#so I instead described the headspaces of the characters to portray what I mean

[yujeong]

Writer's ask game: 8, 16, 24, 32.

For #100/wildcard: We're one episode into 4 Minutes. Is there a character that you're already drawn to or excited to write about? Or a detail from the show so far that you're eager to explore in your writing?

Hiiiii! OMG, thank you so much for sending me this, what a pleasant surprise in my inbox 🥺❤️

8. What’s your relationship with constructive criticism and feedback like? Do you seek it out? How well do you take it?

Hmm, it depends on who gives it to me and why. If a friend notices a typo or a grammatical mistake - as I do tend to make those - then I'll be happy to be informed, although now that I have my brilliant beta reader to help me, I don't think any of them slip out. In general, I do seek out feedback from them in all the stages of my writing (from the construction of the fic idea, to the characterization, the prose, the editing, the research of the topic, all of it), which happens a LOT - you should see the comment chains on my docs honestly - and for that reason, I wouldn't like receiving a comment on my fics with constructive criticism. I don't see the point when I have people I trust to ask for things like that. I rarely receive comments as it is, so I'd prefer it if people mentioned the positives, how much they liked the story and why. For everything else, I have help + Tumblr, if they want to ask me questions or talk to me about anything.

16. Where is your favorite place to write?

This is going to make me sound like a psycho, but I love writing on my phone while on public transport, especially on the underground train. On my laptop, I can't get into the mindset to write often, especially the last couple of months. I just can't focus much. Normally, when I'm writing on my phone, it's part writing, part editing already-written text. I also write a lot on my notebook, which can also happen on public transport (yes, even smut).

24. On average, how much writing do you get done in a day?

I'm a very inconsistent writer for this question I'm afraid, I don't have a schedule and it can be days or even weeks before I type words on a doc. But, since you asked, assuming I could keep writing even a little on the daily, I'd say it's between 100-300 words, unless I get super inspired and it goes up to like, 500.

32. Do characters influence your writing style?

Oh, I love this question. For me, I'd say yes and no. No because I believe my prose is...hm, simple and there's not much of a style there? So, even if there are changes between POVs, it's still essentially the same to me.

But also, yes, because every character's POV is different; they talk differently, they notice different things, their headspace varies and all that reflects on the prose. I'll give a few examples:

- Macau's POV is, for lack of a better word, more word-y: he has a lot of thoughts and a lot of anxiety, so it includes longer sentences and it's more emotional. Just an endless flow of angsty thoughts and a lot of casual dialogue, especially towards people he dislikes or doesn't trust,

(Pete doesn't immediately follow him; he's talking to Porsche a little further away from the car, who for some reason is at the main family compound today. Macau doesn’t know why. He got a brand new home as a reward from his uncle, didn't he? He can go there and spare Macau from having to look at his stupid face.)

- Vegas' POV is heavy, with thoughts that aren't always directly stated, due to Vegas being a coward about them. So, his POV does include longer sentences, though not constantly, it includes subtlety, tension, aversion to face himself and it's just generally a more charged reading experience than other ones. Also, my man is very dramatic, so the prose becomes dramatic, too,

("There are days when... when I can't control it," he whispered, as if to prevent Pete from being able to hear him, as if to keep the ugly truth to himself. It was a foolish thought. Pete was able to hear everything, sometimes even things Vegas hadn’t actually said, but were festering deep inside his heart.)

- Porsche's POV is way less heavy, more playful and very observant some times, while not at all observant other times, so there are details that will be missed through his eyes, especially if it's an uncomfortable truth he'd rather avoid. His dialogue is also more casual; he's like Macau in that regard, but his is less childish,

(The moment they're on their own, Pete’s movements become almost manic as he lights his cigarette and inhales sharply, holding it with trembling fingers. Porsche can only look in awe of the shift in Pete's demeanor. Was he like this the whole night and Porsche just didn’t notice?)

- Kim's POV was one of the trickiest I had to deal with. This kid is a LOT: he's incredibly observant, closed off, anxious, suspicious of everyone and everything, avoidant of his own feelings, he yearns for something he doesn't know how to name, and all this makes every single word in the prose carry many different meanings, which as a writer you have to smoothly include,

(Pete flinched. Kim hadn’t even used that much force and Pete flinched. It made that indescribable feeling settle between Kim’s lungs, preventing him from breathing normally.)

- Now, Pete's POV is the hardest and the most challenging, but it's the POV I love writing from the most. He's a person who's not a person, so I try to reflect that through my prose; I've written a whole fic through his POV in which his name is never mentioned. Short, punchy sentences are what I normally write with him, aversion to state the obvious, aversion to acknowledge hurtful things or twisting them into seeming normal or acceptable. I could go on and on about him, but I'll refrain from making this post longer.

(He heard his name. It sounded so strange coming out of Vegas’ mouth. Like it didn't belong there. Like he said it by mistake in his effort to call him something else.)

NOW, for the 100th question, I'd act surprised that you asked me about 4 Minutes, but I think my blog activities have made it quite evident there's at least potential I'll get inspired to write fic for it hahhah.

As it's become tradition with every BOC production, the side couple has grabbed me by the throat. KornTonkla is insanely juicy to me and Tonkla even more so, because we didn't get as many details about him as we did about Korn. What is his work? How did he end up becoming Korn's sugar baby? Why does he still want to work even though Korn is paying for everything? What was the whole deal with the black cat in his apartment? So, so many questions and such potential for exploration in fic form. So, you can expect a fic or two about KornTonkla from me, or maybe even sth solely Tonkla centered, we'll see ❤️

[prisoner009]

Here is why I, a person who has DID, think that Mikoto also has DID. I have seen a lot of misinformation about the disorder in the Milgram tag so I will try to correct them with the best of my abilities. And just a heads up, I am not interested in arguing whether or not Mikoto is a singlet or not since I had this conversation with others several times. This is just what I think Milgram meant to portray.

Before I start, please be mindful of the fact that Mikoto isn't a real person and I don't think he is a great DID rep however I feel like a lot of people just ignore the fact that he has DID because "it is ableist" while it is true we shouldn't ignore the obvious intention of the series, Milgram doesn't like being vague about the prisoners as seen with others. Here is the diagnostic criteria for DID. Code 300.14 "A. Disruption of identity characterized by two or more distinct personality states, which may be described in some cultures as an experience of possession. The disruption of marked discontinuity in sense of self and sense of agency, accompanied by related alterations in affect, behavior, consciousness, memory, perception, cognition, and/or sensory-motor functioning. These signs and symptoms may be observed by others or reported by the individual. B. Recurrent gaps in the recall of everyday events, important personal information, and/or traumatic events that are inconsistent with ordinary forgetting. C. The symptoms cause clinically significant distress or impairment in social, occupational, or other important areas of functioning. D. The disturbance is not a normal part of a broadly accepted cultural or religious practice. Note: In children, the symptoms are not better explained by imaginary playmates or other fantasy play. E. The symptoms are not attributable to the physiological effects of a substance (e.g., blackouts or chaotic behavior during alcohol intoxication) or another medical condition (e.g., complex partial seizures)." 1) "Disruption of identity characterized by two or more distinct personality states" for the sake of clarity, I will refer to Mikoto's alter as "Other Mikoto". Mikoto himself is very sociable, kind and has a more sweeter tone to his voice. He calls most prisoners by nicknames even though he isn't really familiar with them. In John Doe voice drama Mikoto gets stressed and switches to "Other Mikoto". Other Mikoto talks more like a delinquent, swears a lot and generally has more of a raspier tone to his voice. Other Mikoto goes as far as attacking Es which is out of character for Mikoto. 2) "B. Recurrent gaps in the recall of everyday events, important personal information, and/or traumatic events that are inconsistent with ordinary forgetting." We know that since day one Mikoto had no idea about what he had done to be in Milgram. In MeMe, during Other Mikoto's parts (metal parts of the song) he is very blunt about the murder making it clear that he is the alter that holds that traumatic memory while in Mikoto's parts (softer, chorus parts of the song) he says that he doesn't know why he is there and that they must be mistaken. No, he isn't lying about amnesia. It has been confirmed that to ensure that they are not lying Es uses a song extraction machine that extracts the knowledge about murders from their subconscious mind. MeMe sounds like two songs stitched together because Mikoto's subconscious is shared by another alter. In short, it was extracted from both of them not just Mikoto. Also, in John Doe voice drama right after Other Mikoto switches out Mikoto gets really confused because he doesn't remember beating Es and then fighting with Kotoko. 3) "C. The symptoms cause clinically significant distress or impairment in social, occupational, or other important areas of functioning." Even though Mikoto has a stable office job and tries his best to look like a functioning adult I believe there is more to it. In MeMe, towards the end it sounds like they are aware of each others existence but Mikoto wants to deny the fact that he has DID. His amnesia barrier and miscommunication with Other Mikoto does affect his functioning. 4) D and E points are as we know, don't apply to Mikoto so I won't bother explaining them. I have seen a lot of people say that Mikoto is faking DID because "He remembers/knows about it a little as seen in the MV." which is literal misinformation. Amnesia barriers are not always the same and you may remember bits of things at times. Mikoto is well aware that

something bad is going on, he is scared to admit it. He just doesn't know what and that is when Other Mikoto comes in the stage. Other Mikoto is supposed to hold that traumatic memory (murder) so Mikoto won't have to process that all by himself. I believe Other Mikoto is a trauma holder + most likely an protector. "You don't have to keep it in and hide it away, “I” will save “me”." is the reason why I think Other Mikoto is a protector. Motive for the murder was not mentioned a lot in the video but basing from these lyrics I believe that he has killed someone that was a past abuser or a threat to Mikoto's life in anyway. The murder was planned. At the beginning we can see him waiting on a specific subway station for his victim, which makes me think that it was most likely someone he knew rather than a random pedestrian. Hopefully, we will learn more about his motive on the second trial but for now all we can speculate is that he did it to "protect" himself. Not by the means of self defense, but by something else. Another thing I have seen that has been spread around a lot is that "Mikoto formed a system after murdering someone/because of his stress as an office worker." No. No one can form a system at the age of 23. It doesn't work like that. (next part is taken from did-research) The theory of Structural Dissociation works off of the assumption that no one is born with an integrated personality. Instead, infants operate based off of a loose collection of different ego states that handle their different needs- feeding, attachment to a caregiver, exploring the world around them. Over time, these ego states naturally integrate into one coherent and cohesive personality, usually by the ages of 6 or 9. However, childhood trauma disrupts this process. Different ego states are left unable to merge with each other due to conflicting needs, traumatic memories, or learned action paths or responses to trauma. One coherent sense of self cannot form when the primary caregivers of the child are inconsistent, loving one moment and abusive the next, preventing healthy attachment from occurring and instead facilitating disorganized attachment. In short, Mikoto's DID formed in childhood because of repetitive trauma that he had experienced when he was between the ages of 6-9. We don't know what his trauma is but perhaps we may learn about it on the next trials. Overall, DID is used in a lot of symbolic ways in MeMe (from using OSDDID terms like "switch" to a headspace) that I think it is almost impossible for Mikoto to not have DID. Thank you for reading all this mess. Feel free to shoot me ask if you have any questions.

