous journalistic standards to it.

"There's social contagion!" "No that's bigotry"

"They're just undiagnosed autistic people!" "No they're trans AND autistic"

"They're coming after the kids!" "No, that's age old queerphobia"

"✨Simon Says ✨ there's social contagion!" "oh well this warrants very careful discussion, I need to think very hard about this before taking a side here, it's a toxic culture war debate and we must remain ✨rational✨ when discussing issues like this..."

[wordsandrobots]

So I do kind of want to write something about the ending of Gundam ZZ, having now finished my rewatch. But as an aside to that, I wanted to note a few thoughts about how Judau is presented, or, rather, how he isn't presented in a romantic context by the show.

Because both Amuro and Kamille definitely have romantic aspects to their arcs. Amuro has his crush on Matilda and Fraw Bow's (unrequited) crush on him, while Kamille's relationships with Four and Fa are key to his development throughout Zeta. It's treated as part of them 'growing into manhood', in that highly tedious way of exposing a lot of uninterrogated sexism, that we nevertheless have to accept as part of the framework within which these stories were written.

But Judau doesn't have anything like that. He and Haman's rivalry is not really presented in romantic or sexual terms, at least, not directly. Haman is *scared* of Judau and transforms that into a desire to control him, and while her control of several other characters is coded in romantic terms (capital R Romantic, no less, when it comes to Mashymre), their particular dynamic is instead rooted in a push and pull over their differing world-views. Judau's embrace of straightforward emotionally-driven action is critically at odds with the puppet-mastery Haman aspires to and exposes the loneliness and pessimism beneath her approach. She's not in love with him; she's fucking furious this no-account kid could come along and be a shining example of an empathic, caring newtype, right as she'd given up on that as a possibility for humanity's future.

And with Chara, and Judau getting smothered in boobs, the titillation is entirely on her side. It's not even played as him being embarrassed by it, which, while it clearly plays into the joke about Chara being unattractive owing to her overly-sexual aspects, is still notable when there are pretty much zero examples of Judau caring about girls in that way at all. Or, in fact, girls caring about him that way.

Roux and Elle's bickering is notably devoid of any 'we want the same guy' aspects. I shall go further and say that Gundam Wiki ascribing Roux as Judau's love interest is bunk: they never once have romantic interactions and there are other good, character-based explanations for them picking the same path at the end. She and Elle butt heads for the same reason there is tension between Roux and the Shangri-La kids from the start. She's more grown-up and more invested in being the grown-up in the room, which rubs everyone else the wrong way.

Elle, meanwhile, does seem to have strong feelings for Judau but whether these should be considered romantic is actually a surprisingly slippery question. That is, obviously that's the natural read in the sense of being completely typical, but there's a sequence in the final episode that positions her feelings slightly differently.

Under a cut due to spoilers and two teenagers slapping each other.

Right before Judau heads out for his climactic confrontation with Haman, Elle tries to talk him down, since he could very well be killed. He won't listen and Beecha tries to make Elle stop, leading to her backhanding him, him slapping her, and the two of them accepting that they can't do anything except be there in the hope Judau will come back home safe.

Setting aside the gender weighting on the slapping, the part that makes Beecha really angry is Elle asking how he can let Judau go alone because, despite Beecha often disliking playing second fiddle to the other boy, he doesn't like the idea of Judau going alone either. It's just at this point, they're down to one other remaining mobile suit and the priority is protecting the ship.

Beecha is clearly miserable about this too and his contribution here is helping Elle come to terms with the situation. What interests me is that this places Elle's emotions on the same level as his, that of a deeply concerned friend who, regardless of their differences, don't want to see any harm come to Judau. Beecha is implied to have (romantic) feelings for Elle and gets annoyed at her paying more attention to Judau, but here he's the one to express the bulk of the shared emotions. In essence, the text renders everything platonic while underscoring how the Shangri-La gang have grown closer over the course of the show.

Either that, or you go the other way and read this as Beecha's jealousy coming from his own crush on Judau, and conclude he and Elle are reaching the same conclusion about a shared romantic connection to a third person. I don't think that's likely as the intention, although who knows? Certainly Judau shows no negative reaction to an earlier comment by Roux about Beecha being cute, so maybe this is another case where polyamory was the solution.

(And if this isn't a perfect summary of what kind of relationship Roux and Judau have, I don't know what is. That's not romance; that's the cosmos' peanut gallery in the making.)

Irrespective, I find it interesting how the show forecloses romantic possibilities around Judau, not by having them hook up with other people ala Fraw (crucially, there's no hint Elle and Beecha actually do form a couple), or by killing them off, but simply by placing the friendship of the group above everything else. At the end, while Kamille and Fa dance on the shore, Judau's big moment is being reunited with his sister ahead of leaving to get some greater perspective on the world.

I do wonder if this is part of Judau being a more immature character than Amuro or Kamille. After all, the point is that he doesn't 'grow up', doesn't shed his driving anger or the idea of trying to save everyone, instead carrying forward the possibility that things can change in spite of all the 'damn adults' who've harmed the world. He manages to embody Amuro's original idealism about the future without succumbing to the sin of 'doing something he can't take back' over the course of the battles he's forced into.

Again, it's either that or we add another tick in the 'asexual protagonists' column, which would also be perfectly groovy.

[charrfie]

Who is Franky?

Do you have a tag on your blog that I can scroll through to get up to speed on the character you want asks about?

I would like to know what questions you have already answered so I don't ask a repeat question.

Giggling over what was (probably) your autocorrect referring to flaky as franky. Thank you so much for asking though.... I'm more than happy to explain!! And very appreciative that you're so eager to learn. Check under the read more, because as I've said before, you can't vaguely ask me "who/what is [character/interest] of yours" without expecting infodumping in return....

Flaky is a character from the show happy tree friends! If you're unfamiliar, this was an online series/serialized cartoon that debuted in late 1999 and is still ongoing in the present (though episodes are released at MUCH slower rate). There's not much to necessarily know about the show to understand it since it's fairly cut and dry; it's a shock horror series centered around cutesy cartoon animals being killed in extremely grotesque ways and then coming back totally fine the very next episode. And........ that's about it. There's no ongoing plot stringing it together, there's no interesting character commentary, no efforts to expand the worldbuilding at all, and there's only vague efforts to be coherent/avoid inconsistencies... but hey, fall out boy collaborated with the HTF team to make a music video, so that's something..

If I make the series seem incredibly uninteresting and bordering on obnoxious, it's mainly because it's not something I'd willingly recommend to anyone. Like. You genuinely should probably not watch this show if you didn't hop on the bandwagon of its popularity in the 2000s (<- something that only happened because of the online landscape's demand for excessively edgy media at the time). It's not worth your time and it's unlikely you'll take away anything meaningful from it, if not actively harmful. That being said, it unfortunately means something to me!!!!!!!! 5th grader laika was exposed to it far too early in their childhood and formed an extremely strange, convoluted relationship with the franchise!!!! I really do care about the characters in it.. deeply! Despite how I wouldn't recommend it to anyone else, of course ^^;; Granted, my personal interpretation of it is..... almost completely devoid of any of the original source's canon. Which has a lot to do with it..

Paragraphs in and I haven't even addressed who flaky is (ノ_<。) but I felt that the context was necessary. Flaky is a red porcupine that is mostly characterized by their debilitating anxiety. The writers of the show have a tendency of stereotyping and stigmatizing different mental/physical conditions for each character they create, but unfortunately I find a LOT of familiarity in flaky's affliction, which makes what was intended to be harmful into something I can find genuine solace in. This, of course, is not to say any of the other depictions in HTF are alright. There's some pretty heinous shit in there. But in flaky's case at least, I feel a lot of kinship with them. This goes for their gender weirdness too, as the ambiguity of it is an ongoing bit throughout the show. I get it!!!! Flaky is a character I relate and LOT to!!!!

As a result of how fear drives them most times, they're often characterized as a helpless and frightened vicitm in fan spaces..... though I would argue is not entirely correct...? Flaky is a very self destructive individual, but their terror also guides them in ways that inadvertently hurt others through means of prioritizing their own safety. I really do not see this talked about often enough, despite it being one of- if not my most- favorite traits of theirs. It's extremely compelling to analyze and factor into their every interaction. Their senseless paranoia even goes so far in one episode that they directly and INTENTIONALLY injure a loved one out of self preservation. And its completely brushed past by people?!?! I will never understand it!!!! Please understand I am not trying to convey that they are EVIL since they do mean well most times, but more nuanced than lots of folks would let on. Even if it wasn't intentional on the show creators' parts.

I have a couple other htf characters that I particularly enjoy exploring flaky's relationships with, namely flippy, flick (because the name fliqpy is stupid, I've decided to call him this), cuddles, giggles, sniffles, and nutty. Though of course, other relationships they've formed with unmentioned characters are compelling as well in their own right, such as their relationship with lifty and shifty.. it's just not something I tend to focus on as much.

After all of this, if you are, by any chance, interested in seeing flaky's character firsthand, you don't have to watch very many episodes to get a grasp of what's going on with them. I would recommend viewing the episodes without a hitch (<- BY FAR MY FAVORITE HTF EPISODE EVER MADE EVER.... SOOOOOO MUCH WONDERFUL CHARACTERIZATION HERE THAT WAS A TOTAL ACCIDENT ON THE CREATORS PART), party animal, water you wading for, and ski ya wouldn't wanna be ya. In that order! Happy trails part 2 is also pretty good for the few seconds they appear in it; it works pretty well for character symbolism, albeit unintentional. There ARE other episodes that accidentally impart some grander takeaway for their character which I would be happy to detail, but these cover the main bases.

