#that's not how you find the key

[junkanimate]

...you know when you have a thought that transforms in a drawing and a short "comic"?

Anyway, in my head Johnny and Lao had some occasional hookups while at the academy, mostly they were trying to prove themself to be better than the other. Also, headcanon Johnny/Kenshi and Raiden/Kung Lao roommates

[strixcattus]

I really enjoy looking at this still from Slay the Princess:

In the midst of all the weird imagery from the first part of the Stranger route, you see for a moment—and it is cut off at the end, so I had to be quick with my screenshot—every route laid out in front of you, paired up as the game does elsewhere, and described, interestingly enough, from what I can only believe is the Voices' perspectives, or perhaps the relationship between the Princess and the Voice of a given route.

Consumption: The Beast (Hunted), the ribcages in the bottom right. Being eaten, alive or half so, is one way or another the outcome you face in the Beast. This one seems to be the least connected to its route's Voice, though I can still see it in a relational sort of way. Betrayal: The Witch (Opportunist), the nail-studded... I can't tell what it is, but it's at the top left. Betrayal on your part is the cause of the Witch's route, and it too is inevitable in some form once you're on that route—the Opportunist is very vocal about it.

Skepticism: The Prisoner (Skeptic), the chains at the bottom. Pretty clear analogue given the name of the Voice, but not to neglect—you reach the Prisoner by taking the blade (distrust of the Princess) but ultimately using it to free the Princess (you take the time to think critically about what you're being asked to do, and decide the Narrator is less trustworthy). Blind devotion: The Damsel (Smitten), the... I can only imagine locks of hair at the top. You reach the Damsel by immediately and wholly assuming she has no ill intentions, an attitude made manifest in the Smitten.

Rivalry: The Adversary (Stubborn), the spikes to the left. The Adversary route is, so long as you embrace it, about your probably-a-metaphor-for-sex-I-mean-the-Eye of the Needle-isn't-even-trying-to-veil-it eternal fight with the Adversary, with the Stubborn in strong support. Submission: The Tower (Broken), the stone columns to the right. One of the most clear-cut "this is about the Voice" examples—the Broken has completely submitted to the Tower's will, even though the player still has a few chances to resist her.

Terror: The Nightmare (Paranoid), the eyes in the upper right. Of course, the Nightmare is all about fear, and the Paranoid is the embodiment of your fear of the Princess—the fear that made you lock her in the basement and the fear that stopped your heart when she broke free. Longing: The Spectre (Cold), the wisps in the bottom left. This one is interesting, and almost made me second-guess my "Voices" reading, as the Spectre herself is clearly a creature of longing—but then what about "Submission?" The Tower is not "submitting" to anything. That's her whole deal. Perhaps this one is connected to your desire for something other than what the Narrator calls the "Good Ending..." or perhaps it has something to do with the Cold's interest in feeling something, which he expresses in a few routes (the Greys being the most obvious).

Pain: The Razor (Cheated,) the spikes at the top. She skewers you, and you die. Over and over again she skewers you, and you die, and it is painful over and over again. I'm not sure I have much to add to this one. Unfamiliarity: The Stranger (Contrarian), the abstract DNA-like strand at the bottom. You reach the Stranger by refusing to interact with the Princess, leaving her an unfamiliar blank slate whose actions you cannot predict and thus fracture into every possible image of her.

And at the heart of it all, an emotion that can only be described as—what? The Narrator doesn't get the chance to finish his sentence before you wake up in the Prisoner's basement, but I'd think the answer is obvious once you've finished the game.

After all, this is a love story.

[luck-of-the-drawings]

OH ARTHUR BENNETT.. such a gorgeous and intriguing character. terribly burdened by a GRUESOME set of crimes, his light suffocated by a HEAVY century of GUILT. so tragic, so dark and broody, and yet PAINFULLY awkward in any social setting ever

[rainbowvamp]

hob in the dreaming just minding his own business:

dream: *drops a book on a table that was not there three seconds ago*

hob: hey buddy… there a problem?

dream, glaring at the book: yes

hob:

dream, still glaring:

hob: …wanna share?

dream: do you truly believe i do not care for you?

hob:

hob: what the fuck??

dream, opening the book that is hob’s letters (written and unwritten) and pointing to one from a couple weeks ago:

the letter: “…and maybe sometimes i still wonder if you’ll come back. if you’re just amusing yourself with me…”

hob: what about that says i don’t care about you?

dream: it implies that i do not care for you. do you think so little of me?

hob, breaking out of that weird dream space where your brain just accepts stuff and actually analyzing what is going on: wait, no. hold on. how do you have this?

hob, scanning through a set of letters he wrote on an artistic kick in the 1700s: no really! how do you have these?

dream: my realm contains every book ever written and unwritten.

hob: and so you read my letters?

dream: they were addressed to me

hob: no. no. they were not addressed to anyone. they were unsent.

dream: i’m clearly the intended recipient.

hob: you are not. i never meant you to read these.

hob: i never even wrote some of these! i just thought this one.

hob: did you read all of them??

dream:

dream: yes.

hob: what the fuck?