[monipoka]

Addressing Content Warning Concerns

I am writing in response to points that were brought up concerning my recent post. If you haven’t read that post, you can find it here.

Be warned that this is a very long post (2.8k words). It deals with the topics of pedophilia and rape. Opinions expressed are my own; however, I do offer some resources for you to better educate yourself on this post’s content.

I will not provide a link to the user that responded as she had no ill intentions. Disclaimer if the said user reads this post, I write with peace and love at 4:00 A.M. There are a couple of places where I may sound aggressive or petty, but it is analytical and not meant to invalidate you or your opinions.

Red = user’s response with minimal changes (adjusted for grammar and clarification)

Black = my response

Part 1: Age Regression and Infantilization

To learn more about age regression, here are two lovely articles describing what age regression means medically and socially.

“Age regression [agere] is a form of coping meant to eliminate stress in potentially triggering situations. Agere is not a part of sexual play and never should be. I believe [Moni] is confusing agere for age play.”

This completely misses the mark. I understand that age regressors enter a younger psychological state often as a coping mechanism. There is nothing inherently wrong with age regression as therapy. My complaints are that people are FETISHIZING age regression. As stated in my post, age regressors enter the mindset of a child commonly called a “little space.” These individuals are to be treated like children as it helps them feel safe and loved.

In my experience on Tumblr, writers commonly misinterpret Daddy Dominant, Little Girl (DDLG) or Age Play (the larger, umbrella term) for age regression. For the purposes of explanation, I am going to be using DDLG and she/her pronouns. DDLG is a type of BDSM relationship where the dominant partner (male) takes on the role of a care-giver while the submissive partner (female) takes on the role of a child. This dynamic is pretend and intended for sexual interactions. Keyword here: pretend. While the submissive portrays childish behavior, she still has an adult mindset; therefore, she can give meaningful consent. Once writers describe the submissive slipping into “little space,” her mindset is corrupt as she has age regressed; therefore, she cannot give meaningful consent making the interaction non-consensual as she embodies a child.

“Infantilization is treating somebody as if they’re a child. For example, ‘babying’ someone is the best explanation for it. This, in my opinion, is not pedophilia because it’s not inherently sexual. If it IS sexual, I wouldn’t necessarily classify it as pedophilic, but it is questionable.”

Again, this misses the mark. In a non-sexual context, infantilization is completely okay. My complaints are that people are FETISHIZING the infantilization of characters. I used this term as an alternative language to age regression because I have encountered both on this site.

“Age Play, in my opinion, is pedophilic due to how the 'older’ of the partners is benefitting from it. So if [Moni] and I are thinking the same thing, but not really using the same terminology, then I agree.”

Age Play is a kink in the BDSM community between two consenting and level-headed adults.

Age Regression is characterized by regressing back to a younger headspace.

Sexualizing age regression is pedophilic because age regressors feel, act, and exhibit childlike qualities; they genuinely believe that they are a child.

If age play includes “little space,” then it is pedophilic because the submissive has age regressed.

“None of these is what I would consider illegal due to the fact that both parties are consenting adults. But age play definitely is pedophilic. But, obviously, if both people are adults, it can’t be considered illegal.”

I called pedophilia (and rape) illegal. In the eyes of the law, sexualizing age play--given that the individual is of age--is legal. This point used the transitive property of equality (Trans POE) to point out the hypocrisy in condemning pedophilia but supporting the fetishization of age regression. To clarify, it may not be illegal, but it is morally wrong.

“Infantilization and age regression aren’t inherently pedophilic because they revolve around the idea of a mindset and not physicality.”

This is contradictory to your previous point and only half true. Age regressors largely rely on physical objects (ie. clothes, stuffed animals, pacifiers) to feel safe. While the root of age regression involves a change in psyche, it is reflected in their appearance and environment.

Part 2: Dubious Consent and Non-consensual

To learn more about rape, here is a wonderful article on non-consensual sex.

“Secondly, I’m quite confused on what she [Moni] is saying regarding calling dubcon [dubious consent] and noncon [non-consentual] rape instead of dubcon and noncon.

They are rape, or at least some form of sexual assault, but I don’t think anyone’s trying to mask them from being as such.”

I whole-heartedly disagree. It is apparent by the staggering number of dubcon and noncon posts that people use these terms to try and justify writing rape because they consider it a “fetish.” The reason I am against these terms is that writers never specifically condemn them. Oftentimes, writers mix the content of the fic into their warning section. So, by writing ‘blowjob’ next to ‘dubcon’ it underscores the severity of the situation.

“Categorizing both of the two as 'rape’ could potentially end up being very damaging. Rape is a very triggering and harsh word for some people, which is why I believe a lot of people use non-consensual sex as a term to avoid potentially triggering people.”

Again, I believe that people use dubcon and noncon to try and justify their rape “fetish.” However, if using the term “rape” is triggering to some individuals and the terms “dubcon” and “noncon” are used as a substitution, why aren’t these writers coming out and explicitly saying that they do not support these types of interactions? Furthermore, why are they writing and sharing this content in the first place if they acknowledge it as rape?

“Also, I think it’s important to clarify whether the 'sexual assault’ in fiction is dubious or non-consensual. There’s a big difference between both parties being drunk in a fic (dubcon) and hard rape, and it’s important to distinguish the two in warning columns.”

Drunk people can’t consent. Both situations are rape. The “level” of rape that you refer to, being how consensual it is, is more damaging in my opinion. Because they were drunk, it means less than if they were sober. This perpetuates victim shaming. She was asking for it. She shouldn’t have drunk so much. Rape is rape. It is never okay. And one rape is never better than another.

“Dubcon is also very important to clarify in fics due to the fact that dubcon is only a fictional concept. It helps indicate the level of consent given in the fiction because someone could be not triggered by sex under intoxication but can be triggered by hard noncon.”

I’m going to use a quote I cited from this source because I feel that the writer describes dubcon more eloquently than I can: “What bothers me the most about this situation, and what I think you are partly getting at here, is when people say that their fic isn't "noncon" or they say it is "dubcon" or "noncon depending on your point of view." Come on! Have the guts to admit that what they're writing is rape. Dubious consent bothers me as a qualifier because if you aren't sure whether someone is consenting, you don't do it or it's rape. No excuses. So, I think that people should just bite the bullet and say, this is a rape fic.... If people want to write rape fic, go for it, and I will probably read it, but let's step up and acknowledge what it is we are writing. I take issue with these qualifiers because I think that it is far more insidious than out and out rape porn. At least when we say it is rape, then we can move on to the next step: saying it's wrong, just a fantasy, etc. But avoiding the label perpetuates the rape myths that have had such a damaging effect on victims and justice: did she enjoy it, she didn't really say no, she was a tease, they've done it before. None of those things matter, and when a person labels their fic, they need to stop pretending they do.”

Essentially, the writer is reiterating what I explained in my previous comment that rape is rape. Another statement that I found describes how damaging fiction can be in real life. While most readers understand that what occurred didn’t really happen, there are real-life consequences attributed to it: “...However, not everyone in fandom uses those terms in those ways. And I think that's a problem that we need to fix. Because, especially when situations that exist in real life and that would be called rape in real life are labeled "dubcon," I think it does real harm to us all.....We currently live in a culture where not fighting back - because, for example, the rapist has threatened to kill you, or someone else, or your pet, if you don't go along with it - will very often get a rape case overturned in court. Where judges and juries and god knows the popular media will pick out and analyze every detail of a person's life to determine whether they were asking for it, whether they secretly wanted it, whether they could have conceivably fought back more than they did, why they didn't scream, why they didn't report the blackmail that was used to control them, whether or not their "consent" might've been implicitly given by winks or nods or secret handshakes or a general miasma of sexual invitation. In other words, we live in a world in which rape culture, a thing we all unwittingly participate in at one time or another, works very very hard to label things dubcon when they're really noncon.”

“Most people 'romanticizing’ non-consensual sex are victims who are trying to gain some sort of control over their trauma, so they have every right to do so. If a victim of rape should have the ability to choose whether or not they want to read/write a noncon fic and if they don’t want to use the word rape because it makes them uncomfortable, they don’t have to and shouldn’t be forced to.

As a victim of rape and sexual assault, I find peace in having the control and ability to write about my trauma. It's a way for me to gain back control that I lost and the word rape does make me uncomfortable, it makes many victims uncomfortable, and if I prefer not to use that word then I should not have to if people know synonymous terms.”

Romanticize: deal with or describe in an idealized or unrealistic fashion; make (something) seem better or more appealing than it really is.

If you are writing/reading smut, you are trying to get off. If you are writing/reading dubcon/noncon smut, you are getting off to rape. Instead of writing/reading about how heinous rape is and how disgusting rape culture is, you write/read fics romanticizing rape since as a reader you enjoy the content to some extent: it is with your favorite character, it takes place in a cool universe, it got you horny, you felt good after reading it. Romanticizing rape is damaging to society as it subconsciously makes rape appealing. I doubt that is the intention, but you can’t deny that these underlying connections exist.

There is a difference between writing to cope and writing to entertain. My intention has never been to victim shame. But writing non-consensual sex between anime characters and a reader-insert is a form of entertainment. Remember the purposes of writing we learned about in elementary school? Yeah, I have a hard time believing that this is therapeutic. Journal therapy uses reflective writing to work through trauma and mental health issues. In sexual assault cases specifically, victims often write about their experience and/or letters to their perpetrator(s). However, if this is your way to cope, that’s fine. But writing rape fics is not the same as sharing rape fics.

“People know the severity of noncon and dubcon, which is what I think [Moni] is missing. No one is trying to not make noncon rape because it is rape. People know that it is. Most people just chose to say 'noncon’ to avoid unnecessarily triggering others.”

Do they? I think to my previous comments in this section, people use these terms to downplay the seriousness of rape.

“And there are far more 'consensual’ fics out there than noncon/dubcon fics, so I don’t exactly understand what [Moni] means by 'romanticize’ or 'normalize it.’”