Returning to the questions you asked at the very start though (and my apologies for not being more concise)...... you are free to ask any questions you would like about them n_n! It's not often that I get asks about flaky; I believe I've only gotten one or two in this blog's lifetime. Ask away! If you'd like to see what art I've posted of them, you can check #flaky htf. If you'd like to see other people's art of them that I've reblogged, check my #kin tag, and they should be sprinkled throughout it :^D

[foreignswaggersession]

Thank you for your IWTV posts and clearing up misconceptions. Tbh I wouldn't be so annoyed if people weren't constantly determined to do as many bad faith readings as possible when it came to Louis and Armand's relationship. Like of course it was a very flawed and very complicated relationship, we know this! But it's so obvious when a fan is making a post about how it was "completely loveless and devoid of sexual intimacy" solely so their own otp could look better. So many examples that others have already pointed out, including that one take about Louis disliking the first TVD performance, so this means that he hates theater in general and prefers Lestat over Armand (excuse me, what?)

Also more than one person trying to say how loumand had more PDA and not just for Daniel in the Dubai interview. But that this meant "every affectionate gesture between them to ever happen including Paris was just for performance" and was not truly genuine compared to what was with Lestat? Um no shit, Louis and Lestat had more of their love scenes behind closed doors. But also consider the context with how things were in NOLA and Louis having to pose as another person (brother, business partner, etc) because of rumors surrounding him and his lover. How due to racial discrimination he couldn't even get into an opera house without playing Lestat's servant. Then skip forward to the 1940s when he believed he can actually be comfortable doing this openly "Paris was a formative sexual liberation", with him having those casual relationships with other men while cruising. To kissing and being affectionate with Armand in public and not give a damn who is watching or if he's being heckled for it. This isn't even trying to reduce Louis' previous relationships either or say they're less important, more that Louis' comfort with how he expressed his own sexuality and romantic gestures developed over time.

As for Dreamstat... guys he's an extension of Louis' inner thoughts (a complex mixture of emotions before Louis was ready to enter a new relationship), but he wasn't present during loumand sex scenes either... and Louis certainly wasn't having sex with Armand just for Dreamstat to watch??

Despite already knowing what's "endgame" some people still can't allow even a single moment of love, attraction and vulnerability between loumand to just exist without twisting it into something else, or making it actually about Lestat or Daniel while propping up their preferred pairing. good lord, I'm tired of this.

🥰thanks anon! i'm not as familiar with tv fandom so maybe i'm not understanding why people are so resistant to acknowledging louis's attraction to armand (even pre-claudia's murder) when they were together in canon. like in both the show and the book (and not in a future book, devil's minion stans). since when are people not allowed to enjoy different relationships at different times? i think it's silly to ignore or misrepresent whole sections of the plot just to feel like your favorite ship is the more romantic(?) or healthier (😂) ship, i guess? but yeah, recognizing any romance or attraction between louis and armand (especially from louis towards armand) makes some people angry, as though it undermines armand's abuse or any future relationship either party will have.

not much to add to what you said - the majority of fans only care about louis to the extent he cares about lestat, so they focus on dreamstat/lestat scenes in s2 and ignore the many scenes without him. then there are fans that can't let go of their s1 headcanons that conflict with new information from s2 (louis tops sometimes. it's just a fact now. please stop being weird about it.) i also hate the refusal to engage with louis's repeated statements about his changing relationship to his sexuality over time. his sexual preferences are not stuck in 1910, and i don't agree with pathologizing louis topping or having sex with men besides lestat (if you're not into it, just say that, but don't act like there's no evidence for louis enjoying a different sex life in the show).

i'm not a solo shipper and i love thinking about louis so it's not hard for me to imagine louis in multiple relationships (and in various positions 🥵), and lucky for me i get to see that on screen! cause that's what the show is about actually! louis! the titular vampire.

[sgiandubh]

Hitting a nerve, again

Dear @outlanderfandomfollies,

You took an extraordinary amount of time to lecture me on your blog with regard to one of my comments about the (in)famous funeral pictures. This deserves a reply and I hope you will understand it is done in good faith, although I cannot guarantee you that my answer will be devoid of irony. I am who I am, even if my opinions clearly vex you: I am sorry, but there is little I can do to accommodate you in that respect.

Fair enough, then. I took a stroll on your two blogs yesterday and I have to say I am underwhelmed. The thousands of words, the hundreds of pages, all that Taj Mahal of wisdom so liberally, relentlessly bestowed upon us, ignoramuses, was not enough to shake my beliefs. And pardon me the approximation: trying to make sense of what you wrote left such a strange aftertaste, that I did not pay enough attention to such details. Stupid me.

I have to say I was just starting to enjoy your very interesting interpretation of Jungian archetypes as applied to JAMMF. It did also remind me of Richard Campbell's Hero With A Thousand Faces, to be completely honest. I wanted more of that: a non-biased and personal interpretation of a beloved literary character. So, I am asking you in all honesty: why do your approach and your tone change, from professional to patronizing, when you deal with this side of the fandom, including me?

You present yourself as an independent blogger within the OL fandom. That, in my humble opinion, is a bias and a lie. There can be no independence in the current context of cold war, with the "truthers"' side bucketing out insults on a daily basis, with no prompting and no provocation from the shippers. You probably know as well as I do how the spiel works, via multiple spy sock accounts, anonymous submissions often sent to oneself and yes, rivers of "stupid shippers, idiot shippers". You also know and yet keep complete silence about it, that sensitive information is always exchanged in DMs and private groups, primarily out of respect for the people concerned (and also because that is none of your business, Antis).

Your very peculiar orientation is also something that ethically nags me. Independent, yet aligned. I find this fascinating, truly: it reminds me of an Eastern European tyrant's game of promoting himself for years to the West as aligned with the Soviets, yet independent from them. True story.

In the side note at the end of your long (loooooong) intervention about a mere comment expressing an opinion, you write:

I am asking you and I would appreciate a serious, well-researched answer (a girl can dream): exactly which boundaries did I (and I really mean I, Sgiandubh, not "shippers": that is very cheap rhetoric and I expected better from you) cross by simply expressing an opinion that disagreed with your POV?

For comparison purposes, an example of a very recent, supremely suave comment on one of the major Anti players' blogs. We never read any well-articulated protestations from you on those, ever: it is as if they do not exist. Heh. Talking about bias, when it's all about hiding the Antis' garbage under a skillfully woven carpet of scientific jargon:

And since you love side notes and caveats and all the critical apparatus paraphernalia, let me be very clear: I blurred the blogger's name on purpose, and not by cowardice. I blurred it because it is perfectly irrelevant, in this context and at the same time, very representative of a certain dominating vibe, in your camp, about OL's male lead. Something I believe you, as an independent (let's not forget aligned) blogger, should have no trouble taking a strong stance about.

Oh, the stench of intolerance, from the same person who wrote this, in 2016, on her blog:

Yes, yes. I know you also wrote your opinions changed with time and adventures along this long-winding, twisted road. Yet, I cannot help but thinking that a walk down this particular memory lane could bring more serenity and more clarity to your fandom endeavors.

I have no wish to attack you and I am not the insulting type, unlike some of your fellows. But I also do not need a laissez-passer sealed, stamped and delivered by you (with which authority?), in order to continue my journey. I would be very happy to settle on a non-aggression 'we agree to disagree' , keep calm and carry on common ground. At the very worst, I will simply ignore you and would be very grateful if you did the same. I simply feel I owe you absolutely nothing, including my time and attention.

Cordially yours,

Sgian-dubh, stupid shipper

[idontwanttospoiltheparty]

https://youtu.be/4mCbU4eys5k?si=1AwD60ANjLkHyq0V opinions?

I've watched this before.

My opinion is that it's quite funny, I like the deadpan delivery. Personally though – and I know this is largely a me thing – I find it hard to deal with this sort of half-serious, half-joking speculation outside personal conversations with people I know well.

Like, if you want, I can engage with this whole video as a serious argument, but I don't think anyone actually wants that, even though the format of the video strongly suggests it. I find it hard to believe the presenter doesn't to some extent believe (reciprocated) McLennon Is Real, but presenting the evidence in this jokey way sort of makes arguing against it impossible without being called a killjoy, which is frustrating if you don't agree with all of it.

I wanna say one thing: the Pyramus and Thisbe thing is in my opinion so utterly irrelevant lmao. And the way it's being framed here – completely devoid of context, like the fact that the entire gag of that bit of Midsummer Night's Dream is that it's two men, the fact it's a gag at all, or the fact that John and Paul did not decide to do this play – is a thing I find kind of annoying about this type of "I will prove to you, average person, that my theory is true." Because non-fans watching this have no context to respond to any of it with anything but agreement.

[gwenllian-in-the-abbey]

didn't the showrunners for some reason portrayed helaena-aegon marriage as sexual abusive one like their parents marriage?

Hi anon! So, I didn't really interpret it that way, but I think it's one of those things where your mileage may vary. We really were only given crumbs about their marriage in the show, so this is just how I interpreted it.

