#read more test

[what-am-i-doing-in-this-fandom]

Suddenly, bell bottoms aren't so bad

Bonus sketch, because I had to vv

"Stop checking out my assistant, Stanley."

[ruporas]

vw sketches (id in alt)

[commsroom]

the u.s.s. horrible unending nightmare 💥 (once again from the incredible @hehearse)

[crowiin]

[baladiumsdrive]

Maybe someday Sora will figure out why he wants Riku to call him this bad… 👀

[ryllen]

[mblue-art]

once again i was fueled with coffee (did not sleep the whole night) but this time i doodled college au to cope bc ofc i did (also did not feel like sleeping wooo)

[tangramkey]

i love my Basketbot Portal AU

[lord-squiggletits]

I think the key component to my personal reading of post-Delphi Pharma is that he's trying to be a horrible person on purpose. Not "on purpose" in the way that people have free will to exercise their own choices, but in that Pharma's "mad doctor" persona is a performance he puts on to deliberately embrace how much everyone else hates him. Basically, if people already think you're a "bad Autobot" and a horrible doctor who just kills his patients for fun, why try to prove otherwise to people who have already made up their minds about you? Just fully embrace the fact that people see you as an asshole. Don't try to change their minds. Don't plead for their forgiveness or understanding. Just stop caring. If you're going to be remembered as a monster, you might as well be a memorable monster, and eke as much pleasure and hedonism as you can out of it before karma catches up to you and you inevitably crash and burn.

I mean, I guess you could just go the route of "Oh, Pharma was always a fucked up creepy guy and Delphi was just him taking the mask off," but I really don't like that interpretation because, for one, it feels really wrong to take a character like Pharma becoming evil under duress and going, "Oh well clearly he did the things he did because he was evil all along," as if somehow Pharma breaking under blackmail/torture/threat of horrible death was a sign of him having poor moral character. As opposed to, you know, suffering under the very real threat of horrible death for himself and everyone he cares about while being manipulated by a guy who specializes in psychological torture.

The second reason is that it just doesn't make sense to write Pharma as having been evil all along. I mean...

Occam's Razor says that the best argument is the one with the simplest explanation. Doesn't it make way more sense to take Pharma's appearances in flashbacks, his friendship with Ratchet, his stunning medical accomplishments, and the few we see of him speaking kindly/sympathetically (or in the least charitable interpretation, at least professionally) towards his patients and conclude "This guy was just a normal person, if exceptionally talented." Taking all of these flashback appearances at face value and assuming Pharma was being genuine/honest is a way simpler and more logical explanation than trying to argue that Pharma for the past 4 million years was just faking being a good doctor/person. I mean, it's possible within the realm of headcanon, but the fact is Pharma's appearances in the story are so brief that there simply wasn't room in the story for there to be some sort of secret conspiracy/hidden manipulation behind why Pharma acted the way he did in the past.

I just can't help but look at things like Pharma's friendship with Ratchet (himself a good person and usually a fine judge of character) and the fact that even post-Delphi, pretty much every single mention of Pharma comes with some mention of "He was a good doctor for most of his life" or "He was making major headways in research [before he started killing patients]" which implies that even the Autobots themselves see Pharma's villainy as a recent turn in his life compared to how for "most of his life" he "used to be" a good doctor.

And although Pharma doesn't know this, we as the readers (and even other characters like Rung) know about Aequitas technology and the fact that it actually works, so... if Pharma really was an unrepentant murderer, why couldn't he get through the forcefield too? The Aequitas forcefield doesn't require that a person be completely morally pure and free of wrongdoing or else how could Tyrest get through, just that they feel a sense of inner peace and lack feelings of guilt. Pharma has murdered and tortured people by this point, and put on quite a campy and theatrical show of how much he sees it as a fun game, so why then can he not get through?

It circles back to my headcanon at the start of this post that the "mad doctor" persona is just that-- a persona. Delphi/post-Delphi Pharma's laughing madman personality is just so far removed from every flashback we saw of him and everything we can infer based on how other people see/saw him before that, to me, the mad doctor act is (at least in large part, if not fully) a persona that Pharma puts on to put his villainy in the forefront.

To avoid an overly simplistic/ableist take, I don't think Tarn tortured Pharma into turning crazy. To me, it's more like the constant pressure of death by horrific torture, the feeling of martyrdom as Pharma kept secret that he was the only one standing between Delphi and annihilation, the physical isolation of Messatine as well as the emotional separation from Ratchet, being forced to violate his medical oaths (pretty much the only thing Pharma's entire life has been about), etc. All of that combined traumatized Pharma to the point that the only way he could avoid cracking was to just stop caring about all of it. Because at least then, even if he's still murdering patients to save Delphi from a group of sadistic freaks, Pharma doesn't have to feel guilty and sick about doing it. As opposed to the alternatives, which were probably either going off the deep end and killing himself to escape, or confessing to what he did and getting jailed for it.

In that light, Pharma becoming a mad doctor makes sense. It avoids the bad writing tropes of "oh this character who was good his entire life was actually just evil and really good at hiding it" as well as "oh he got tortured and went crazy that's why he's so random and silly and killing people, he's crazy" and instead frames Pharma's evil as something he was forced into, to the point where in order to avoid a full psychological breakdown and keep defending Delphi, he just had to stop caring about the sanctity of life or about what other people might think of him.

Then, of course, the actual Delphi episode happens, and Pharma's own lifelong best friend Ratchet basically spits in his face and sees him as nothing more than a crazy murderer who went rogue from being a good Autobot. Then Pharma gets his hands cut off and left to die on Messatine. At that point, Pharma has not only been mentally/emotionally broken into losing his feelings of compassion, he's received the message loud and clear: He is alone. Everyone hates him. Not even his own best friend likes him any more. No one even cared enough about him to check if he actually died or not. He will only ever be remembered as a doctor who went insane and killed his patients.