Two comments up I describe what romanticization is and how it is being done in the community. I’m going to ignore the number part of this statement because I feel that there is no relevance; If there is a platform for rape fics and people are engaging with them, numbers don’t matter relative to another type of fic. I call that authors romanticize consensual sex because it is oftentimes not explicitly stated, and I think it should be. The character(s) and reader are in a relationship and sex is a byproduct of that (I do not consider this dubcon). Personally, I have found very few fics where explicit consent is written in. People sometimes think that asking for consent interrupts the flow and ruins a moment. Works of fiction have an impact on real life, and writing/reading about consent serves to reinforce healthy practices.

“Going off of that, I don’t understand what [Moni] means by 'fairly young’ audiences. I'm hoping that most 18+ consumers are, you know, eighteen or older (obviously that's not the case in all situations), and eighteen is a legal adult. Most people over the age of eighteen are very aware of what these terms mean, and they know right from wrong. So, there should be no need to clarify what 'noncon’ is for them.”

My point is that this community is relatively young. I have not encountered many writers or readers who are over the age of 25 (if you are, kudos). At this age, you lack experience. Many of these readers have never had sex or been in a relationship before. While you might know the difference between rape and consensual sex on paper, some of these things are more subtle--especially in person. You referenced drunk sex as something that you’d classify as dubcon although intoxicated individuals can’t consent. I recently read a fic where the reader was drunk and picked up at the bar by a character. He asked the reader if they consented to sex and they agreed. This is still rape as you cannot consent while intoxicated since alcohol impairs judgment. Regardless of enjoyment, which the reader experienced, this is still sexual assault. Can you see the confusion by labeling that dubcon? What is a young adult to think when they’ve been manipulated into sex but told they consented? It’s confusing, so these terms should be clarified.

Part 3: Fiction

To learn more about how fiction affects reality, here is this interesting TED-Ed animation that summarizes fiction’s impact. Also, I read this article that cites more examples.

“Also, our writing shouldn’t have to equate 'good practices,’ because a healthy-minded individual knows how to separate fiction and reality. Give people the freedom to write about whatever they want, whether it’s in private or not, that's what fiction is for.”

You claim that you don’t want to use the word rape to trigger people, so you acknowledge that not all readers are health-minded as they could be suffering from trauma or mental illness. Likewise, some individuals can’t discern fiction from reality.

More importantly, there is a connection between fiction and reality.

“Finally, I don't think we should be so open with connecting real-life issues with fictional ones. No one is going to become a rapist or want to be raped because they read fiction on it unless they’re truly a rapist or have been raped. Equating fictional works to real-life problems is a little insulting, whether [Moni] intended it to be or not.”

Watch the video and read the article. Fiction directly impacts culture and society. It may be insulting, but it’s factual.

“Because in the end, in rape fiction, no one actually got raped. In pedophilic fiction (I don’t support it don’t get me wrong), no one was actually a victim of pedophilia. Because they’re all fictional.”

That doesn’t make it okay. Again, my problem is that writers ROMANTICIZE these topics which reflect poorly on society.

“If someone is concerned about pedophilia and rape fiction, I believe it would be best to work towards real-life solutions to those real-life problems compared to criticizing fiction authors.”

If you’re concerned about pedophilia and rape FICTION, I’d hope you’d criticize FICTION authors. Honestly, this seems to be a diversion tactic to avoid accountability.

Part 4: “No Offense, but You’re Wrong About Everything”

“Overall, I think [Moni] had good intentions, but it was poorly worded.

You pose a counter argument to each of my points and make it sound like I did not educate myself beforehand. You then deflect to talking about rape and pedophilia in real-world context to downplay the severity of pedophilia and rape in fiction.

I sound petty here, and I do not mean for my words to hurt. I wish that there was some communication beforehand since it seems that there was confusion. If my original post was unclear, I hope my comments help.

Conclusion

This is for everyone:

Please check out the resources I provided and do your own research to understand the situation before forming your own opinion.

No hate to the writer of the response. I just wish you would have reached out directly for clarification before taking my words out of context and assuming their meaning.

[kaminohana]

the meme man full analysis

Yeehaw here we go. Analysis of Mikoto Kayano’s video and song, along with some theories about the many themes and symbols in the video. Note: If there’s any other supplemental material for him out there, I haven’t read it. This is just an analysis with the music video we were given. If I happen to miss stuff that was mentioned before, I may talk about it in another post lmao

I was SUPER invested in this video as I watched it and soon realized “Oh shit, I think Mikoto’s plural”. Cuz, you know, I’m plural too (not disclosing what kind) and it felt SO good to see some actual parallels to stuff I go through- though of course not to Mikoto’s degree.

That said, I feel I should make a disclaimer in passing: yes, portraying your only plural character as homicidal ain’t the best representation. But, you know, we’ve seen other cases like that in Milgram so I’m just gonna leave it at that. Personally, I’m not that offended because the execution is SO top-notch. Though, hey, I totally understand how this can be very frustrating to other systems to see plurality depicted in such an unhealthy light- if it’s not for you, it’s not for you.

Keep in mind the point of the Milgram series is to make you uncomfortable in so quickly incriminating someone; if you’re hesitating to determine someone as guilty, hey, that’s probably intended and good! It’s about personal decision, so I’m not going to judge you one way or the other in voting. I just find it fascinating how these videos can put us in such conflict. This is all just my own perspective, BTW, so if you disagree with some of these points, good! I’m just hoping to share my thoughts since I can make a lot of connections. I’m by no means an expert in plurality or tarot, I just have some background in both and decided to try my hand at this analysis, so I really don’t the final say on what’s going on in the video.

Now, onto the actual video analysis.

I’m sticking with the basic idea that Mikoto is split into two parts; his more loveable, gentler side, which I referred to in another post as Softboy Mikoto, and the more violent side which may be acting as a catharsis to his frustrations. I referred to this side previously as the Devil alter, as he is depicted with the Devil major arcana tarot card. I can see how this could be taken badly, so for now I’m just going to refer to him as the shadow alter. There are many themes of duality in the video, most commonly with the symbol of the half moon which appears so many times. Shadow of the moon etc etc. I’ll be bringing this up several times as I analyze the lyrics. I’ll be breaking down the lyrics as evidence to support the idea that Mikoto is plural, and to show how softboy Mikoto (and shadow alter Mikoto) view this particular relationship and how this culminates in murder. Sometimes I refer to Mikoto (as a whole), softboy Mikoto, or shadow alter Mikoto depending on what I’m trying to describe in the below.

First piece: the title. MeMe. Me x2. A dead giveaway, like Umbilical. Also, it can be a meme, which is interesting taking the definition of the word meme in this context: “an element of a culture or system of behavior passed from one individual to another by imitation or other nongenetic means” (Oxford Dictionaries).  HMMMM. I know memes are generally within the context of a community, but I think it’s interesting to actually apply this to Mikoto. What exactly is being passed on? Could we argue that Mikoto’s frustrations from one of his parts is being passed on to the other? Interesting to think about, though it may not be relevant.

Going into the lyrics:

So from here I’m guessing there was a point in Mikoto’s life where his plurality was not an issue; or, potentially, there was a time before his split. These were the good times.

Playing dead vs. being alive – representing duality. May refer to how, when one side has their way, the other is locked away in the headspace with no control, thus feeling like being dead. In the context of “if only”, perhaps he’s wishing that he just didn’t do anything if only to prevent things from getting this far.

“If” I could end- I believe Mikoto (particularly softboy Mikoto) is saying “Hey, I have no control over my other side. If I did, would things still be the same? Would I still be ‘letting’ this happen?”

“Keep it” and “hide it away” I feel like are both representative of his shadow alter and of the desires that alter represents. Many words related to destruction are tied to this alter, so it could be seen as Mikoto trying to hide those urges as well.

“’I’ will save ‘me’��- this is a very interesting line that I think very well encapsulates the shadow alter’s initial motives; he’s saying “hey, I’m going to take care of us,” I believe to try and convince softboy Mikoto to let him out. As far as if softboy Mikoto can actually “let” him out is TOTALLY up for debate.

Part of the reason I refer to the other alter as softboy Mikoto is because there are softer words I notice used by him in the song; here’s I’m seeing “snuggle”, so I think this side of him is more vulnerable and soft.

SWITCH, shake up that brain- wow couldn’t be any more obvious here

This is where the chorus starts. This I think is from softboy Mikoto’s perspective, PARTICULARLY when he’s trapped in the headspace. There are many forms of plurality IRL in which alters cannot simultaneously front, so one or more are “pushed” back into the headspace. This very act occurs several times throughout the song in the weird minimalist vaporwave shadow realm room, where the tarot cards are. During this time, we can assume that is when the shadow alter is fronting. Softboy Mikoto slowly starts to become more helpless and fearful in this space as the song goes on, and this is where he makes his celtic cross tarot spread that quite frankly defines the whole song. I discussed that in my other post.

Another facet of plurality that is applied here is amnesia, which is common, especially when alters are pushed back to the headspace. Within the headspace, there may be a lack of awareness to the outside world, which Mikoto seems to express in his confused sentiments like the above (in the video, he is also scratching his head, which as a gesture can represent being confused). “Why am I here?” can act as a double entendre, both referring to “Why have I suddenly been pushed to this headspace?” as well as the whole point of Milgram- “Why am I in prison?”. He may not be aware of exactly what he did, hence why he feels it’s a mistake. He may be experiencing amnesia of what his shadow alter is doing, so he doesn’t even know what crime he committed. However, he at least has enough awareness to tell someone else is present in his body doing things, so he begs the viewer “Hey, just watch whatever my body is doing and it’ll all eventually make sense. I don’t have access to this information, but you do.” I thought this was an interesting fourth wall break.

The truth revealing itself could also be the truth coming to light from the particular tarot reading he does in the headspace; note that the cards only seem to be appear in this place and not in the outside world. So softboy Mikoto is trying to figure out what’s going on this way. If he can’t figure it out himself, maybe the cards can give him some direction.

Another duality- “I won’t forgive you if you reveal the truth” vs. “However I know I’m right when I say I’m innocent”. Or he could be right about something else.

I’m wondering if the breaking here is just reflecting the shadow alter or is softboy Mikoto actually wishing he could end the shadow alter. He at least wants things to change; the way things are right now is not something he’s okay with. Though, it sounds like he isn’t getting help with this and has no idea if he can even arrest full control again. It seems at this point, this has been going on for a while so he’s stopped trying.