The only line we get from Helaena about her marriage to Aegon is that "it isn't that bad, mostly he just ignores you, except sometimes when he's drunk." It's completely devoid of context, so for all we know Aegon comes back home drunk to bitch and moan or cry on Helaena's shoulder, not to have sex with her. But assuming she is talking about sex, we know from episode 7 that Aegon didn't want this marriage, so you can also easily read that line to mean that Aegon can literally only perform with her sexually when he's intoxicated. Also, if you watch Aegon's reaction when Helaena says this, he's clearly embarrassed. She's roasting him in front of the whole family, exposing him for being a shitty husband who isn't very present, but he's not getting angry, instead he looks like he wants to sink through the floor. And like, obviously victims can act any sort of way around their abusers, there's no rulebook, but I think that if the director of this episode intended for us to read the dynamic between them as an abusive one, they would probably not have had Helaena gleefully mocking Aegon and Aegon reacting with obvious shame. It's important to remember two things about Helaena and Aegon. First, she's his sister, and second, it was an unwanted marriage that happened when they were both too young. And Aegon and Helaena would have been pushed into doing their duty and securing his line with children the same way Rhaenyra was. They wouldn't have been given a choice. And although they're Targaryens, Aegon, at least according to TGC, hates being a Targaryen. Brother-sister marriage is something only Targaryens do in this world, something their mother might grudgingly accept but which goes against her faith. If Aegon rejects his heritage (with the notable exception of his dragon!), he probably has a hard time being married to the sister he never wanted to marry in the first place. In this context, him needing to be drunk to make it happen makes sense.

So I don't know anon. From the (albeit limited) dialogue in the show as well as the interviews that the writers and TGC have given about Aegon, I just don't think we were meant to interpret that line as indicating he rapes Helaena. Just because show!Aegon raped a serving girl doesn't mean that he never has consensual sex or that he rapes every woman he lays eyes on either. In fact, that's one of those dangerous misconceptions about the nature of sexual assault. It would be great if it was that easy to identify potential rapists, but in reality a person can have a consensual relationship which never crosses any boundaries with one person, and still cross the line of consent with another, especially when there are power imbalances involved. So in this case I'm inclined to believe that Aegon's relationship with the Helaena is not sexually abusive. He and Helaena both seem to draw lines with each other, both as brother and sister and as husband and wife, whereas clearly Aegon lacks any sense of boundaries when it comes to the staff.

[snezenie]

utsugi and minoru: the divorce manifesto

longform analysis about noriyuki utsugi and minoru harada's relationship, as i see it. there's a lot of room for interpretation in their relationship, so of course these are my thoughts only.

contains spoilers for the full series.

word count: ~8,600

images are from this youtube translation, i got lazy so not everything has image support. if you see a random little tagline like 'ch 7' that means the evidence comes from there but i was too lazy to screengrab it yet (or ever, i don't know)

outline: i. the completion of each other ii. a deep and mutual understanding iii. the emphasis of their cruelty iv. the concealment of their kindness v. family and cycles vi. other allusions vii. conclusion

part one: equality and lack there of

how minoru and utsugi are presented as equals in some manner (whether in reality, presentation, thoughts, or otherwise) and how they circumvent it 

1a. utsugi-kun, did you fuck my wife?

'jealousy' is a big theme with these two— in the context of utsugi's interactions with rai and hajime, as described by minoru, and similarly with utsugi taking up minoru’s place in his own family.

their interpersonal relationships are the greatest source of their conflicts, as is clear with all their arguing and sniping at one another in the base game. there are two clear 'pairs' that become intertwined with one another: rai and minoru, and hajime and utsugi.

utsugi is someone who finally felt needed, the only thing he’d ever wanted, and then it's slowly taken from him as hajime becomes less willing to depend on utsugi. utsugi had uprooted his entire life to follow hajime, and he considers hajime's life and happiness to be his sole goal in life. it's natural to become agitated when it starts to become obvious that he might be sacrificing everything for someone who doesn’t want it. 

minoru states in the base game that utsugi is jealous of him, this is supported by how in some way minoru seems to have similarly occupied that supporting role as someone that hajime does depend on with utsugi. but is this true?

utsugi never mentions that he thinks hajime likes minoru more, or that he's jealous of minoru in his monologues. these plain descriptions of his inner thoughts are some of the only things about him that can be taken mostly at face value, he will only lie to himself if he benefits from being in denial. he mentions his various grievances with minoru (below), so why would jealousy never come up?

utsugi isn't jealous of minoru, that's why it doesn’t come up. minoru wants them to have a symmetrical relationship, something easily explained: utsugi has what i want, but i have what utsugi wants. so naturally i am jealous of utsugi and utsugi must be jealous of me.

but this is the admission of hajime and minoru’s friendship in utsugi’s mind: perfectly plain and devoid of criticism. 

utsugi doesn’t mind (or at least, it isn’t a major concern for him) that hajime and minoru are close. he genuinely likes minoru, and is distressed at the thought that he would hurt minoru by continuing to be around him. this is his commentary around the time he learns both about the ‘factor of catastrophe’ surrounding their families, and haruki is born, cementing the fact that making minoru leave will be difficult. 

instead, a lot of the grievances utsugi has with minoru in these thoughts is more indicative that his greater problems with minoru were really 1) that his interference harms utsugi’s plans for hajime to believe he is a savior and 2) grief that minoru insists on staying when utsugi’s plan for him is to go. 

but again, none of this is jealousy. utsugi’s apparent jealousy towards minoru is merely the product of minoru’s attempt to understand his abrupt change in behavior when he doesn’t have the full picture. and it is a projection of minoru’s own strife around utsugi’s position with haruki and rai. 

utsugi is more of a father to haruki than minoru was, and minoru explicitly recognizes this a few times. utsugi helps haruki with homework, calls him a good boy, and they sit together and sip juice. in contrast, minoru can hardly talk to haruki without losing his temper after he learns of haruki’s experiment status. 

his complicated feelings towards utsugi and haruki's relationship are clearly illustrated in his outburst in the train station, where he frantically tells haruki that he is his father, not hajime or utsugi. he still has a sense of ownership and duty to haruki, and wants the mantle of fatherhood. and yet his own fears and selfishness won out, burying those feelings. 

the same unnatural setup can be observed in the complicated way rai, minoru, and utsugi’s relationship develops. rai makes multiple choices to the detriment of the family in order to stay on utsugi’s good side and appease him, and minoru himself is kept in the dark about haruki much, much longer than utsugi. this all creates a feeling of isolation from his own family, and utsugi manages to ‘replace’ him wholly in some ways, where both haruki and rai are placing higher importance on their relationship with utsugi than they do minoru. minoru notes in retrospect that he was more deeply in love with rai than she was with him, likely adding to this insecurity.

the isoi’s importance to minoru is underlined by the mundanity of his ambitions. he wants to be happy, he wants a family and friends, he wants for everyone to get along. there is no grand higher purpose for minoru. this desire for a mundane, happy family is possibly inspired by his original orphaning, where both parents blamed minoru in part for their issues before leaving his life entirely. notably, hajime also makes up most of utsugi’s ambitions and desires, further paralleling the two pairs. 

and relating to minoru's upbring, there are also multiple points in the game where the concept of affairs and cheating comes up, strengthening the existing concept of jealousy and insecurities within marriage. most prominently, minoru questions if utsugi likes rai in the reference room scene of DLC. 

to utsugi, to the viewer, to rai, this sounds like complete laughable nonsense. but minoru seems to ask it seriously, showing the depths to which he has started to question his importance to his family. it’s emphasized that he wasn’t merely asking this in jest when utsugi laughs in response and minoru seems confused by the reaction. 

further references include that it comes up that both the harada and isoi families previously had incidents with their mothers cheating, shown as a symptom of the crumbling marriage. and again, minoru brings up an affair when affirming that haruki is his kid to hajime in a flashback scene in chapter 7 of the base game. 

minoru’s feelings about rai and utsugi are never addressed as explicitly as minoru’s feelings about haruki and fatherhood, but this concept of infidelity has come up too many times to be mere coincidence. minoru probably, at least momentarily in times of insecurity or irrationality, considered the idea that rai and utsugi might have something between them. 

when considering how obvious utsugi’s single-minded devotion to hajime is (and minoru knew this!), it is a rather insane leap of logic. but minoru doesn't tend to make smart decisions, especially under duress. many of his ill-fated decisions in game are led by his human fallibility. most prominently, he misses his window to escape with haruki and reiji in 1999 because he goes back to sleep after receiving the text to move up the plan.

he wasn't ignorant or blind to utsugi’s devotion to hajime, his own insecurity, jealousy, and confusion over utsugi’s sudden changes in attitude ended up creating impossible possibilities in his mind. he has been so completely replaced in importance to both his wife and his son, his family being the only thing he ever wanted, that he doesn't know how to cope with it.

both minoru and utsugi’s most important relationships are fraught with strife over the other person, and thus we can see how they are equal/replacing each other in some way. utsugi slots into the isoi family naturally as minoru’s relationships with his wife and son splinters. and while minoru shows hajime a simple way to live happily and without expectations, at the same time, utsugi is unsuccessful in his own pursuits to make hajime happy. utsugi has no jealousy over minoru’s relationship to hajime, and yet it is true that minoru ‘replaces’ utsugi in a just as important way as utsugi ‘replaces’ minoru. 