[dovalore]

borbs

[puppyeared]

When you backread through a fun conversation you had with someone for hours an angel gets its wings

[dennisboobs]

charlie bringing up a traumatic event involving older women only for dennis to brush it off as something milder than it was

(x)

[coquelicoq]

actually natori has some kind of tracking talisman on matoba at all times. that's how he knew where to abduct matoba from for Operation: Kitty Cat City. matoba fully knows about it; it's why he wasn't at all surprised to find a paper doll in natsume's hair after the mask youkai debacle (matoba internally as he watched it fly away: classic mother hen shuuichi-san momence 🥰). because this is matoba "boundaries? what are those? can you eat them?" seiji we're talking about, he's not bothered by this "violation" of his "privacy"; rather, he finds it fittingly clingy (it is, after all, only right that natori should be keeping tabs on him obsessively). sometimes the talisman gets confused and sticks to yesterday's outfit, so he always checks to make sure he has it on the way out the door (his pocket patdown is "keys, lighter, wallet, exorcism supplies, shuuichi-san's cute lil tracker he thinks i don't know about <3"). i wouldn't be surprised if he's figured out how to uno reverse it and now uses it to track natori's location as well. this may not technically be canon but it is probably all 100% true in an important way that transcends canon, we just never hear about it because it isn't relevant to natsume's journey 😌

[fullscoreshenanigans]

Your analyses are the best. They are so fun to read and I over think everything afterwarrs

Thank you!

For analyses above my level, I highly recommend checking out these if you haven't already read them:

The two chapters of Kei Toda's Reading The Promised Neverland with a British/American Literature Scholar (2020) that have been translated into English by fans (Chapter 2: Religion by @thathilomgirl & @0hana0fubuki0 | Chapter 3: Gender by @1000sunnygo)

Anime Feminist's "Emma’s Choice: The gender-norm nightmare at the heart of The Promised Neverland" article (2018) (good follow-up to Toda's chapter on gender)

Jackson P. Brown's "Thoughts on… The Promised Neverland, and Black Women in Manga" (2018) blog post and Zeria's video essay/blog post (2019) on Krone's depiction

Jairus Taylor's "The Unfulfilled Potential of The Promised Neverland Anime" (2021) which made me more open to the idea of a remake of S1

For tumblr posts (some of these I'm linking through my blog because I either had a minor link addition or think the OP's/prev's tags deserve to be seen and rebloggable, but you can just click through to the original post):

@puff-poff's exploration of the demon world's culture (Part 1 & Part 2)

@just-like-playing-tag's examination of the farm system, Emma character analysis launched by a minute change in S2e02, and mini-Isabella analysis regarding her treatment of Ray (along with her blog just being a wealth of knowledge in general)

@hylialeia's post on the series' handling of Norman's plan/the oppressed and oppressors

@avadescent's analysis of the S2 ED album art (Norman and Emma are perpendicular; Emma and Ray are parallel.)

@linkspooky has a lot of analyses from when the series was running but special mention to this analysis of Norman's character

@vobomon also has a lot but special mention to her Norman is autistic and Norman has PTSD posts

@goldiipond's "Ray is autistic" essay

@emmaspolaroid with some of the best Emma and Emma & Isabella meta in general

@nullaby's post on Isabella and Ray's relationship

[camellcat]

you ever realize you never properly learned how to say a character's name, so by the time you finally HEAR it, you have no idea who they're talking about? cause I feel like I keep doing this and it's very confusing to keep being corrected like that

[seaweedstarshine]

Hi! Long time no yap but I've been really bothered by this thing and I know you're just the person I can go to with this (even if we don't always end up agreeing at times).