In the video, the shadow alter is doing a GREAT job hiding the evidence; while of course probably just trying to not get caught, the shadow alter may also be trying to hide his crime from softboy Mikoto so he’s none the wiser.

He’s hoping he can be rid of the shadow alter side, but I think he also is dumping all his difficult feelings onto the shadow alter. Maybe he feels its some sort of release, even if he can’t control it, so he feels a lot of guilt over the shadow alter’s existence, even though that alter is serving a purpose as a conduit for those emotions.

I really really think though that there IS some connection between softboy Mikoto and shadow alter Mikoto. Maybe they are both truly aware of each other, hence the scene where they are viewing each other through the mirror. I think here, softboy Mikoto might be admitting that it feels good to let the shadow alter out, like a hug. The “minus energy” probably refers to the shadow alter.

“Maybe it’s okay that we’re separated like this?” he wonders. There seems to be a sense of feeling alive at least that is conveyed through the shadow alter.

SPLIT IN HALF- yeah, again, pretty encompassing.

In the video, I think this is when we have a switch, as Mikoto’s expression changes in the outside world mirror.

The chorus again, softboy Mikoto is shoved into the vaporwave shadow realm headspace. He’s asking the audience to investigate him here, but I also like to joke that he’s like “uwu look at me I could never harm anybody, pwease let me out”, which may be true only so far as softboy Mikoto is out.

I wonder if in “I will NEVER forgive you if this is happening to me” is directed at the shadow alter instead of the audience? Like softboy Mikoto is saying “I swear to god if you murdered someone im gonna be so pissed, but I also already kinda know it’s happening.” Just another take.

In the video, softboy Mikoto is THROWN into the headspace, where he is gifted with just one hint of what’s going on: The Devil tarot card.

You DARE accuse Miette of murder? Oh! 1000 years jail for Milgram viewer!

Now the vaporwave space starts to turn into a bloody mess; perhaps now softboy Mikoto is starting to put two and two together.

“Hurting it, holding it down, it doesn’t change anything, does it”- I definitely understand this being plural, like if your alters are causing problems, you may try and chastise them, or you may try and lock them away deep inside, but that often doesn’t stop them from existing. It’s really cool how that idea is present here. Like YES that’s how it is quite often. So even if softboy Mikoto TRIES to smother or accuse his shadow alter, that’s not going to change anything.

It being the same anywhere he goes makes me think he’s been putting up with this for a long time, that it’s not about what environment he’s in because his shadow alter is with him everywhere he goes.

“It’s like what’s wrong isn’t wrong”- may be referring to multiple things:

-the shadow alter having a different morality (hence why murder is okay for him, his indulgence in smokes and…redbull/alcohol, etc)

-OR, how softboy Mikoto’s amnesia isn’t letting him understand the full picture so everything is okay when he’s out fronting (shadow alter cleaned the place up and stuff, perhaps hiding all evidence of murder)

-“I’m already the fake one”- a very common sentiment for plural folks, worrying if you as an alter aren’t “the original” or if you’re not actually split and it’s something you’re making up, etc. I think softboy Mikoto is having these feelings. Poor boy, wish we could get you some therapy instead :/ (all of Milgram would be very different if only most of these people could get therapy, let’s be honest)

Now, what’s special here is that BOTH alters are in the headpace, with shadow alter Mikoto looming ominously behind softboy Mikoto.

During this next instrumental, just a side note: we see what’s going on through security footage. The security cameras reflecting a third person perspective is kind of neat in context of pluralism, where someone else fronting can feel like a third person awareness to another alter. I may be thinking too much into this one, but it’s a fun connection.

Another thing many plural folk go through: DISSOCIATION FROM REALITY. Ah yes, my good friend dissociation. Especially like in Mikoto’s case, where the consequences of being split have drastic consequences, he could be running away from the truth which may always be partially concealed to him. Something’s VERY wrong, he knows this for sure, and it may be at this point he really realizes “Oh shit. I just committed murder.” But instead of taking responsibility in any way, he’s trying to imagine that it’s a fabricated reality. I’m not going to say if this makes him bad or not, but it is a known coping mechanism.

I know I mention that the bad habits of smoking and drinking may be the shadow alters habits, but they could also be softboy Mikoto’s own methods of escapism, which definitely fits with the above lyrics. “I need to wake up soon”- but he still realizes that he’s going to have to face the harsh truth of reality soon.

Now this point indicates a marked change in softboy Mikoto and shadow alter Mikoto’s relationship: I believe there may be a time when softboy Mikoto expects to come back out to the front, but now the shadow alter is starting to take over fully and keep softboy Mikoto locked inside. This is supported by the Outcome card in his celtic cross spread being The Devil. Not only does this card have its own meanings, but here it may mean that the more violent side of him takes over.

Again, don’t know if he’s talking to the audience or his shadow alter in never forgiving this outcome. I believe softboy Mikoto does have a clearer morality in that murder is NOT okay, and if he were to fully acknowledge that he as a whole was capable of that, I think he’d break down. So he’s like “it better NOT be true” because he doesn’t know how he’d be able to deal with that.

Interesting in the video is when Mikoto snaps and the headspace turns red again; I would think this is when the shadow alter is entering the scene and taking over. The snap here is symbolic of the switch.

Now presumably softboy Mikoto is like “PWEASE WET ME OUT MISTEW OBAMA”, which, again with the double meaning, can refer to letting him out of the vaporwave shadow realm headspace OR letting him out of prison. Both apply.

“That it’s a lie

That I’m right”- a nice duality here. Mikoto is having difficulty separating the truth from reality.

Also NOW he is forgiving. Forgiveness vs not forgiveness (grudge)

I think it’s gotten so bad that he’s like “okay fine. Fine if I committed murder, fine if you’re accusing me of murder, but please help me understand what’s going on. Let me out”. Maybe he’ll forgive the shadow alter if only he fesses up to the murder.

Of note for the scene however is that shadow alter Mikoto is holding up The Fool card, which represents softboy Mikoto in this case. “I’m right” may be the shadow alter’s sentiment.

-THE CARDS AT THE END-

Then, all the cards show up in more detail, all depicting weapons instead of the standard minor arcana that you might see in your standard Rider Waite tarot deck (which these are based off of). The Wands are baseball bats, the Swords are kitchen knives, the Cups are…poison cans? Acid? The Pentacles are….records but I can see these being rotary saws if you squint. The Wheel of Fortune has car wheels with a snake….GTA time baby (the snake being hidden danger, the devil’s temptation, etc). The chariot is a really weird motorcycle death machine. I was thinking how like, people would drag people along behind them while driving a vehicle as a method of torture so there is that.

Now we see some cards not in the original spread- I think this represents shadow alter Mikoto inserting himself into the headspace and changing things to fit his goals. We see a couple placed in the original spread, but some don’t and are just free-floating, but you’ll see below we have enough context to decipher their meaning.

First, it’s the Page of Pentacles, which has taken over the position of the 7 of swords as the current challenge affecting the issue. This card indicates “Manifestation, financial opportunity, skill development”. I think this means the shadow alter is finally learning to take full control.

Then we see the reverse 2 of swords, which represents “Indecision, confusion, information overload, stalemate”. This could probably represent softboy Mikoto not suddenly understanding why the shadow alter is ALSO in the headspace. Maybe his dual presence in the outside world AND the headspace is indicative of exactly when he learned to take full control. This was NOT in Mikoto’s original spread.

Wheel of Fortune again, which was in the original spread. “Bad luck, negative external forces, out of control”. Yup, that confirms it.

Next, the Five of Swords from the original spread comes up. “Conflict, tension, loss.png, defeat, win at all costs, betrayal”. Softboy Mikoto is now being completely taken over. There is a facedown card on the chair. This might be the one that reads as Death later, so it may be that softboy Mikoto is…KILLED OFF?

Cup of Ace, “Love, compassion, creativity, overwhelming emotion”. I think this one is also meant to represent softboy Mikoto, but it could be that the shadow alter sees it as an act of mercy to take full control for softboy Mikoto. Maybe he feels his alter can’t handle reality and he’s going to take over full time. Or more likely he just has ulterior motives.

Reverse King of Cups. “emotional manipulation, moodiness, volatility”. Softboy Mikoto was lead along, thinking it was okay to leave things to the shadow alter or to exist alongside him. Now we see that isn’t a viable solution.

Reverse Five of Wands. “conflict avoidance, diversity, agreeing to disagree”.  I went over this more in the other post.

Chariot is the last one, WHICH ALSO WAS NOT IN THE ORIGINAL SPREAD. “Control, willpower, success, action, determination”. The shadow alter Mikoto has taken full control. Which is very quickly followed by…

Shadow alter Mikoto drawing Death. Also not in the original spread. Perhaps effectively “killing off” softboy Mikoto and betraying him.

Concluding Thoughts.

Now, I understand I do take most of these lyrics from softboy Mikoto’s perspective, but I’m sure there’s a layer of deception added on by his shadow alter. The Challenge card of the 7 of swords did represent betrayal. So softboy Mikoto’s only context into what’s going on outside may be his headspace tarot reading. If you want to question some of the lyrics, or even think one of the alters is lying, that would add SO much to the complexity of the situation, and I wouldn’t put it past the Milgram team to add something like that.

Common Themes/Symbols:

The mirror, both in the headspace and in the outside world bathroom

The Hanged Man- in a painting in the headspace and on Mikoto’s shirt. Indicative of being wrongly accused or martyred. Softboy Mikoto is likely represented with this, as well as The Fool. The Fool painting probably is there to show that he doesn’t know any better, that he is without the knowledge of what his shadow alter is doing (or doesn’t believe he’s doing anything wrong)

The Half Moon- a light side and a dark side. Pretty self-explanatory. Symbolically, it can also represent life and death. NICE.

Sorry if the conclusions end up being kind of vague. That’s the way a lot of this video is; what’s really going on, as it usually is, is up to viewer interpretation at this stage. I was just hoping to provide a bit of context into the images in the video, plural life, and narrator interpretation. I just really love this video and after this full analysis hope others can at least appreciate the work that went into it.

[saokpe-loves-to-talk]

Ducktales (2017): Masters in Character Writing

Rarely does a story revolve around a single character, and this means that characters usually need to eventually interact with each other. This aspect of character writing is probably the trickiest because the moment you introduce two characters that have yet to heavily interact, your audience automatically has an idea on how the interaction will eventually play out. Additionally, if two popular characters have yet to interact, a sudden demand for that particular dynamic formulates. Unfortunately it is rather hard to predict what dynamics will be popular and which the most number of people will want to see, nor can you gauge how your audience will react to canon dynamics when fan alternatives have been allowed to form beforehand. These elements are easy to juggle with smaller casts or even in more grounded settings, two advantages Ducktales has to do without. In this case the writers have to make sure their characters are designed and written in ways that they can bounce their personality with most every other character in the show. How do you do that? Make your characters as three-dimensional as humanly possible. 