1b. the one who knew everything, and the one who knew nothing

their positions of power and authority show equality in other ways: utsugi is clearly jealous of minoru’s apparent easy, unburdened existence, and minoru in turn wishes for the power and influence utsugi has.

utsugi's complex is shown best when utsugi responds to minoru in the reference room: describing his demeanor as ignorant and disrespectful. he's frustrated that minoru can continue living obliviously while utsugi is in pain, even as utsugi himself maintains this state by keeping minoru in the dark about many things. he perceives minoru’s life to be easy and guilt-free, in a contrast to his own life of willingly taking on more and more burdens. 

at the same time, minoru is also feeling the stress and problems of the failing institute and his own crumbling family. it’s not inaccurate to call minoru ignorant, but utsugi exaggerates the depth to which minoru doesn’t understand the problems occuring. minoru eventually calls out the problems and failings he clearly sees, but he lacks the power to execute any real change. as an example, he calls for the removal of utsugi and the recognition of the crimes of the institute in the scene where utsugi orders him to leave, and no one takes him seriously, and things continue as normal.

minoru picks up on symptoms of the problem, but lacks the knowledge to get to the root. he sees utsugi acting out, hajime staying silent, and the increase in human experimentation. but he never indicates that he’s connected the dots on things like the reason why utsugi is acting out, why hajime is silent, and why human experimentation is ramping up. 

utsugi is the one who holds the power and authority to act on solutions to minoru’s concerns. he also has all the information and understanding that minoru lacks on multiple people close to him, including hajime, utsugi himself, and his family. he stands as the archbishop of EHRI and the main executor of hajime’s will, so it is utsugi who is pushing EHRI chiefly along its dark path. minoru wants the ability to hold onto the people he treasures and save his life from ruin, but he lacks the conviction and action-taking of utsugi.

for the most part, hajime takes the role of a passive observer, minoru is an outsider with no clout, and all the other bishops answer to utsugi, who answers to the sponsors.

to further explore how this difference in status and authority shapes their dynamic, minoru’s status as an outsider establishes him as more equal to utsugi than anyone else in the game. the previously talked through jealousy and give-and-take relationship between them supports this, putting them on the equal level of both having things of value to each other. 

it is revealed in DLC that utsugi never bought into hajime’s status as a savior. but even then he treats hajime with a carefulness and fragility that keeps their relationship from being one of mutual reliance and equal footing. he doesn't feel he can tell hajime of his struggles due to his devotion to being an infallible support for hajime. the support only flows one way, hajime being perceived as too delicate to take on utsugi’s problems. 

hajime aside, most everyone else in path to empireo (excluding seodore, minoru, and some of the other sponsors/stakeholders) see utsugi as the highest position of power and authority. he builds a powerful persona, and gradually we see the other members of path to empireo call him ‘utsugi-sama’ more than ‘utsugi-kun,’ showing his complete evolution into someone who is no longer equal and approachable to the others. meanwhile, minoru never changes the honorific, and even wishes to drop it entirely, but utsugi insists on it due to his upbringing. 

that minoru has neither bought into utsugi's leader persona (perhaps because he remembers how utsugi was when they first met: awkward, unconfident, reticent) nor become a worshipper that utsugi has direct power over, nor a sponsor with direct influence over utsugi means he sees things more clearly. he exists somewhere completely outside the power structure of EHRI, where he can see utsugi for who he is.

many of the other researchers we see (the enomotos, rai) don’t seem to quite be unaware of how utsugi is deteriorating, but they do seem to not have the mental capacity to do anything when their own problems are consuming them. rai in particular explicitly struggles with feeling the need to please utsugi, making it so she cannot portray her true self to utsugi or provoke him. 

but minoru frequently provokes utsugi, and he is the only person who is comfortable demanding answers from him. it’s not a coincidence that they have multiple scenes where they come to physical blows, showing the depth to which there is no power barrier between them. they both possess psychic powers from the cells, but only use their bare, human hands on one another. 

1c. love languages  

they show an inversion of each other again in their ways of taking action and expressing themselves: utsugi’s motivations and care are impactful, but quite silent and unsaid; while minoru talks loudly without being able to back it up with action. 

minoru calls out that utsugi cared for those around him when he could (when it didn’t conflict with hajime’s will) and with a little investigating, the viewer can also pick up on this notion.

one example is utsugi may have allowed or accepted noa’s blame for killing rai, when the clear culprits of rai’s death were always seodore and noa herself. 

or that utsugi tried to create an exit for the isoi family both by proposing the plan of a second child and by using haruki to research reversing the cells influence, which has little other application. 

rai dlc

utsugi only ties his own hands when caring for others would directly interfere with hajime’s wishes, which gives rise to things like haruki’s original existence as an experiment (as a note, hajime’s regret of this situation may have played into utsugi’s eventual willingness to reverse it.)

but even then, he does his best to play around the lines of his ultimate obligation to hajime and shows reluctance in carrying out harm. this is illustrated best by how, in one of his dlc monologues, he hoped haruki would have a negative reaction to the cells. 

utg dlc

this would put path to empireo out a potential experiment, arguably hindering hajime’s ultimate dream. however, a negative reaction would keep utsugi from having to navigate the potential situation of a positive reaction, which would surely be difficult for the isoi family. 

in most, if not all of these situations, utsugi's thoughts and actions are not seen as mercies by anyone involved. they’re difficult solutions that are hard to accept. utsugi never presents his help as mercy, nor does he ever asks for gratitude from the people he helps.

we can see utsugi’s affection for minoru persist until modern day, similarly completely unsaid but easily seen from his actions. utsugi holds onto minoru’s books for years and years, keeping them in a backroom without disposing of them. there is no reason for someone so logical and thorough as utsugi to not dispose of these books unless he has sentimental attachment to them.

ch 6

the room behind utsugi’s statue is also minoru’s old room from before he was married, and not only does utsugi preserve it, but he blocks it off so no one would enter it. it can be confirmed as minoru's room when hajime reads a note from minoru in the room in a flashback in the base game, as well as the shape and set-up being the same when it appears in minoru's dlc. 

ch 6

the furniture in it is likely different from minoru’s room in the flashbacks because he took his furniture with him after he moved out with the isoi family, but it has not been repurposed.

utsugi also clearly remembers many things about minoru– his demeanor, how his sign feels, his appearance– and uses all these to easily identify reiji and haruki as his sons. when he’s blinded in his boss fight, he remembers how minoru’s sign ‘feels’ enough to believe that he is fighting him (when it is in actuality his sons.) 

ch 8

with utsugi’s deteriorating mental state after 1999 as well as that year being his last meeting with minoru, it would’ve been natural for utsugi to forget minoru inadvertently or on purpose. but it seems like he makes a conscious effort to remember his friend after their split, betraying his lasting attachment. 

to further compare minoru and utsugi’s actions, utsugi is extremely private and single-minded. he decides on things with little hesitation, and never ruminates on what could have been or what went wrong until everything is over and done. this is best illustrated in how we never see him breathe a negative word of hajime until they both lay dying.

utg dlc

he also insists on having no regrets, even when the only audience to his words is his own self. this is clearly contradicted when he shows clear distress and desire to start over multiple times, most clearly in his second fight with minoru in 1999 and in the reference room scene. but in asserting to himself that he has no regret, he can better stay focused on what really matters instead of wallowing in the past.

mnr dlc

minoru is the opposite, being someone who talks a lot about what is wrong and what he wants to do, but either can’t or won’t take action. he is unable to commit to the same decisive choices as utsugi. 

in the case of can’t take action, his status as an outsider keeps him from enacting real change in EHRI, even as he points out its flaws repeatedly and loudly. he has no real power and thus his words are all he has.

in the case of won’t, it is shown best in the reference room scene with utsugi. minoru is angrily insistent that utsugi confide further in him and help him understand his situation and struggles, but he only maintains this sentiment up to a point. utsugi pushes back hard, feeling that minoru’s words are useless and would not help him. ironically, this proves true as minoru swiftly backs down from his previous words after utsugi starts choking him. it shows a clear line that minoru will give up on his convictions when pushed past. 

mnr dlc

in contrast, utsugi lacks this same bottom line. he is subjected to many counts of violence and pain while fulfilling his promise to hajime, but doesn’t ever think of giving up on their promise. utsugi avoids lying to others in the beginning (possibly as a side effect from the pain of being accused of being a liar in his youth when he was telling the truth) and he prefers total silence over promising anything he cannot guarantee.

he becomes much more comfortable lying and acting as time goes on, but in the 70’s and 80’s his word is trustable. one solid example is how, in 1999 in the train station, he refuses to promise anyone’s safety to noa besides hajime’s, despite her pleas. as someone who tried to treat others well, it would make sense to lie to her to put her fears to rest, but utsugi refuses to make the same flimsy promises as minoru.

noa dlc

this difference in conviction is also what respectively saves and dooms them. it’s merely a possibility that if minoru had committed to taking action and causing change that he could have saved his friends and family at EHRI; however, it is unmistakable and undeniable that his ability to walk away is what actually saves his own self. utsugi similarly is capable/able of walking out, especially in 1999 when the organization is in shambles, but his intense conviction and loyalty to hajime holds him back and ultimately takes him to his ruin. 

in a game very centrally about the power of ‘will’ this feels significant and should be a good thing, but under a different lens it can also be seen as a passive role. utsugi never tries to re-assess his and hajime’s wishes and change his path to fit a more accurate dream. he never has the courage to change or abandon his doomed love to pursue a new one, whereas you can say that minoru does find that courage, to great success in ultimately finding a new home and purpose with LDL.