I got into a tiff with someone in a comments section of a post that was about Amy (Which character do you think deserved to become a villain? or something similar). They brought up Amy's abuse of her boyfriend. I may have tried to defend Amy (key word is tried. I am officially rubbish at debating) but then I may have said something? Because they said that I (and apparently a lot of other fans) was excusing Amy's abuse because of her trauma. It got me stumped because isn't young Amy's treatment of Rory rooted in her trauma? Did I miss the memo where we separate trauma and abuse? Am I missing something?

That statement bothered me a lot because if there's one thing I never want to do it's defend an abuser. So here I am, humbly asking and hoping to clear the muddy waters.

Your really confused and disturbed moot, Tia 💌

TIA!!!!! Thanks for the ask 💌 , and I send you all the hugs.

Discussion of abuse, trauma, ableism, infidelity, and unhealthy relationship dynamics beneath the cut.

(First off… while I really appreciate your faith in my explaining skills <3 <3 <3 my passion for traumatized characters and mentally ill+neurodivergent rights doesn't make me especially qualified to fully clear muddy waters especially not knowing the full context, but I feel you, and what follows is my informed perspective!)

Speaking generally first, harm done in media is best examined by the impact on the audience, with a different lens than harm done to real people. While relatable experiences in media can be useful and validating and incredibly important, you can’t be “defending an abuser” when the abuse is fictional. It's actually normal for traumatized/ND/mentally ill people to project onto mentally ill villains, when villains are the only significant representation for those stigmatized symptoms in a media landscape that excludes and demonizes us simply for existing. RTD can't stop people who hallucinate from reclaiming the Master's Drums and projecting onto the Master, for example — 90% of the best Doctor Who psychosis fic by psychotic authors is about the Master, whether RTD likes it or not. It's not true crime.

(This is speaking generally. Amy Pond is very much not the Master.)

Abuse is a behavior, and there can be many reasons for it, but reasons based in trauma don’t make it not abuse (some forms of generational trauma can propagate abusive parenting styles, when the parent thinks abusive parenting is normal, or lives entirely vicariously through their child). This absolutely should not be taken to mean trauma correlates with abusive behavior; rather that abusive behaviors from traumatized people are more likely to present in specific ways.

Abuse is also a targeted behavior, based in control — not consistently displayed C-PTSD symptoms as seen in Season 5 Amy Pond through many aspects of her life. Mental health symptoms don't become abuse just because they hinder one partner from meeting the other partner's needs. Any life event can do that.

Without knowing the context of the arguments, this is the aspect of their relationship I've seen you talk about before (which I also feel strongly about), and what I assume is what you were debating? So, here I will talk specifically in regard to Season 5.

We all know Amy — she's never attached to Leadworth because she never wanted to leave Scotland, no steady therapist because none of them stick up for her, can't stick with one job yet her first choice is a job that simulates intimacy because her avoidant behavior (a known trauma response) isn't sustainable to her wellbeing. Rory knows her fears of commitment stem from her repeated abandonments, it’s why he’ll always wait for her, and it's why he blames the Doctor “You make it so they don't want to let you down.”, who apart from having caused a lot of her trauma, has actively taken advantage of her being the “Scottish girl in the English village” who's “still got that accent,” because he wants to feel important, so yeah, I think interpreting Amy's issues (and how Amy and Rory transverse them) as Amy abusing Rory indicates a fundamental misunderstanding of their relationship, as well as a misunderstanding of the (raggedy) Doctor’s role in Amy’s formative self-image (which of course she works through in Season 6, but I am sticking to Season 5).

Abuse is always based in control. That just doesn’t fit here. While Amy's detachment from her real life includes things like calling Rory her “kind of boyfriend” (which she is upfront about to his face; differing commitment levels isn't abuse, though it can be a relationship red flag for both parties IRL) — her Season 5 disregard of Rory’s feelings occurs only in response to the fairytale embodiment of her trauma. It's never a response to Rory; it's a response to the Doctor, who stole her childhood and led her by the hand to her death. She cheats on Rory with the Doctor in her bedroom full of Doctor toys, drawings, models, she made from childhood to early adulthood.

(And yes, like many repeatedly-traumatized people, Amy is prone to being sensitive and reactive. Take her “Well, shut up then!” line in The Big Bang; but given Rory responds to this by hugging her, clearly he doesn’t take it as her actually dismissing him. He knows her better than that.)

And by no means do I meant to imply this is fair to young Rory, poor Rory, who's left struggling with the feeling that his role in her life is in competition with the role of her trauma (aka the Doctor). But not every unhealthy relationship dynamic is unhealthy because of abuse. Labelling Amy's treatment of Rory in Season 5 more accurately isn't the same as excusing her harmful choices — but making mistakes is part of being human, Amy's mistakes are certainly understandable, and she works through them out of love for Rory.