I think a great example of this is Della Duck. Since her introduction in the mid-season finale of season 2, Della has been allowed to interact with a vast majority of the main cast, a risky play in a show so focused on variety. If not written correctly, her various interactions would seem repetitive, as if the other characters were just taking turns talking to a looping recording. This doesn’t happen, however; the writers constructed Della in a manner in which her personality has various aspects that allow for different and interesting dynamics with all the other characters. Her and Dewey play off each other’s brave and bold adrenaline-seeking. Della’s more liberal approach to parenting contrasts perfectly with Beakley’s more coservative strategies. Her paranoid guilt clashing harshly with Louie’s reckless schemes, and so on and so forth. Instead of having various other characters interact with one aspect of her personality, the writers had the foresight to create various different angles from which different characters can bounce off. That said, no matter how interesting a character’s different dynamics are, they can’t stay the same throughout a whole show, they need to develop or your character may suffer the consequences.

The new Ducktales reboot is amazing, from the humor, to the stories it tells, the show has really gone above and beyond what anyone would’ve expected from it. I love this show, the fandom around it and the messages it preaches to death, but there’s one thing that this show succeeds in doing that leaves me giddy with joy every time I think about, and that’s its characters. In this, my first of many essays on various media’s superb writing, I want to speak on the Ducktales reboot’s characters and what makes them so great. Now, before I begin, I want to preface that this analysis is purely subjective (like literally any other analysis of media) so if you disagree with anything said please feel free to add your opinion to this post, I want to start a discussion not an ultimatum. 

Anyone who has watched this show knows of its expansive cast. An entourage of main characters large enough to make even Game of Thrones blush, all with arcs and personalities so well developed that it would make Game of Thrones cry. Logic would state that these types of ensemble casts are hard to write, I mean, one well written character is a headache in of itself, let alone the dozen or so Ducktales juggles. There are many aspects of character writing that need to be adhered to, guidelines that turn this aspect of any story into the most complicated and sensitive. A character is usually what the viewer latches themselves to, it’s an element of the story that can’t be manipulated by the author directly but instead by the obstacles and surroundings the author places them through, a part so subjective and circumstantial that it is usual to see a distinction in a fandom’s interpretation of them and the original text’s. Needless to say, one needs to place a LOT of work into the development of your work’s characters. So what’s so special about Ducktales and how the writers handle this aspect of their show?

Personality Overlap

A character needs to have a personality, a rule so basic that it’s dismissal is in of itself an artistic decision (though that doesn’t stop some works from ignoring it entirely). To say the Ducktales reboot has succeeded in the implementation of personalities into many of these iconic characters would be an understatement, from the revamping of the triplets to the expansion of classic Disney characters like Donald Duck and Scrooge McDuck, the writers have far demonstrated their ability to create interesting personalities or elaborating on already existing personalities. That far from makes a character, however, especially when you have as many as this show does. With ensemble casts, the writer needs to assure that every character is unique from one another, we can’t have characters step on each other's toes as it may lead to a sense of monotony in the future. That’s where this show stands out. Many characters DO share many personality traits. The number of eccentric geniuses alone proves comical, yet at no point do these overlapping traits prove detrimental to the enjoyment of any particular character. Why?

Let’s take two of the main four child characters, Webby and Dewey, as examples. Both these characters can be described as brave, headstrong adventurers who are always looking for their next adrenaline pumping adventure. Both are incredibly energetic and somewhat naive, and both seem to share increasingly comparable acrobatic abilities. These similarities are so prominent, in fact, that the show itself has used their compatibility as the base for many episode’s A or B plots. Yet, both of these characters are very easy to tell apart and that’s without listing their obvious differences. While many other shows and movies avoid making two main characters too similar in fear of having the story feel redundant, Ducktales embrace the fact that you need to be in a very particular headspace to do the things these characters do. While, yes, Dewey and Webby are both energetic and excitable, the former portrays this aspect of himself with performative and showman-like mannerisms, the latter expressing herself in hyper-active giddy and high-pitched declarations of happiness. This acceptance of similarities leads to, ironically, a more unique and nuanced experience as the writers allow themselves to create characters that break the mold of their given archetypes. Additionally, this acceptance of character similarities also allow for increasingly interesting character dynamics.

Character Dynamics

Rarely does a story revolve around a single character, and this means that characters usually need to eventually interact with each other. This aspect of character writing is probably the trickiest because the moment you introduce two characters that have yet to heavily interact, your audience automatically has an idea on how the interaction will eventually play out. Additionally, if two popular characters have yet to interact, a sudden demand for that particular dynamic formulates. Unfortunately it is rather hard to predict what dynamics will be popular and which the most number of people will want to see, nor can you gauge how your audience will react to canon dynamics when fan alternatives have been allowed to form beforehand. These elements are easy to juggle with smaller casts or even in more grounded settings, two advantages Ducktales has to do without. In this case the writers have to make sure their characters are designed and written in ways that they can bounce their personality with most every other character in the show. How do you do that? Make your characters as three-dimensional as humanly possible. 

I think a great example of this is Della Duck. Since her introduction in the mid-season finale of season 2, Della has been allowed to interact with a vast majority of the main cast, a risky play in a show so focused on variety. If not written correctly, her various interactions would seem repetitive, as if the other characters were just taking turns talking to a looping recording. This doesn’t happen, however; the writers constructed Della in a manner in which her personality has various aspects that allow for different and interesting dynamics with all the other characters. Her and Dewey play off each other’s brave and bold adrenaline-seeking. Della’s more liberal approach to parenting contrasts perfectly with Beakley’s more conservative strategies. Her paranoid guilt clashing harshly with Louie’s reckless schemes, and so on and so forth. Instead of having various other characters interact with one aspect of her personality, the writers had the foresight to create various different angles from which different characters can bounce off. That said, no matter how interesting a character’s different dynamics are, they can’t stay the same throughout a whole show, they need to develop or your character may suffer the consequences.

Character Development

I’m sure this last segment isn’t anything particularly untouched when it comes to character discussions but I feel it needs to be commemorated equally. People grow and so should your work’s imitation of people. It’s been drilled into our heads that a character should have flaws (which is a bit of a vague sentiment that leads to a bunch of people calling particular characters Mary Sues despite them not actually being one but that’s for another essay), and those flaws need to eventually iron themselves out. They don’t need to be fixed, but they need to be addressed, they need to change and shape your character. This change is the heart of your story. An audience is experiencing your story through the characters and as such their development and change is better felt than the external forces that might haunt them. Or at least that’s how I see it. Most importantly, the duck show does this well.

Louie Duck throughout the majority of season 1 proved himself the odd-duck out in his expansive family of crazy adventurers, him being rather cowardly and extremely averse to any type of physical exertion. Despite this he maintained useful as a shrewd con artist and silver tongued schemer. This left Louie in a situation where he always seemed to resemble more the various villains Scrooge faced and berated instead of his own heroic family-tree. An interesting tid-bit to take into the second season which coincidentally premiered with an episode revolving around Louie’s disdain of thrill-seeking adventures and his insecurity about his seeming uselessness in those previously mentioned adventures. His arc for the season is established. This story-line eventually culminates when Della grounds him for one particularly catastrophic scheme he attempted to pull called the Timephoon. At this point we have a character, who appoints himself as the “evil-triplet”, with an apparently detrimental flaw he previously valued, a flaw which he shares with various of the cunning villains the show has previously labelled as “schemers.” These elements of his arc come together when a party of villains come looking for a way to finally destroy the McDuck family. His character has developed throughout the season, his insecurities and faults continuously pointed out, his one apparent quality mislabeled as dangerous and unwanted, he reached his lowest point. The archetypal villain backstory. Yet he doesn’t actually become a villain, instead he tricks the villains and saves his family from being hunted by these maniacs using the same trickery and cunning that was previously called dangerous. You might think that my retelling is biased to make it seem like Louie was going to turn evil, I mean, I left out like the majority of Louie inc. stories and the development experienced there. But that’s the kicker, the writers led this character through a road that seemed to lead to villany just to remind us of all the other lessons Louie had learned prior to Timephoon, how he felt after being betrayed by Goldie, how unmaintainable his harpy scheme was earlier in the season and a bunch of other, minor, realizations. It’s hard to write character development without it seeming predictable, flaws are easy to fix in retrospect, the journey there is what really matters.

.

.

.

.

I hope you enjoyed reading through this not so little dissection of one of my favorite shows. If you have feedback on how I should format these essays in the future please comment so, improvement is always my first goal. More importantly, however, if you agree or disagree with anything written, or you feel like you have something to add, please don’t hesitate to do so. This is all about creating discussion.

[tired-boyz]