part two: the one who understood me the best

while minoru and utsugi’s relationship is not free of the facades, misunderstandings, and miscommunications that color so many relationships in this series, there is a deep understanding between them. perhaps brought about by the clarity of existing as equals in so many capacities. 

utsugi says that minoru understood him the most in the end, and even as their relationship was in tatters, minoru is the only character utsugi confides in of his own free will, in the reference room scene.

utg dlc

all other confessions of truth and struggles we get from utsugi are either done privately or inadvertently. he tells misumi about his true motives, but only because he hallucinated that there was no one there. 

utsugi’s understanding of minoru in turn is a less clear cut subject, due to the fact that minoru is more of an open book in general, and more characters know of his pain. the position of understanding utsugi is a unique one, but multiple people empathize with minoru.

minoru speaks sardonically to cover up his stress and puts up a happy facade a lot of the time, but it’s still far from how deep utsugi has isolated himself. minoru at the least confides in multiple people and is more willing to talk about issues directly in order to draw out a solution. 

their understanding of each other is not a perfect understanding, and this series shows well how difficult it is to achieve a perfect understanding while possessing all the natural baggage of communicating and existing. so these two inevitably misunderstand several key things about each other. their relationship is one of two people who understand each other the 'most', but this understanding still falls quite short of perfection.

utsugi himself seems to fall for minoru’s apparent happy/care-free facade, as discussed earlier. utsugi isn’t ignorant to the issues of the isoi family, considering how much he does behind the scenes to patch things up for them (getting rai to have a second kid and leave, wanting haruki to have a negative reaction are two solid ones, and there are more actions that can be debatably attributed to the same motive.) but he still doesn’t think minoru understands the gravity of his and utsugi’s situations. it’s true, in a sense, that minoru has deeply false impressions of/has been withheld information about characters like hajime, utsugi, and rai. but utsugi over-emphasizes minoru’s ignorance and carefreeness, since he is seeing it in direct contrast to his own heavy burdens. 

these two only begin to approach the deep and near-perfect understanding of each other when they hit bottom together in 1999. 

2a. their mutual suffering

minoru gives up any sort of facade after the events of 1999, he’s lost everything and desires nothing anymore, so there’s no need to pretend. utsugi sees this and even directly brings this change about with how cruelly and falsely he presents minoru with the trashbags (representing rai and reiji’s remains, but there was nothing in them.)

utg dlc

in my opinion, it can be read that utsugi’s cruelty here was a rather malicious attempt to finally bring minoru to ‘reality’ and see his oblivious facade drop (except, it wasn’t seen as a facade to utsugi) for his own reasons. these reasons are things like hating seeing him smiling all the time,  wanting them to share in mutual misery, wanting him to understand the full situation, shielding him from the complicated truth of rai and OG reiji’s fate, any of them or multiple could work here.

the end result is the same, utsugi finally gets the satisfaction of seeing minoru taking something ‘seriously.’ and he finally understands that minoru too is capable of pain and regret.

their mutual understanding is high at this point; that both of them reach rock bottom at the same time is significant. they lose the people who are most important to them at the same time, and struggle with finding their new purpose and reason to live. minoru walks away, and utsugi continues with the same path as always. the consequences of this are clearly shown when minoru finds happiness and a new family but utsugi just falls deeper into his own lies and violence. 

they fight twice in 1999: the first time is with fists, the most human and least lethal force they possess. they do injure each other (utsugi leaving sanemitsu’s famous and enduring head scar here) but it is a deeply human scene: both of them ineffectually lashing out in misery at someone who had little immediate causation of their pain.

the series has established that man-made things like guns and fists are ‘more human’ and ‘honorable’ (through jabuchi’s own ruminations on how he wanted to kill his coworkers and nina) whereas using empyrean abilities is ‘monstrous.’ minoru mentions this is the only time he sees utsugi use his fists, and that this is the most desperate and human he's ever seen utsugi. 

ch 6

but we don’t see the full extent of utsugi’s regret and turmoil until the second fight. 

utsugi’s motives for saving, confining, and later chasing and fighting minoru in 1999 feel ambiguous, the best clues we have are a set of lines right before the conclusion of their fight. utsugi laments the state minoru has ended up in, going on to doubt his own humanity and then lament the feelings minoru left him with.

mnr dlc

utsugi makes reference to still being human, and killing minoru while he still maintains that humanity. how i interpreted these was utsugi believing that he may lose control to the cells in the future, and wanting to kill minoru ‘as a human’ if he were to die regardless. notably, this again mirrors jabuchi’s plans, that there is honor and respect in being killed by human means. it also implies that he didn't think escape was an option for minoru, inevitably thinking he'll stay in the institute, alive or dead.

one of the most important points of the whole conflict is at the end when utsugi implies that— aside from hajime's happiness— there was one more thing he desired. he wasn't supposed to value his relationship with minoru to this extent, but he acknowledges that he did want it, even as they beat each other bloody. 

mnr dlc (utg?)

not even utsugi's remaining affection can stand in the way of his yearning for mutual understanding, and his cruelty towards minoru is unreserved in 1999.

to bring this back to the main point, it shows further the ill effects of misunderstanding in their relationship. minoru’s inability to understand utsugi’s motivations sews rifts in their friendship and leads to their ultimate split, while utsugi’s misunderstanding of minoru enables him to knock minoru down to his lowest point in life, where even death is a preferred alternative. 

to reiterate exactly what minoru misunderstands with utsugi, it is another thing that is laid out quite explicitly, as it leads to their falling out. minoru never puzzled out why utsugi was so insistent in the way he treated hajime as a ‘star’ and rather took it at face value that utsugi had no ulterior motive aside from religious mania. 

utg dlc

in reality, it was an act utsugi put on for what he believed was hajime’s own benefit, but minoru couldn’t begin to comprehend that. his own viewpoint was that it benefits hajime to think of himself as human, and he thinks of this as an obvious conclusion. there is a fundamental disconnect in both how minoru understands utsugi’s mindset here, and also in how minoru understands and treats hajime, who minoru similarly doesn’t understand fully. 

the other key misunderstanding is that it is dubious if minoru figures out the reason utsugi’s attitude towards him changed. his theories include things like utsugi was jealous of his friendship with hajime (untrue) or utsugi was upset at hajime’s poor state (partially true) or that utsugi liked rai romantically (wholly false).

it is my opinion that the (largest, but not only) reason utsugi distanced himself from minoru was because of the reveal of the existence of factors. he believed that furthering their relationship was ill-fated, as he was warned of on the phone by mari orie. 

utg dlc

he also may have lost faith in the authenticity of their friendship, as shown by his thoughts in 1999, where he panics that they only feel positively towards each other because of the effect of factors. 

utg dlc

minoru both knew about factors (unclear to me as to when exactly in the timeline he understands they affect reality and weren’t just something kazaru used for fiction) and that utsugi was researching them, but it seems doubtful to me that he put it together before he leaves path to empireo for good. later on, he may have belatedly understood what utsugi was researching. 

2b. the understanding they reached in the end

another recurring concept within their relationship is the belated realizations they have. as covered earlier, 1999 is the point where they understand each other best and the last time they see each other. minoru ultimately sees utsugi’s memories by using the power of the pen, and finally understands the events that lead to this point. 

it’s also of note that the only way minoru was able to understand utsugi totally was because of the power of the pen. he had to directly see utsugi’s memories, it was never possible for the truth to come directly from utsugi’s own mouth. only when treating utsugi as a character to be ‘read’ does minoru truly understand him. 

directly after this understanding dawns, utsugi tells him to leave forever. things have proceeded beyond the point of intervention, and it seems that any action taken now cannot undo the massive upheaval that has already taken place. 

this sad ending may feel like it points to saying that the furthering of their understanding was all for nothing, but it comes back into play sixteen years later.

their relationship had long fallen into complete nothingness, and yet minoru is the one utsugi trusts with his final wish, a final happiness for a man meeting a pathetic end. their understanding of each other did nothing to save their relationship in life, but it leaves minoru as the only one who can remember utsugi closest to how he was in reality.

hermit room 

in turn, minoru is the key to how we, as the viewer, also get to understand utsugi beyond all his lies, acts, and facades. it’s heavily implied that minoru has a hand in constructing the narrative of the entire series, and especially of dlc, which is named after him.

to give some more evidence to that point, the main support is drawn from the 'truth only i know' book by code:dante (sanemitsu) that is readable after completing S+ in a new game. in the book he refers to a 'record,' reminiscent of 'the records of sanemitsu isoi' (the title of dlc) where the truth is told. and he says that if there is something only he knows, that he can tell that truth through fiction.

s+

further tying this book to utsugi and sanemitsu, there is the egregious addition that sanemitsu addresses the declaration to his beloved.

s+

where this can be traced back to them in specific is that ‘la vita nuova’/’a new life’ is the real dante alighieri’s book about his beloved, beatrice. and the only time it appears in base game is as the fallen book you can examine to get reiji to comment on sanemitsu’s lasting relationship with utsugi.

ch 9

thus the book about writing the truth is by code:dante, about his estranged beloved, beatrice, and dante and beatrice are only ever referenced in the game in relation to utsugi and sanemitsu’s relationship. 

the 'truth' we learn in dlc is mostly exposed in utsugi's arc. we learn new things about all the characters, but none of them were concealing their true self to the extent that utsugi was. they all had other people who understood the truth about them, and only utsugi could say that sanemitsu was the only person who ever fully understood him.