If there's one thing to say about Moffat women, it's that Moffat allows his female characters the same grace that the male characters *coughTENcough* have always had, to hurt and struggle and make realistic mistakes and overcome those mistakes and to heal without being demonized.

Amy isn't perfect, but she is a fully realized character, and her story gives us a resonant depiction of childhood trauma.

[imthursdaysyme]

Steve and Jon tired af bc Steve thought it would be a good idea to climb through Jons window drunk at 3am instead of using the house key

[suddenrundown]

oh man i always forget moreau happens in season 3. you know what else happens in season 3? scheherazade. gone fishing. season 3 eliot has 99 problems and moreau may be most of those but hardison’s at least one of them. 

[thedreadvampy]

btw about Neil Gaiman I periodically agree with the 'Neil Gaiman is annoying' stuff bc I feel like both he and Amanda Palmer seem like people who I would go insane stuck in a room with bc we have very different ideas about art and suchlike. and I also do think that the career trajectory he's on lately is cynically redoing his greatest hits and pretending that was the dream all along when it clearly was not. which is at best meh.

having said which

as far as I can tell by far the most common complaint about Neil Gaiman is "Snow, Glass, Apples is problematic/gross/it's got incest and rape and frames the child as the aggressor"

which strikes me as a weird complaint to pull out of a 40 year body of work tbh when that short story is pretty clearly coming from a place of 'how far can I push this'. like you don't have to like the story. I don't really like the story. but it is. a horror story.

like and this is the thing with particularly 90s alt horror right? a lot of the interest is in transgression and sitting in the worst possible perspective and seeing what happens if you pull those strings. like I really like Clive Barker for example but there's a good chunk of his short stories that I'm like I'm not picking up what you're putting down Clive this seems Kinda Off. but that willingness to write some trite or Bad Message horror fiction that doesn't land is imo a side effect of being willing to try writing uncomfortable and unpleasant fiction at all. which is what horror is for, among other things, it's for creating discomfort as a form of catharsis or engagement.

like I am not a huge fan of the type of sex-horror that pops up in a lot of Gaiman's work and other contemporary horror writers - to me I don't find it upsetting or horny it just ends up feeling kind of edgy and tryhard - but I'm also a bit like. it does seem like a lot of people's beef with Neil Gaiman is that In The 90s He Was A Horror Writer

and this approach to Problematic Horror in Snow, Glass, Apples I find kind of microcosmic of how The Discourse often approaches art in this kind of 1:1 way. if you write a story which seems to line up with rape apologia it can only be because you agree with it. if you write a story about transphobia you're a transphobe. if you write a story that makes me genuinely uncomfortable you're attacking me.

but artwork, especially art like horror that's not necessarily trying to provoke enjoyment as its main response, is necessarily hit and miss. and if what you're shooting for is discomfort then whether it works, falls flat or goes too far incredibly depends on your audience. and making good art - as in art that makes its audience think, art that opens the audience up to discomfort and catharsis and sticks with them and changes them - requires the space to experiment and tbh the space to fuck up. like they aren't all going to be winners and they certainly aren't all going to work for you as a singular audience.

personally I don't see the appeal of Snow, Glass, Apples, less cause it's nasty and more cause it's hack. ooh an edgy monstrous version of a fairy tale where there's lots of rape and cannibalism? you're soooo original Neil. but like. that's fine. I don't really vibe with like 70% of Neil Gaiman stuff I've read but I still like Neil Gaiman because the stuff that works for me really works for me.

idk I think there's a lot of folk on this website who shouldn't interact with horror cause they clearly aren't interested in being horrified. that's not everyone who dislikes Snow, Glass, Apples, but it's a real undercurrent to a lot of the criticism and tbh this kinda vibe is shit for art. making standout art What Is Good also requires being ready to make art which stands out for the wrong reasons. sometimes they'll be the same art to different people.

[coachbeards]

I AM NOT SAYING JANE WAS AT ALL RIGHT but if i saw my boyfriend hanging out w his boy best friend looking like a housewife…I’d have some concerns lmao

[redysetdare]

I call characters ugly because their personality is revolting and i love to hate them and bully them. You call characters ugly because they have physical features that you deem "unattractive" or don't fit eurocentric beauty standards and you hate them for that.

We are not the same.