So me and pix sat down to finally watch all of Sanders Sides. Eventually Pix got bored and Shi stopped wanting to watch from a distance so he joined me instead. These are our thoughts, comments, and questions while watching it from video 1-39. 1. Who the hell as morals? 2. I would love to make videos like this. 3. The blue dude is an idiot and its kinda funny 4."Adultry" 5. The emo one reminds us of Shi. (At this point they started making jokes that i didn’t understand in the discord) 6. "Ill be back." "Ill be ready" me at depression. 7. ITS 2016-2017!? 8. This is what the inside of my head sounds like. 9. Hes a good singer. 10: "youre a emo nightmare." "Thanks." Any of us at shi. 11. Im pretty sure we all dont like Disney...well maybe Zay does. 12. Im curious about each of thier Hogwarts houses. 13. I also have popcorn. 14. Bizardvark is trash… 15. ...i kinda don't like the prince dude 16. This is a lot of just what shi and pix fighting is like 17. Glasses dude [ black shirt] also kinda reminds me of shi too 18: "i was more of a thrower than a catcher." Thats an innuendo. This man is saying he’s a top. 19: Practice on each other!? 20: he called him daddy 21: "can i take a stab?" "Who gave him a knife!?" 22: "feelings. The pain of my existence" me and Shi 23. Okay Logan is the black shirt dude. 24. Okay so prince man is bi or ace? 25: ooof. Innocent one finds out about ships. 26: "do you trust me?" "...no." us at each other 27: that rap.. 28: gay prince dude is Roman. Noted. 29. Im on episode 14/39 30: me too about growing up 31: "i wanna fight you now." 32: "we have the same face" something we yell at each other all the time 33: the "my eyes!" 34: okay dork dude is Patton. 35: zay has described Shi as "Spicey" before. 36: us in the headspace 37: Shi reminds us of both Logan and the Emo one. Zay reminds us of Patton and Roman. 38: where do people get the sleep character? (The discord explained it to me) 39. None of these boys are slytherins. 40: i understand your guys quote about adultry earlier. 41: shi "feels personally attacked" by the anxiety video. 42: "anxiety and logic are my only two emotions" -shi. 43: Patton and Zayden have the same energy fight me. -shi 44: virgil is emo boy okay 45: "congratulations to graduating to full time clown" 46: this Hogwarts video is interesting 47: he uses the term headspace a lot..and im very framiliar with that word. 48: okay after the part 2 of dealing with breakups shi has chaged his mind and said i remind him of Patton more. 49: virgil pulls his sleves up to his knuckles and i called shi out for that 50: ew a snake bitch. 51: also where the fuck is dad? 52. Logan has a praise kink dont @ me. 53: "they always do this." Probably something we say a lot about each other too 54: he gave virgil a fidget cube....we totally dont have a fidget spinner in our hand before that. 55: virgial called Roman honey. Okay. 56: coping through humor and dads getting sad....i relate. 57: we also write down stupud stuff each other say 58: HE CUSSED YES 59: "hi. Hello. What do you want?" 60: "the call and the wedding cant be at the same. Time...even if they are you can be late to one if youre that worried. Just explain your situation" -Shis imput. 61: "im to emotionally unstable for jury duty" 62: "okay so we kiss now?" 63: snake bitch is just screaming Anarchy basically. Abolish the government. 64: im not ready for the talk of intrusive thoughts 65: who is that ugly ass man who clocked roman? 66: oh. Its those kinds not the dark and damaging stuff 67: hes gay let the man talk about butts. 68: "bitch what is your deal?" 69. Were on the last video 70. I kinda feel bad for patton in this. 71. But hes also kinda crazy. As i said at the start. Morals are weird who the fuck as them? 72. Roman also has a praise kink. 73. BANANA CONDOM 74. Okay learned snake mans name 75. This is like watching a movie. 76. So does this mean that Logan has a Darkside counter part and Virgil has ethier a darker side or a light side? 77. Add jannus to the list of people with praise kinks.

Final thoughts:

Pix: That was alright, kinda funny. Not that into it.

Shi: I liked it, and enjoyed how problems were presented as not just black and white. I enjoyed that it did show that there is more than one solution to a situation and that working in a group can sometimes benefit. I however envy those communication skills and wish we could talk like that. The farther we got in the more I felt derealization hitting for some reason. It was also similar to watching a movie the farther it got in. While it was entertaining I did lose focus at some parts and a lot of the lore can slip by very quickly. As far as the sides themselves go it was interesting having Chase point out characteristics he saw in them and me and likewise back to him. I didn’t choose favourites and don’t really plan to but it was nice seeing that every character had their flaws and were portrayed as imperfect.

Chase: It was fun and interesting to watch. I also zoned out a bit during watching it so I probably missed some things. I think taking notes was a good idea but i still dont remember where some of those notes came from. The videos were entertaining and the characters were pretty cool but it did seem a bit repetitive. I think they even made a video talking about that. I don’t have a favourite but i dont really like the prince dude still. Also agree with shi that it felt more like a movie the last few episodes and i’d be down to watch more when they come out. I also liked spending time with Shi while watching this. Me and him never really interact and it was cool hanging out and just chilling and cracking jokes with him.

[juicemitio]

Alright I went to Louisville Galaxycon and saw Travis and Clint twice, for their worldbuilding workshop and their Q&A. Here's some interesting stuff I learned (I didn't include stuff they talked about that's pretty common knowledge or they talked about on the last ttazz)

Graduation 

Fitzroy was originally going to be a jock that was weak bc he no longer had a team, Travis told Griffin that that didn't really work for the world so they reframed it as him training to be a hero, was great academically and behaviorally, but had a problem no one had seen before and no one felt like dealing with. It specifically wasn't "barbarian fails bc he can't keep his rage in check," it was that no one was willing to deal with his magic so they shipped him off

Someone asked Travis to explain fitzroy's magic, so from the DM's mouth- he's a barbarian subtype with elemental magic which has a random effect while raging, which we haven't seen yet (path of the wild soul if you want to look it up and see what he can do) and he took a feat which gives him the ability to cast 3 cantrips of his choosing. What I thought was interesting was that Travis described Fitz's magic using the word "elemental" twice, even though that isn't specifically stated in the path of the wild soul entry

Travis knows Argo's secret and is very excited about it 

Clint has a pirate fiction book he reads every night before they record to get into the headspace to play Argo, he told us the name but I forgot it 

There is one small little concept that made the whole of graduation make sense to Travis and is what the arc will be about, and he only figured it out a few days before recording. Obviously he didn't tell us what it was

Originally it was going to start with everyone starting at age 11 and slowly killing the other kids off, but Justin didn't feel comfortable playing a game surrounded by kids dying 

The accounting scene is already one of Travis' all time favorite taz scenes

The pegasus scene informed Travis on exactly how he was going to treat the firbolg

Also Travis referred to Justin's character exclusively as "the firbolg," which means "master firbolg" is solely a thing going on with the npcs in the game which I find hilarious. They just all decided to give him a dope title bc he deserves it, meanwhile no one will call Fitzroy "sir"

To Fitzroy, social threats are an extremely real and serious thing, like the Biggest thing to him (we were talking about what characters found threatening in the workshop, for context)  

There's some big concept/idea that comes up in the next episode that travis almost let spill and had to quickly stop himself from saying it

Someone mentioned eating breakfast in their question in the workshop and Travis goofed on it for a second, then said "cereal world" suddenly, and Clint had to pick up the question bc Travis had to take a second to make a note of it in his phone 

Travis started brainstorming graduation in March and they recorded the first episode in October, and his main job in that time was working on graduation 

Before Buckminster was adapted for graduation he could not fight at all, if he got into a fight he would die, he poured everything into charisma and could talk his way out of any fight (even the big bad of the game he crit 20d his check and the big bad walked away from the fight) 

Travis is really into psychology and how if you assign a label to someone they're going to act more like it (ie you tell a kid they're amazing and smart and talented and they become more like that, you tell a kid they're annoying and dumb and a problem they become more like that), and how that was a major contributor to play into hero/villain/sidekick/henchperson dynamics, you get assigned this arbitrary title of good/evil/subservient and you become like that to fit the role, and then the inevitable pushing against that mold

Travis is fully aware of his story being compared to harry potter and he doesn't care bc it's apt (people in a school arbitrarily divided into four groups and one of them is the Bad One), also he knows people describe it as "sky high meets Harry Potter meets my hero academia" and he actually finds that really flattering bc he thinks that sounds cool and like something he'd want to watch 

On that note, Travis is a self-identified Slytherin and he's always upheld that the reason Slytherin is depicted in a bad light is bc Rowling decided she didn't like them, and he's always sympathized with the idea of a first year Slytherin working their ass off following the rules and doing their work and getting points, and Dumbledore rewards three idiots for breaking like every rule and pulls the trophy away from you. This was a big inspiration for graduation, of one group getting a bad rep and being portrayed as evil for literally no reason 

Amnesty

Clint & Travis's favorite scene they've ever done together was Ned & Aubrey's final scene together 

Aubrey and Dani do move in with each other at the end of amnesty

Balance

Travis' main emotion around taz is pride and he's most proud of the scene in stolen century with the spirits in the robots, bc they had to record it a second time bc it got way too dark and ended in a really grim way and about 20 min after they finished they all decided that they weren't happy with it, that it didn't fit the tone, he's really proud they didn't just leave it be and they took the second pass at it to make it right

I'm pretty sure he's talked about wanting to kill Magnus off at the beginning before but he mentioned that it was only at the end of petals to the metal he actually realized he wanted Magnus to live, bc Hurley had to sacrifice herself to save Magnus bc Magnus had been so reckless, that hit Travis really hard. Travis realized that Magnus' recklessness was getting people hurt and so Magnus did too, so Magnus become a bit more cautious and took up rogue training to try not to get anyone killed again 

Dust

Dust wasn't designed to be anything more than a one off and the workload was completely unsustainable, the document of notes for dust was about 100 pages and only about 10% of it got used

The reason Travis loved it so much was bc it was a mystery and he found it really fun

Commitment

Clint would love to revisit commitment, but probably not in podcast form bc he didn't find himself really being in the moment as much bc of all the different things he had to keep track of, he'd like to see a comic adaptation/continuation if possible

It was based of a comic he wrote that never got published bc the company producing it failed (he still cashed his paycheck) so he reused it bc he still liked it a lot, it was about how America was founded as a monarchy instead of a democracy and what that changed in the usa's (united sovereignty of america's) history, and how people now were fighting to establish a democracy. Also there were cowboys and spaceships and other cool stuff he put in there bc he liked it

General adventure zone

The reason why they're are able to do romantic relationships w/o being weirded out by it (they joke about it but they don't actually care) is bc it's never done in an explicit or sexual way and since it's the decision the characters would make to pursue the relationship then that's the decision they make. He reframed it as it wouldn't be weird if a family were writing a script together and there was a romance and one person wrote lines for one character and the other wrote lines for the other. He did mention that two siblings playing characters in a relationship as actors on screen wouldn't be cool though

They sometimes get comments that some of the stuff they do is "fanservice," but they feel that they owe their success to their fans and they owe some to them 

They are both aware of and proud that Justin is the best at character creation, Clint specifically really was talking about how Justin's strong suit is definitely character creation and characterization

General mcelroy stuff

They walked pretty close to me when they entered the stage room for the q&a and like… they're short, like shorter than you think

Travis referred to his unborn child as "baby dod" (I'm not 100% certain but I'm pretty sure) which I looked up and is a nickname for George, and given with their older kid being named Barbera and nicknamed BeBe and Travis talking before about how he and his wife like classic names with cool nicknames it makes sense

Travis had an earing in his right ear, I didn't get to see his left ear and I couldn't tell if it was an actual piercing or a fake, it looked really good though. Also his tinted glasses look a lot cooler irl than they do in pictures

Clint told the teenage mutant Ninja turtle story with the signatures that griffin told on mbmbam, but Clint remembered it as happening at King's Island, not Disney. This story was prompted by the question of the biggest lie he ever told his kids, and he only came clean about this a few months ago

Travis told a story about how he finished a videogame when he was younger and was so excited that he picked up a plastic knife, yelled "throwing knife!" threw it directly at Griffin who dodged it and it hit and shattered a window

[fakeoldmanfucker]

F, H and N!!