utsugi also directly asks sanemitsu to write his story as a final parting wish, and indeed the way his story is initially told follows that last wish. he is an evil villain in the base game, easy to condemn and forget, and this irredeemable and unsympathetic person is how he wanted to be remembered. 

utg dlc

in the forking paths scene, he says that it's alright to think of him as a villain and not acknowledge that he had human emotions too. the illusions in this scene likely come from haruki’s own hopes and fears, and this being the ‘correct’ utsugi establishes that at least haruki believed his act. 

ch 8

dlc contradicts this completely by pulling back the curtain on what utsugi did behind the scene, so how can it still be said that sanemitsu honors his wish? there are plenty of people who played the base game but not dlc. the separation of these two stories ensures that some people will never get to see utsugi as sympathetic. sanemitsu couldn't stand to let the truth die with him, but he could leave enough breathing room so that utsugi's last wish would be fulfilled somewhere, with someone.

part three: unintentional cruelty, hidden kindness

3a. how do i hurt thee? let me count the ways

tying into both the failed good intentions of their actions and whether their will or lack thereof affected their relationship, there are multiple interesting ways in which they are unintentionally cruel to each other within the confines of their own relationship. 

one of the strongest examples we see is that utsugi digs up minoru’s insecurities in the process of trying to help him. starting with kazaru’s suicide note, minoru has been impressed with the idea that his very existence was a mistake, and he should not have been born. utsugi pushes him away in the end, telling him the only thing he can do for utsugi is to disappear and leave.

mnr dlc

in a way, this is a kindness as it is an escape route from the sinking ship that is path to empireo. but simultaneously, it is one of the cruelest ways utsugi can show ‘goodwill.’ it compounds upon kazaru’s original idea, directly pointing to the conclusion that minoru’s very existence is what causes utsugi distress, and thus there are no possible actions minoru can take to help utsugi besides disappearing. it doesn’t feel like a positive or meaningful solution to utsugi’s problems due to minoru simultaneously being the problem when framed like this. 

the previous sections already cover how much utsugi is intentionally cruel to minoru, from specifically digging up anything he can to hurt minoru in 1999 to intentionally sabotaging their relationship without discussion. but this 'solution' that utsugi offers minoru is unique in that it doesn't seem to be aware of how much it will hurt minoru.

moving onto minoru, i’ve discussed a few times already that minoru fails utsugi in the reference room scene, but it feels particularly cruel due to the uniqueness of the situation. it’s the first and only time utsugi directly reaches out for help, possibly ever, and he has nothing to show for it. minoru’s ultimate failure to deliver in that situation only heavily reinforces to utsugi the uselessness of depending on others. 

mnr dlc

he remembers the excuse he gave to minoru in that room, and it’s the only excuse he can come up with to cover up the real reasons he never told minoru when they fight in 1999.

utg dlc

utsugi wishes for reciprocity, that he should be able to offer value to anyone else in the way that he desires love and tenderness from others. it stems from his childhood, children naturally want love and attention from their parents and he was denied all familial love. his family largely regarded him as useless and thus unloveable, and this leads him to believe that if he is 'useful' to someone then they might love him back. 

his grandpa is a key example of this, loving (but abusing) utsugi only because of his birthday, which made him useful to rangiri's delusions. this is the only love he receives as a child, and does much to shape his mindset.

utsugi’s final plea to minoru in the reference room is “if you’re willing to do everything for me-,” which feels reminiscent of what utsugi has already promised hajime (to stay by his side until they both die, it is all of his life, everything.) utsugi could promise everything to a stranger in distress on a whim, and he wishes (impossibly) that minoru could do the same for him.

utg dlc

in a sense, the sentiment of ‘save me’ in that scene already indicates that utsugi has been previously failed by hajime. the original dialogue he shares with hajime (that he clearly remembers and references even many years later) includes the idea that hajime will save everyone, and utsugi will save hajime. 

utg dlc

since utsugi still feels he needs saving, it means hajime has not been able to deliver on his promise of saving everyone. the title of the scene being ‘the hand i failed to take’ show minoru as also clearly failing in this respect. in the end, no one can save utsugi. 

dlc screen(?)

and yet, similarly to utsugi, minoru’s cruelty has good intentions. maybe there was no good way out of that situation, it certainly seems both that utsugi was unwilling to accept help and minoru unable to provide it. utsugi knows minoru can't help him, and he makes these grand demands of minoru as a way of self-sabotage: he already knows minoru will never be able to promise everything to him. minoru has a family, and utsugi will never be his first priority.

on another tragic note, utsugi directly pleads to minoru for a way out of his misery, but hasn’t minoru already been showing him the way out? if hajime accepted being human and wanted to live simply, there would be no need to continue the crimes and experiments. minoru pushes hajime towards humanity but utsugi directly opposes it, showing how unamenable utsugi is to minoru’s idea of helping. 

both of them are people who could've helped each other, but didn't have the proper communication skills or ability at the time they crossed paths. in their struggle to save each other, they only hurt one another more, intentionally or unintentionally.

the base game hides almost all of the kind sides to their cruelty, they're barely even shown as friends. minoru's friendship innately humanizes utsugi, he's the only utsugi confesses his pain to, fights with, and takes out his stress and fears on. minoru witnesses all these emotions he buries with anyone else. they're emotions that make him sympathetic and wholly human, and thus something that cannot be learned about utsugi until dlc.

minoru also repeatedly (undeservedly) forgives utsugi for his unkindness. utsugi is responsible for a lot of pain in minoru's life: surrendering haruki to experiments, leading path to empireo down a dark path, violently pushing him out of both path to empireo and their own friendship, the list continues on for a long while. and while minoru does resent him at points for how much he's suffered at utsugi's hand, he never stops caring for utsugi.

he says things like he shouldn't have ever considered utsugi a friend, utsugi has gone mad, and they come to blows multiple times. but minoru always caves later, still showing concern for utsugi. after their big fight where minoru leaves path to empireo, he asks hajime about utsugi's condition on a visit back. in 1999, after they'd just grievously injured one another, he still laments that utsugi never depended on him.

ch 7

mnr dlc

the way sanemitsu talks about utsugi after they part is not described as happily, sanemitsu insults him to reiji and reiji is certain sanemitsu believed utsugi hated him. but he doesn't allow roses in his house, and reiji says that sanemitsu seems lonely when discussing utsugi. 

ch 8

???dlc beginning

by all rights, sanemitsu should have no warm feelings left for utsugi. the way the narrative repeatedly highlights their pain underscores that, but neither of them can truly let the other go. sanemitsu holds onto the scars utsugi gave him, and utsugi holds onto sanemitsu’s books. even in their physical absence from one another, the memories persist. 

3b. back to the beginning

with how much establishing i’ve done of only harsh things like cruelty, failures, jealousy, disappointment, it’s easy to think utsugi and minoru had a relationship that was only negative. but, the narrative guides us through their relationship in a rather complex timeline: we start with the middle and the consequences before we see the beginning and ending. 

base game shows their relationship as something fraught with arguments, leading up to their first major falling out where minoru leaves path to empireo for the first time and begins to avoid utsugi. there is little shown here that indicates that they had a complicated relationship, it feels like they were simply two people who didn’t get along. the tidbits indicating more depth are generally missable dialogue and details. 

this is somewhat due to all the flashbacks being shown through hajime’s perspective, so that we only see these two as they are around hajime and only while having conversations that concern hajime. 

throughout dlc, this pattern repeats, and there is no great upheaval in the viewer’s understanding until minoru’s dlc episode. the episodes leading up continue to breadcrumb their true nature, with hints like sanemitsu disliking roses in his house, sanemitsu expressing that utsugi took responsibility for everything while drunk in reiji’s episode, utsugi compliments minoru in rai’s dlc, and they have a few exchanges that are more lighthearted in tone than the constant fighting in base game.

minoru’s dlc finally throws the curtain back entirely, where it is fully revealed that, once upon a time, they were true and proper friends. their first meeting is amicable and remarkably normal, utsugi talking to minoru about his reporting and behaving awkwardly about a compliment paid to him. 

mnr dlc

we know utsugi values compliments highly, since he vows his life to hajime after hajime calls him kind and gentle (among other reasons.) so that minoru compliments utsugi on his sermon and speaking ability, something that truly belongs to him (in comparison to something like a birthday, which is random), is especially meaningful to utsugi.

mnr dlc

in the following scenes, we see them teasing each other and talking frankly about developments in their lives. utsugi sets up several arrangements for the isoi’s marriage and seems to seriously wish them well.

mnr dlc

their friendship couldn’t be more normal, save for utsugi carefully keeping his distance and drawing a line between them due to his obligation to hajime. he seems to like being around minoru, but deflects admitting any personal attachment when questioned, using hajime’s like of minoru instead. this foreshadows just how much he will put hajime above anyone else, even those he also likes, and how he has carefully sculpted his other relationships to fit within that hierarchy in advance. 

of course, he ultimately fails in sectioning minoru out. there are a number of other characters (haruki, noa, etc.) that utsugi is kind to, but he doesn't form the same attachment to them that he does to minoru. in the end, when he's saying his goodbyes, the only people he mentions are minoru and hajime. hajime, as the person he loved; the world, as something he hated; and minoru as something between the two. 