So in the light of 1. Having all of your redeeming qualities be squeezed out of you one by one for the sake of survival and 2. Having your reputation and all of your positive relationships be destroyed and 3. People only know/care about you as "that doctor who became evil and killed his patients" rather than the millions of years of good service that came before.

What else is there to do but internalize the fact that you'll forever be seen as a monster and a freak, and embrace it? People already see you as a murderer for that blackmail deal you did, so why not become an actual murderer and just start killing people on a whim? People already see you as an irredeemable monster who puts a stain on the Autobot name, so why beg for their forgiveness when you could just shun them back? You've already become a murderer, a traitor, and a horrible doctor, so what's a few more evil acts added to the pile? It's not like anyone will ever forgive you or love you ever again.

Why care? Why try to hold on to your principles of compassion, kindness, medical ethics, when an entire lifetime of being a good person did nothing to save you from blackmail and then abandonment? Why put yourself through the emotional agony of feeling lonely, guilty, miserable, when you could just... stop caring, and not hurt any more?

[marblerose-rue]

click for better quality!

it's this way! / squirrelpaw and leafpaw

[lunarharp]

What led to this (orufrey comic, cw an uncomfortable/creepy scene)

[ruporas]

in a mood (ID in alt)

[sadclowncentral]

I haven't heared the door knobs and fascism thing before, can you elaborate?

gladly! i was referencing one of the aphorisms by Theodor W. Adorno, Do Not Knock, one of my favourite philosophical texts, certainly top 5.

I would summarise it for you, but it's quite a short text and i am not embarrassing myself by trying to summarise Adorno, so I have transcribed it for you under the cut:

60. Do Not Knock

Technology is making gestures precise and brutal, and with them men. It expels from movements all hesitation, deliberation, civility. It subjects them to the implacable, as it were ahistorical demands of objects, Thus the ability is lost, for example, to close a door quietly and discreetly, yet firmly. Those of cars and refrigerators have to be slammed, others have the tendency to snap shut by themselves, imposing on those entering the bad manners of not looking behind them, not shielding the interior of the house which receives them. The new human type cannot be properly understood without awareness of what the is continuously exposed to from the world of things about him, even in his most secret innervations.

What does it mean for the subject that there are no more casements windows to open, but only sliding frames to shove, not gentle latches but turnable handles, no forecourt, no doorstep before the street, no wall around the garden? And which diver is not tempted, merely but the power of his engine, to wipe out the vermin of the street pedestrians, children and cyclists? The movements machines demand of their users already have the violent, hard-hitting, unresting jerkiness of Fascist maltreatment.

Not least to blame for the withering of experience is the fact that things, under the law of pure functionality, assume a form that limits contact with them to mere operation, and tolerates no surplus, either in freedom of conduct or in autonomy of things, which would survive as the core of experience, because it is not consumed by the moment of action.

[sskk-manifesto]

Bungou Stray Dogs: Dead Apple and how “ability users” (opposite to “normal people”) learning to accept themselves through the acceptance of their own abilities is a queer metaphor of acceptance of own's sexual orientation and gender: an essay by me

[chipped-chimera]

Finally got a fancy(tm) pic of my aquarium - think I figured out the solution to awful photos is just I have to do them at night because the hugeass window in my room directly adjacent ruins everything. Going to try and take a pic like this weekly to track growth!

Anyway it's looking close? Closeish? to being cycled so the question is: WHAT COLOUR SHRIMP

[ihaveforgortoomany]

The quote at the very beginning of Reverse 1999 (spoilers for the Great Gatsby by Scot Fitzgerald i guess)

Speculation

I haven't seen anyone talk about this quote, I don't blame anyone since the text appears very briefly in which Vertin starts speaking, but I think the quote should be taken into consideration for the game to introduced by this quote + the fact that Fitzgerald's novels are referenced twice in game (the fore mentioned quote and Chapter Two)

The quote:

"It eluded us the but that's no matter - tomorrow we will run faster stretch our arms out farther .... And one fine morning - So we beat on, boats against the current, borne ceaselessly into the past"

This is the final line in the Great Gatsby published in 1925 as the penultimate novel by Fitzgerald, the final being Tender is the Night (I haven't read yet but probably should later heh).

This describes the tragedy of Gatsby's dream, an effort to reclaim the past and his love Daisy Buchanan that ultimately ends in his death. The line can be interpreted as either the inevitability of the past coming back or the futility of obtaining your dreams because of obstacles or the "current" (for Gatsby this is his social class and the hedonism of the Jazz Age/ 1920s).

So... Reverse 1999 introduces us with this quote and notably we hear Vertin say "No, it is not, the storm is coming" almost as a response to the quote.

This is again speculation but it sounds like the quote here sets up the narrative themes of the game, the concept of being trapped or doomed by your own past is made into a literal (physical?) entity of the storm - actively stealing away the future away from 1999. It sets up how Vertin stands in opposition to the Storm and seeks to find the truth and return to the year 1999.

I may explore this further but the game narratively deals with themes of being defined the trapped by your past (Forget Me Not, Manus Vindicate) vs moving forward to the future (Druvis, Vertin, etc) which can be seen in very chapter and event story so far.

It should be noted that the Great Gatsby is tragedy, if this is implying that Vertin's goal is ultimately doomed to fail it is too early to make concrete answers (but 100% we all on the pain train with no breaks and orange snacks).

In short the quote could be establishing Reverse 1999's theme of attempting to reclaim/ go back to the past vs moving forward to the future.

(Wow this is long)