Thank you for the ask!!

F: Share a snippet from one of your favorite dialogue scenes you’ve written and explain why you’re proud of it.

“Is this about Ashlee?” His voice is just barely tethered to restraint, shaking from the effort to keep under control. Or something other than anger, maybe, but Pete doesn’t really want to consider that.

Pete blinks in shock as the room spins, almost recoiling from the unexpected question. “What?”

But his apparent confusion only stirs Patrick up more; the trembling is definitely due to anger this time, no question about it. “What do you mean, ‘what’?” Patrick mocks, lashing out now. “She’s your wife , Pete! I’m…” he gestures wordlessly to the space between them, movement fragmented and jerky. “It’s not exactly a difficult decision to make, is it?” He bites the words out, fists clenched.

This is rapidly spinning out of control, and, despite the distance he created just a minute before, Pete crosses it in two strides, thoughtless. Or, that’s not quite accurate; he’s thinking too much, ideas floating in and out, so fast he barely dismisses one before two more rise in its place. He has no clue what he’s going to say until he opens his mouth. “Hey, no. Trick, no.”

He tries to lift a hand to Patrick’s cheek, but the younger man flinches away from the touch. Pete retreats a little, swallows back the lump in his throat. “It’s not like that, I swear.”

Patrick scoffs. “What is it like, Pete?” He looks about one breath away from punching him, maybe two. It’s been a long time since they’ve devolved into fist fights, wounds cut instead with sharp looks and sharper words, but Pete wouldn’t put it past him to break that streak. He certainly wouldn’t blame him.

“It’s…” For once, he’s run out of words. There’s nothing on his tongue, nothing in his brain, nothing, even, in his heart, ready to be spilled into the air. Exhaustion numbs him, makes him dumb and speechless. “It’s us . We…it’s just us.”

This is from the first chapter of summer love on a gurney. I like this bit because it's really just an exercise in self-destruction with absolutely no comfort, which I don't write a lot so it was fun to stretch that skill, knowing that there wouldn't be any sort of happy resolution for awhile. I love how Pete is entirely out of his depth and caught so tightly in a spiral he can't quite figure out which way is up or how to unwind it. And I love how Patrick is both entirely giving into his anger and pain but is also really tender and vulnerable; finding that balance was really fun. I'm also kinda proud of how I managed to get into Pete's headspace and hopefully (?) portray him as sympathetic when y'know, he's not anywhere near blameless in all of this.

H: How would you describe your style?

I don't know a ton of ways to describe style? I like using parentheses a lot, to offer a sort of introspection and subconscious side to the narration. (This is present a Lot in summer love, it's basically Pete's defining narrative style.) I guess I generally spend a lot more time writing narration as opposed to dialogue? I can get pretty heavy on metaphor and lean into a sort of poetry-prose thing.

N: Is there a fic you wish someone else would write (or finish) for you?

Ooh! I've got an idea for a post s2 Hannibal canon divergent fic where Abigail doesn't die and goes to Europe with Hannibal and they have some father-daughter bonding and she goes off of her own to find who she is and comes back just in time to save Will and Hannibal from the Fall at the end of s3. But I don't really have time to write it with the Several WIPs I already have, and Hannibal has always been a hard character for me to wrap my head around anyway. And I know there are some Amazing fic writers out there for that fandom.

Fic Ask Game

[nightmareonfilmstreet]

The King vs. The Kubrick: 38 Years of THE SHINING

I have sat down in front of my computer a dozen times over the past week, trying to come up with a new angle to write about 1980’s The Shining. It is impossible. This film has been written about, analyzed and over-analyzed (see the documentary Room 237, and you will agree) to the point that everything that has needed to be said about the film has already been said. There are 6,000 articles about The Shining from writers much more talented than myself that can be accessed on the internet at any given time.

Everyone is aware of the shooting details of the film, how Kubrick emotionally terrorized Shelley Duvall yet coddled the psyche of little Danny Lloyd. We have heard about the set dressing, the outfits, the extra takes and the apologies for faking the Apollo 11 moon landing. We’ve been told these stories over and over since 1980, and, frankly, it’s boring at this point. So, what I would like to do, instead of running through the film and commenting on its merits or faults, is take a look at why the story’s creator despises the film so much and determine whether or not his points are valid.

We all know that Stephen King famously hates Kubrick’s adaptation of the story and that he has gone on record dozens of times since 1980 to let us know exactly why. His latest book, The Outsider, even has a small dig at the film, introducing a character who is watching Paths of Glory because it is “better than The Shining“.

I think we can all agree that The Shining is the most technically proficient, beautiful and frightening adaptation of a Stephen King work of fiction, so why has he held on to these disgruntled feelings for so long? Let’s take a look at three of his biggest issues with the film adaptation of his story and try to see if King’s version, or Kubrick’s, resulted in the better story.

    #1- “Jack was crazy from the first scene.”

In an interview with Rolling Stone from 2014, King went on a short rant about why he disliked the film version of The Shining. In it, he states:

In the book, there’s an actual arc where you see this guy, Jack Torrance, trying to be good, and little by little he moves over to this place where he’s crazy. And as far as I was concerned, when I saw the movie, Jack was crazy from the first scene. I had to keep my mouth shut at the time. It was a screening, and Nicholson was there. But I’m thinking to myself the minute he’s on the screen, ‘Oh, I know this guy. I’ve seen him in five motorcycle movies, where Jack Nicholson played the same part.’

  It has been noted several times that the character of John Daniel Torrance (Jack in the film) is King’s most autobiographical creation. He is a schoolteacher (check), a writer (double-check) who has a drinking problem (triple-check) and is genuinely afraid that his vices will cause him to harm his family (quadruple-check). I can understand the anger King has about the change in motivation for the character. The book follows this man’s decent into madness at the hands of the Overlook Hotel, it’s demons and ghosts worming their way into his mind and forcing him to try to hurt his family. The film, on the other hand, does not explicitly state that the ghosts of the Overlook are having any effect on Jack at all. Instead, it seems like Jack began his mental disintegration long before accepting the caretaker position.

You can see from the short conversation between Jack, Wendy and Danny in their tiny yellow Volkswagon that he is not necessarily fond of his family situation. He resents them for dragging him down and stifling his creative process. Writer’s block rules the world around him, and it is their fault that he has it. He hurt little Danny once, in a drunken rage. Instead of showing any true remorse for having hurt his son, in the film, Jack blames it all on the boy for throwing his papers around the room. He doesn’t blame himself or take any responsibility for it, instead claiming that it was a “Momentary loss of muscular coordination” (which, I admit, will probably be the title of my memoir). To please Wendy and to keep the family together, he vows that he will never take another drink, forcing him onto a wagon that he never wanted to be on and into this state of mental block. This planted a seed of hatred for the two of them deep within his mind that the isolation and continued sobriety of the Overlook fed until it bloomed into the hallucinations and rage we see at the end of the film.

      King wanted his character to be the victim of an evil force so that we could all see ourselves in his shoes. He wanted Torrance to be a good man, trying to be good and do good for his family that is swayed by the spirits that want his son’s psychic energies and powers. In the book, John has a moment of clarity during his rampage through the halls of the lodge, telling Danny that he loves him and to run. This obviously did not translate to the film version. There is no moment of humanity peeking through the curtain of red madness. Jack has transitioned into a grunting maniac, and there is no coming back from it.

So, which has the greater effect? I believe that Kubrick’s version is a much more impactful iteration of the John/Jack character. The moment of clarity John has in the novel suggests more of a “possession” rather than a true break in psyche. This does not make me see myself in his shoes, like King wanted. As time goes on, I see Jack as a more realistic character, a man who loses his mind and tries to kill his family. Possession takes the blame away from John in the novel. It’s not his fault, it’s the hotel that is doing it. Also, there is more finality to Kubrick’s version of the character. A possession can be beaten, it can be avoided, but madness cannot. You cannot stop the train of psychosis once it has left the track when you are 25 miles deep in the snow-blocked mountains. So, when it comes to the difference in central motivations for John/Jack, I have to side with Kubrick. The film’s version of the character is more believable, understandable, and downright terrifying.

  #2- Wendy’s Role

In his novel, Stephen King describes Wendy Torrance as beautiful, blonde and smart-as-a-whip. In Kubrick’s version, Wendy is reduced to a lank-haired mother-only in Shelley Duvall (Side note- I dare someone to besmirch Shelley Duvall’s name in my presence. She is a unique, beautiful woman that has had her world ripped apart by mental illness. He was very good in this movie, and to call her “ugly” or “dumb” is a sure-fire way to make sure you receive these hands.) In the same interview with Rolling Stone from 2014, King tells Andy Greene that Kubrick’s film:

…it’s so misogynistic. I mean, Wendy Torrance is just presented as this sort of screaming dishrag. But that’s just me, that’s the way I am.

  This is the most valid of King’s criticisms of the film. Wendy does nothing to save her family, instead, she stands there and takes Jack’s verbal abuse about interrupting his work and nods as if she is a dog cowering in the corner.  She fails to act when Danny is attacked in Room 237, instead she smokes and paces her bedroom, swearing to get them out of there. Then she, um, goes to bed. This gives Jack enough time to sabotage the SnowCat (their only means of escape), destroy the radio (their only connection to the outside world) and descend further into his psychosis thanks to the spirit of Mr. Grady.

Towards the end of the film, she does stand up for herself and tries her best to stop Jack from hurting them. He hits him in the head with a bat (although with terrible form… come on, Wendy), slashes his hand with a knife and screams an awful lot. This all comes way too late, and a smart woman who truly cared for her family would have gotten out of there at the first signs of paranormal interference or murderous rage. In other words, she is “presented as this sort of screaming dishrag”.

    I agree with King that Kubrick devolved Wendy into a prop for Jack to rage against, but I don’t agree with many people’s assumption that she is a wasted character in the film. She takes Jack’s verbal assaults, deflects his anger, tries to keep Danny from making his father mad, allows him his privacy and continues to hope that he will not hurt them.  In other words, Wendy is in a abusive relationship and cannot break out of the cycle. It is impossible for me to truly get into the headspace of someone who continues to be with a man who abuses them or their children, but this film is a glimpse into that world. She stays by his side through the drinking, the fighting, the screaming and the hitting, and she holds onto this tiny sliver of hope that she will someday see the Jack that she fell in love with come back.