part five: generational yaoi

one of the most impactful things revealed about the relation between minoru and utsugi in dlc is that it spanned multiple generations. the actions of their grandparents caused so many shock waves that there is a belief (whether true or not) that the story now actively resists the interaction of the two families. i’ve already touched heavily on the idea of the factors of their families: they are certainly the largest reason utsugi abruptly changes, dooming the friendship between him and minoru. the series has lots of commentary on the hereditary way our family shapes us and cycles of behavior, and minoru and utsugi are no exception. 

part 5a. carrying on the family legacy 

both utsugi and minoru have intense family issues, coming to shun their family name and legacy in time. but they both inevitably carry it forward, regardless.

utsugi leaves his family’s company and doesn’t pursue pharmacy or business leadership in a strict sense, instead, he becomes a medical researcher and executive in path to empireo. ironically, while he could not come into his own as a confident leader under the guidance of his family, he naturally grows into that confidence after he leaves. he needed purpose and passion to grow into his full potential as a scientist and leader, something he lacked when his family neglected him.

similarly, minoru breaks from the family tradition of fiction writers to become a reporter. but even then, he shows in DLC that he is preparing to write novels. it fits with his character arc: reporters passively observe reality but writers actively create it, and he himself is starting to reclaim control and power in his own life. but still, it places him among the company of the many fiction writers of the harada line. sanemitsu certainly has some measure of control over the narrative and way it is told, shown by his position in system n.h., the group credited with the creation of this series of games. this places his actions as remarkably similar to mutei harada’s designs on manipulating characters and creating stages. 

part 5b. the cycle 

both minoru and utsugi are haunted by their childhoods, which build up to their issues that cause ruin in their interpersonal relationships. these are issues that are inflicted on them by their parents: utsugi’s parents reinforcing utsugi’s ideal of isolation and self-dependency, and minoru’s parents showing him how to run away from love and regret being born. and naturally, these beliefs were likely initially formed in turn by how mutei and rangiri treated the next generation. 

they cannot escape the influence of their respective families in this fashion, and also in how they explicitly won’t let the other forget their lineage. minoru is not actually ‘minoru harada’ in the series for very long, he marries rai isoi early on to become ‘minoru isoi.’ but names are a social thing, and neither hajime nor utsugi let go of the harada surname. that both utsugi and minoru address each other by their family names instead of given names is important, they both stand as friends who could use more familiar terms of address and choose not to. their relationship is undeniably shaped by their family history though, and so these family names are inescapable. 

their relationship is similarly cyclical, where they attempt to break out of their patterns and yet return to them in the end. minoru’s relationships are best shaped by his fear of gaining love and then losing it, thinking it better to not have loved in the first place. utsugi’s relationships are best shaped by inequality, where he is accustomed to loving someone more than he receives in turn. 

their relationship starts out subverting these concepts, beginning with how utsugi is hesitant in closing the distance with minoru. minoru then quickly pushes to be closer, upsetting utsugi’s status quo and newly putting him in the position of not being the one who loves more. and the lack of a deep relationship to lose gives minoru confidence to keep arguing with and pursuing utsugi, even as their mundane friendship melts into animosity, something that should usually scare minoru off. utsugi was always a bit cold to minoru, so what warmth and kindness would minoru stand to lose by upsetting him?

but, in the end we see the relationship ultimately return to the forms they are most familiar with. minoru runs away in 1999, abandoning utsugi and certainly being saddled with the painful regret of lost love. utsugi remains behind, having settled back into his typical unequal relationships. he remembers and thinks of minoru even sixteen years later, while minoru has moved on and found a new family. 

part six: other allusions

aside from the clear line to how they both represent their families, there's several other allusions baked into their relationship. one of the most significant being how they tie into the divine comedy.

minoru is born on the day of dante's death, and utsugi shares a birthday with the poet virgil. minoru both is and isn't dante, he fails earlier in life to fulfil to reach any kind of enlightenment (thus the death day being his birthday) but later on he becomes "code:dante." haruki is notably also representative of dante, the whole harada line having a close tie to the author.

utsugi is tied to virgil by his birth and also by his relation to both minoru and haruki. virgil is a mentor, a guide, and a friend. he is close and intimate with dante, assisting him on his journey through hell but unable to accompany him in heaven. utsugi similarly is a figment of sanemitsu's difficult past, a valued friend who cannot accompany him in the lighter, easier parts of his life.

the utsugi line isn't all associated with virgil in the same way the harada line ties to dante, noriyuki utsugi alone is the 'guide.'

their relationship is similarly foreshadowed in the similarities it holds to nina and jabuchi's relationship. there's much to say here, but to keep it basic: jabuchi and nina start out happy, jabuchi goes down a difficult path without telling nina, nina finds out the truth too late and cannot save jabuchi, but she decides to honors his memory by witnessing and remembering his death. it's a clear parallel to the way sanemitsu and utsugi's relationship develops, where similarly utsugi suffers silently and pushes minoru away, and the only thing minoru can do is honor his death. read more here: TODO

part seven: conclusion

overall, i think i touched on many things i wanted to say about these two, and i still have many more words… but this was already very long, i imagine. i hope you got something out of it. this is solely my interpretation, and i think there are room for many more. 

one of the best things about the relationship between utsugi and minoru to me is that it is so ambiguous. love existed but it was not merely love, and hate existed but there was not merely hate. anything in-between those black and white values can be argued. minoru has the more clear-cut regret and affection, but still mocks and curses utsugi at times, showing the depth to which they hurt each other. 

and still, they clearly love each other. they sacrifice, remember, and pray for one another. they were friends in the very beginning, and sanemitsu is the last person utsugi ever addresses, entrusting him with his final wish. in turn, sanemitsu never lets the wounds utsugi gave him heal. 

[na-na-namine]

Is it weird that I’ve lost interest in Firefly/Sam?

I was originally on board with the Firefly-being-Sam reveal cause I believed it was a brilliant way of turning the tragic love interest trope on its head.

Like, picture this: the sweet, chronically ill girl Stelle loved and lost comes back and reveals that she’s a merciless killer. Not only that, she’s been in league with the Stellaron Hunters, the rival group to the Astral Express, all along.

But she wasn’t pretending to be a vulnerable person, because that’s who she wants to be. The wonderful dream called Penacony allows her to live out the fantasy of being a normal girl, unburdened by her ailing body or the cold armor - to be free of bloodshed and allow herself to live in the moment, to have fun, and maybe even fall in love.

But dreams are just dreams, reality is cruel. And in reality, Firefly sees nothing but scorched earth and flames. She has never wept for the countless lives she took, and will continue to take countless more if she has too. She’s a bitter killing machine who takes out her anger and frustration on her targets without restraint, hateful to world that made it so she can’t live a normal life outside of her “medical cabin”.

And yet, despite all of that, she still clings on to that single emotional connection she has with Stelle, even if it’s only possible in a dream. She hopes with all of her heart that Stelle will accept her for who she is, bloodstained warts and all.

…

What we get instead is a girl who’s too nice to her allies. A girl who’s too heroic for a killing machine. The other Trailblazers trust and care about her too quickly. Also, it turns out Firefly can walk freely outside of her mech suit (if only for a certain amount of time).

The bloodshed, the lives taken, the worlds left ruined, the missions completed in the wake of flames - all of those things that made Firefly “Sam” and “Sam” Firefly were all too easily swept under the rug.

Conflict is what crafts good stories and characters. And I couldn’t help but feel there was a distinct lack of conflict involving Firefly’s character, especially in regard to her relationship with Stelle. I can’t help but feel robbed of a morally-ambiguous love interest for our main character.

Firefly’s edges were sanded off and we’re left with an easily marketed waifu-bait character for gacha gamers. And I find that to be utterly boring.

…

…

…And because I know some idiot is going to take this post completely out of context, I’m not saying I want Firefly/Sam to be a grimdark edgy character devoid of softness. I’m saying that there should be a tangible conflict involving the kind of person Firefly wants to be (Firefly: kind & vulnerable) vs the person she presents herself as (Sam: merciless & unfeeling).

[mooshs-crack-headcanons]

Okay, I mean this in no disrespect about Miphlink, Miphlink shippers *mwah* love you guys, but me for me personally I like Miphlink but only with it in the context of it being one sidded AND Mipha being 100% completely aware of it's unrequitedness.

Why? Because I. Love. Angst. I thrive off it.

Like Mipha is a sweet, compassionate girl with a heart of pure gold - but she isn't stupid. She isn't oblivious to the blink and you'll miss it searching glances that goes on between Link and Princess Zelda, the devotion he has for her that goes well beyond than just a knight doing his job. She isn't ignorant to glimmering shine that lights up in the princess' eyes every time she looks at her chosen knight either, the genuine expression that melts across her face that is all devoid of the facade she presents wherever on official royal duties. Love. Clear and obvious love that is impossible to ignore even if it stabs and knaws at the Zora princess' heart each and every time she sees it.

How she wished deeply in her heart of hearts, how she wished and pray to the goddess that maybe one day... Link would look at her the same way. But then she quickly realizes how silly and selfish that sounds every time and that breaks her heart even more. It'd be so cruel to wish something like that because then it'd be hurting both Link and Zelda and she absolutely doesn't want that - both of them are very dear friends to her and she doesn't want to warm that because of some... silly feelings. Silly, deep, feelings.

For quite some time she sits up on Vah Ruta's spout and truly recollects on the matter. Each day she thinks, traces her slight taloned fingertips over the blade of her trident and staring back at her reflection on its blade. She really did love the hero, she knows her feelings are true and much before the realization that his heart actually belonged to someone else she... started making him the armor. Since then she's hiddened it, far from any eyes to see and is positively sure the only ones to know about its existence is her father and little Sidon - who'd actually helped a bit himself in the stitching of the scales which even now still brings a small smile to her lips. There's no reason to finish it now, surely, but on the other hand something ate at her to accompanied by a voice saying maybe it'll be important one day to fulfill at least some kind of purpose, even if it wasn't for its original intention.

Mipha pauses on the thought, her eyes scanning over through the mountains and towards the direction of the castle in the kingdom's heart. She heard rather recently from Urbosa that Link has been sneaking Princess Zelda out of the castle at night to continue her sheikah research, going the King's direct orders.

A knight disobeying the word of his king. He did that for her.

The Zora sighs. That sounds very like him, she admired that about him and even so she's glad to hear the princess had still continue her research, it was no hidden secret that one of her main interests so if she continue to pursue it than that makes her happy. And the princess happy obviously made Link happy, which in turn makes Mipha happy at the end of the day.

Her mind crawls back to the armor.

...maybe... she could finish it. Not as some token of engagement as Zora tradition willed it, though she is aware exactly how it will look to most Zora when she gives it to the hero, how they'll interpret it and try to spin it off as a romantic thing but... the creation of armor like this without a doubt is a very special an and intimate one, very personal. So it'd have to mean just as much if she were to give it as a... blessing, right? Her personal blessing for Link and Zelda's relationship. Her token of acceptance, even if it stung.

She very quickly went to work.

Every single night, even after long days of training and attending to her royal duties she takes some time to work on the armor. She pays attention to fine detail - making sure every row of scales that aline the sturdy fabric are in the correct shape and positioning that would make the set suitable to be worn even years and decades from now. Regal - she makes it, with every pattern melted in the pauldrons and the pretty eye catching glimmer of sapphires that danced in between the threads of the fabric. Perfect, she wants it to be perfect. To symbolic represent how much Link means to her and how happy she is with his happiness and love to the princess. She loves seeing him happy and wishes for everything in the world just to keep him happy.

Even if she has to watch him grow old, together hand in hand with the woman he actually loves and eventually... die. And Mipha will still be young, and live life long without him, that's the sad truth between human and zora lifespans. So this all is for the best.

Weeks and months leading through the armors creation process, even in the final hours until its completely finished and ready to present.

She still can't stop the uncontrollable tears streaming down her face.

[dustedmagazine]

Robbie Basho — Snow Beneath the Belly of a White Swan: The Lost Live Recordings (Tompkins Square)

Snow Beneath the Belly of a White Swan : The Lost Live Recordings by Robbie Basho

The rediscovery of the guitarist, composer, and singer who presented himself to the world as Robbie Basho continues with this release of more than four hours of live recordings from his too-brief career (1965-1986). Snow Beneath the Belly of a White Swan is a major achievement, equally successful as documentation of the underappreciated composer and performer and as vital and beautiful music. Like Song of the Avatars (2020), which gathered unreleased demos and studio recordings, this collection, also released by Tompkins Square, expands significantly the amount of Basho’s music that is available. Packaged with archival photos and images of concert posters, the 30 live tracks (presented over five CDs in the physical release) provide a fascinating perspective on Basho’s music and its context.

Basho’s often lengthy excursions on acoustic guitar, at times accompanied by powerful and eerie singing, came to the attention of John Fahey, whose Takoma Records released a series of his albums in the mid to late 1960s. Featuring eclectic mysticism and showcasing stunning, if unorthodox, guitar and vocal technique, none of these albums sold particularly well. However, constant shows at coffee shops, bars, and college campuses across the country managed to land Basho a contract with the celebrated Vanguard label for a few years in the early 1970s. His Vanguard recordings also failed to attract a large audience, though, and he soldiered on with touring and small-batch releases on his own or on obscure new age labels until his death from overly aggressive chiropractic treatment in 1986.

Basho lived precariously on the edge of the music industry, a professional musician who was shy and socially awkward, a product of hippy culture who eschewed drugs (“I’m completely straight,” he declares before playing “Autumn Nocturne”) and was apparently devoid of guile or irony. As Robbie Dawson discusses in the liner notes, in the pre-digital era, Basho was never represented by an agent and had to rely on word of mouth, the post office, and phone calls to schedule his tours and market his recordings, usually with little or no support from a label. The unfavorable reviews that Dawson quotes and tepid applause following some of the tracks documented here suggest the difficulty that Basho experienced finding and connecting with audiences. All the more remarkable, then, are the passion and commitment that he demonstrates onstage.

Such challenges aside, these recordings demonstrate how accomplished a musician Basho was. Largely self-taught, his approach to the guitar and singing tends toward maximalism without being overblown. His fingerpicking on the six- and 12-string (it is sometimes difficult to tell which he’s playing) ranges from delicate (e.g., “Silver Curls”) to ferocious (“Charles Ives Paints Modern America”), sometimes within the same tune (“Portrait of Fahey as a Young Dragoon”). His influence is so pervasive in modern Takoma school guitar music (Jack Rose, Glenn Jones, James Blackshaw, Daniel Bachman, etc.) that its revolutionary character is easy to forget, and Snow Beneath the Belly serves as a reminder of his uniqueness.

The standout tracks include what seem to be the longest recorded versions of “Cathedrals et Fleur de Lis” and “California Raga,” both of which unfurl with stately majesty and offer insights into Basho’s thinking as a composer. Some tunes, such as “The Golden Shamrock,” which crackles with energy, are close to the studio versions, showing evidence of careful polishing. Other live versions differ from the studio versions in interesting ways. “Orphan’s Lament” on guitar —  rather than piano, as it appears on Visions of the Country (1978) — sounds every bit as mournful and a little more emotionally raw; “Chung Mei” sounds a little more conventional without the wonderful whistling that features on the studio recording; and the live version of “Green River Suite” appears as an instrumental rather than vocal number.

There are also a fair number of previously unknown or unpublished titles that will delight Basho-philes. At least some of these seem to be earlier or alternative versions of known tunes. “In the Meadows,” for instance, is reminiscent of “The Dharma Prince,” and the title track bears a passing resemblance to “Pavan Hindustan.” “Bear Medicine,” on the other hand, starts out with harmonics and a riff suggestive of John Fahey’s “America” before going off in a different direction.

Fahey is, in fact, a recurrent background figure in Snow Beneath the Belly. To begin with, two of the tracks are covers of his tunes (one each from his first two albums), being among the very few covers in Basho’s recorded output, and Fahey’s name appears in one of the song titles. Also, Basho repeatedly mentions Fahey in his stage banter. For instance, after crediting Fahey with the cover songs, he says proudly, “John Fahey is my friend,” and he repeats this claim at the end of “Song of God,” though it is difficult to imagine the sarcastic and irascible Fahey similarly describing the earnest and gentle Basho, of whom he once said “I never hung out with Robbie personally much. Nobody did. You couldn't.” Basho also introduces “Himalayan Highlands” as intended for Fahey’s wedding. It is fortunate for the development of guitar music that these two young men — both transplants from the Northeast to California shaped in part by childhood traumas and driven by idiosyncratic artistic visions — found each other, and Fahey deserves credit for recognizing the quality of Basho’s work (including his singing), releasing six of his albums, and helping revive interest in him through the release of the Bashovia collection on CD in 2001.

Basho’s banter is a delight throughout, showing him alternatively confident and diffident. In the introduction to “Chaconne Fandango” (which indicates that the title should read “Chicano” rather than “Chaconne”), he describes the tune as “a fun number” (though “Fahey said I was too serious”); interestingly, this peppy tune is greeted by fairly thunderous applause. He acknowledges making mistakes, for instance, declaring “I’m three for four this evening” before “Cathedrals et Fleur de Lis,” and reflects on his process, introducing “California Raga” as “a new type of music I’ve been working on for some time.” His devotion to the Indian spiritual teacher Meher Baba is also on display in the dedication of his performance at the beginning to “Song of God.”

Some of these recordings have been released previously. This version of “A Song of Kings,” for example, appears on the Live at St. Mary’s College of California set recorded in the mid-1970s, and “Charles Ives Paints Modern America” is included in the Portrait of Basho as a Young Dragoon collection, both released in 2010s by the apparently now defunct Grass-Tops Recordings. “Kowaka d’ Amour” appeared on the Tompkins Square compilation Imaginational Anthem 2 (2006), and “Chaconne Fandango” is the same as “Fandango” found on the 1/29/75 demos, also released by Grass-Tops. In every case, the sound quality of the Snow Beneath the Belly version is superior. This collection is not, however, comprehensive; for example, the Reed College bootleg recordings from August 4, 1967 are not represented.

Over all, the sound quality is remarkably good given that these recordings were mainly sourced from Basho’s decades-old personal tape archive. The remastered digital files come across warm and full, and the vocals and guitar are well-balanced. The few tunes, such as “Wonder Song,” that are of sound low quality are worthy of inclusion, in this case because this specific title is not found elsewhere and the playing and singing are prime Basho (and, indeed, the tape distortion of Basho’s voice serendipitously contributes to the power of this performance).

Tompkins Square deserves praise for cleaning up this trove of material and making it available in an attractive passage with well-written liner notes. Robbie Basho was a singular talent whose music, like Fahey’s, seems certain to find an audience in every new generation, and his live recordings, as this collection shows, are a vital part of that legacy.

Jim Marks