So, while I agree with King about how Wendy is portrayed in the film, I still feel as if it is a good representation of the emotional terrorism that Jack has subjected her to over the years. She doesn’t know how to react because Jack has taken away her free will and she is completely dependent on the man who is now chasing her with an axe. In other words, she is not a “dishrag”, she is an abused woman trying her best to protect her son from the monster she married.

  #3- The Overlook

In the novel, the Overlook Hotel is the evil tearing the family apart. It has haunted hedge animals and possessed fire hoses that attack and try to claim Danny’s powers for it’s own vile vortices to contain. In the film, the hotel is just that: a hotel. Sure, it is probably haunted by overly-bloodied elevators, disintegrating bathing women and fellating bear-men, but it does not have the powers over the physical world described in the book. So which is more effective?

I believe that Kubrick’s version of the hotel is, by far, the most horrific version of the secluded setting. This harkens back to the argument about Jack/John’s motivations, in that the Overlook is seen as a possessive force in the novel. Possessions, I say again, can be beaten. They can be thwarted by good men with good intentions. The hedge animals were terrifying in the book and they gave 10-year-old me nightmares, but they are an example of how the hotel manipulates physical things for its own gain. It is a sentient character in the novel, but only a setting in the film.

  “[The Overlook] is simply a conduit for the chaos created by Jack and his insanity.”

  The true evil of the film comes from Jack Torrance and not a scrapbook in the boiler room. There is a sentience there, I admit, because it tends to attract men with hate in their heart to it’s caretaker’s quarters, but it isn’t the cause of these actions. In the film, the hotel itself has no grand scheme. It doesn’t want Danny’s psychic powers or anything else from the Torrance family. It is is simply a conduit for the chaos created by Jack and his insanity. There are spirits there, sure, but there are spirits in many hotels across the country. What the Overlook does in the film is simply push and prod Jack toward his rampage. It takes a damaged man and allows him to follow his own path to murder.

    As we all know, Wendy and Danny escape in the novel because the hotel explodes. In the film, they escape because Jack freezes to death ion the maze. As a horror fiends, which version is more terrifying for you? In one scenario, the evil is defeated. It forgets about its own faulty boiler and is destroyed. In the film, the hotel still stands. It’s spirits still walk the halls and bathe in Room 237. They will still be there the next time a family wants to spend the winter roaming its halls. This permanence is why I tend to side with Kubrick’s version of the Overlook. In the novel, a haunted hotel is blown up and the threat is over. In the film, however, the hotel stands, its ghost haunt, and the axes are still in the shed for the next caretaker who accepts the position.

King describes the main difference between his work and Kubrick’s film like this: “The book is hot, and the movie is cold; the book ends in fire, and the movie in ice”. This may sound like a straightforward statement, seeing as the book ends with the Overlook being destroyed by a boiler explosion and the film ends with Danny luring Jack into the hedge-maze to freeze to death, but it is much more than that. He is describing the difference between Kubrick and himself. King is the warmth, the humanity in the story, while Kubrick is the cold artist who distances himself and the characters from true emotion and feeling. This is a fair metaphor for the different artistic styles of these two men, but in my mind it is not a condemnation of the film. For me, fire burns out. Smoke settles and flames turn to embers. The sun may come up and winter may turn its pages into spring, but cold will always return. Cold always comes back to continue its feast, therefore making it the more permanent adversary.

  “In the film [..] the hotel stands, its ghost haunt, and the axes are still in the shed for the next caretaker who accepts the position.”

  Let me get this out in the open, I love Stephen King. He has gifted me with the characters and villains that I love most in the fictional world. He is the source of my passion for the horror genre and is, undoubtedly, the finest horror author that has ever lived. That being said, I think it is foolish to dismiss Kubrick’s adaptation of The Shining simply because King hates it with such a fervor. I have seen arguments online coming from people in all walks of life saying that The Shining is not a horror film, that it isn’t a true King adaptation or that 1997’s miniseries is the superior version because it sticks more closely to the novel. That, I’m sorry to say, is nonsense.

The Shining is one of the finest horror films ever made and it belongs on the upper-tier of King adaptations. On the film’s 38th anniversary, let’s let bygones be bygones and allow ourselves to disagree with The King for once. We can love both the novel and the film for what they are, and rejoice in the fact that we have two different, yet related stories about the Overlook Hotel that we get to enjoy.

  Are you as big of a fan of The Shining as we are, or do you think the novel is the better version of the story? Either way, we want to hear from you! Join our Facebook group Horror Fiends of Nightmare on Film Street and join in on the conversation! While you’re at it, bookmark our homepage at Nightmare on Film Street to stay up to date with all the hottest horror news, reviews and retrospectives the internet has to offer.

The post The King vs. The Kubrick: 38 Years of THE SHINING appeared first on Nightmare on Film Street - Horror Movie Podcast, News and Reviews.

from WordPress https://nofspodcast.com/the-king-vs-the-kubrick-38-years-of-the-shining/ via IFTTT

[cwl190]

Week 3

Benjamin Percy “Set Pieces: Setting the Iconic Stage” (Thrill Me)

“Mine your past. Think of a place... Three or four images will typically race to the front of your mind. You can hunt for those images too. Keep your mind open, a notebook ready” (43).

“Every winter, in Ames, Iowa, crows appear. Clouds of them. Thousands of them. They blacken rooftops and leafless trees. They mutter and wheeze. They slick sidewalks with their shit. They dive and peck people who walk too close” (43).

Benjamin Percy “There Will Be Blood: Writing Violence” (Thrill Me)

“... where imagination takes over and the reader becomes a kind of writer, inventing the violence, and in doing so the story becomes their own and they carry it with them like a red-veined tumor” (54).

“We’re all guilty of it at one time or another. Excess. Recklessness. Dangerous indulgence. Driven by the same impulse that compels us, when we spot a sign that reads Wet Paint, to reach out a hand for a touch, delighting in the smear, bringint a finger to our nose for a sniff, to our tongue for a taste. Especially when the paint is red” (55-56).

Gorenography - Prolonged suffering, splashing buckets of blood across stories without principle and with peculiar malice and glee.

“Their flamboyand style aestheticizes the mayhem, as if the authors love what we are meant to despise. They linger on the violence, wallow in the gore, celebrate it to such a degree...” (56-57). 

“Violence is not the answer, but a variable in a long, complicated equation” (58).

“Almost every shot is a close-up, each of them flashing on-screen for the briefest moment, giving us a shutter-speed collage of horror. A screaming mouth. An outstretched hand. A bulging eye. Knife, knife, knife” (59). 

“We are not told about his aching heart or his mind stricken black with grief” (64).

SET PIECES: 

One movie with a set piece that really sticks out to me is this scene from “Perfect Blue” directed by Satoshi Kon. Honestly the entire last third of the movie is a ride and I never explain why I like this film so much because I think everyone should watch it at least once in their life going in blind. From the beginning of this clip to the end, we can see the main character Mima’s struggle with her own identity to the point where it crosses over to her reality. Just like it is for her, the audience has no idea how to draw a distinction between what is real and what’s in her head. I still don’t completely understand everything that happened in this film even after rewatching scenes and analysis videos because everyone’s interpretation of this movie is so different. Even so, I think the beauty of the film is it’s bizareness and how no one can truly grasp what was trying to be conveyed there.

CONNECT THE DOTS (SET PIECES): 

The defining set piece in “The Minature Wife” for me was the scene where the narrator walks in on his wife sleeping with his co-worker, who had shrunken himself to her size. I think that this is the set piece of the short story because it’s the catalyst for everything to really turn to havoc. The narrator and his wife have had rising tension throughout, from the narrator neglecting his wife to her slowly adapting to being small, but I think that her cheating on him was the breaking point where we just knew their relationship was past salvagable. The main character killing his co-worker by letting a bird eat it and his wife assaulting him as an act of war is just an escalation of this set piece after the other.

WRITING VIOLENCE: 

I think this advice is perfect for any aspiring writers because by shying away from the ugly, you are not making any progress regarding your plot or characters. Your writing doesn’t always have to be raw and visceral, but conflict is what drives a story and to make something compelling, it has to be believable. People do ugly things. By embracing that in your writing you can convince the audience your characters are real. I’m still trying to work on this in my own writing but in a way where I can balance dialogue seamlessly with action.

CONNECT THE DOTS (VIOLENCE):

I think the violence in Gonzales’s story is something that got proper buildup. Gonzales’s story is an allegory that works especially well in the context of today’s relationships. There were a lot of underlying problems in the relationship between his narrator and his wife, and I think that accidentally shrinking her was symbolic for how he minimized her feelings. I think the narrator and his wife had flaws, but their inability to communicate is what spurred the chain of disasters. Her eventual infidelity and hatred of him seems to explode out of nowhere, but I can see this happening in any regular marriages as well. 

DON’T LOOK BACK: 

I think there is backstory in Gonzales’s story when he’s explaining how his wife used to leave passive aggressive notes to him. It works here in a way that helps us understand that it wasn’t just being shrunk that drove a wedge into the narrator and his wife’s marriage. There was already unresolved conflict between them due to the narrator’s overdedication to his work and his neglect of his wife’s feelings. This wasn’t something that came out of left field, it was just something that escalated the ruin of their relationship at an even more rapid pace. 

CONNECT THE DOTS:

Parameswaran uses violence in a unique way where he downplays the tiger’s brutality towards Kitch and the baby. He means to be gentle when he takes the baby in his mouth and ends up suffocating it, and he wants to show Kitch affection and kills him. This makes the tiger’s strength even more convicting because the tiger doesn’t mean to do any of those thing but is so powerful he cannot help himself. This gives the tiger’s violence meaning instead of just describing a rampage beast on the hunt out of malicious intent.

SET PIECES: 

The set piece in Rajesh Parameswaran’s “The Infamous Bengal Ming” is definitely when the tiger bites into Kitch and kills him. It sets in action him becoming a runaway and escaping from the zoo. This is an escalation to the plot and shows that although the tiger loves Kitch, it’s impossible to bridge that gap between man and animal.

VIOLENCE: 

I think that violence is written responsibly in “The Infamous Bengal Ming” in that it is not responsible at all. This tiger has well-meaning intentions through most of the story but his strength ends up being his unbecoming, as every act of good he tries to commit is received with punishment. This is thoroughly intentional because while it portrays that predators can never be fully tamed, it also brings a new perspective to an otherwise terrifying animal. 

DON’T LOOK BACK: 

I don’t think there is any flashbacks, only context to who certain characters may be, like Saskia, Maharaj and the old lady he despises. I think that this is more effective for this story because it puts you more in the headspace of the tiger who is mainly focused on his present feelings of hunger or danger.