#this makes no sense but whatever. also can probably b applied to whatever side character | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

heatwavering · 1 year

Note

when-harry-met-sally-ification of hangster is genius!!!! i would love to hear more about that if you don't mind sharing!

also - what's on your bradley bradshaw playlist? what's genre do you associate w/ him the most?

oh god. oh you don’t even know man. hangster being harry met sally (1989) is one of those things that only makes sense in my head or with a lot of background context, because if i were to just come out and say “rooster is like sally because he’s a chronic perfectionist and an emotional powder keg that lets everything pile up until the last moment (plus his mom is meg ryan), and hangman’s like harry because he’s an cynical asshole who’s actually gooey on the inside and doesn’t speak before he thinks and chooses to push peoples buttons and yearns more than he lets on” to someone who’s only seen both movies in passing, i’m going to get a lot of blank stares and nervous laughter. "isn't that every romcom couple ever?" yes. but i mean--

BAR. FOR BAR. I have wayyy more examples and comparisons but my computer explodes every time I try to add a picture or god forbid a gif. mostly, the "we've met before and it went terrible both times, but the third time we met it stuck and we managed to finally find equal footing and fall in love," is sooooo special to me. and since when harry met sally is an 80s movie (derogatory) and people bog down on the "men and women can't be friends" thing it gets a lot of flack, but by the end of the movie the whole dynamic shifts and becomes more like "why are we putting such big expectations on a relationship when I just love you. plain and simple. no wishy-washy philosophy applies because we've outgrown it and now know each other as equals." (plus that whole first "idea" is brought up by a cynical twenty-something who changes his entire worldview by the end of the movie bc he's fallen in love. why stick to your guns about an idea that's outdated when (a) people are too complicated to fall into your boxes and (b) uhhh who cares. you're in love. I always thought the change in harry's character is supposed to reverse his previous claim in the beginning of the movie and make fun of it for being kind of elementary. but maybe I'm thinking too hard about it.) I'm definitely glossing over some plot points and nuance and whatever but again, this dynamic is something that came directly out of my mind and basically only applies to how I've sandcastled hangster into what I want to see. plus I watched WHMS at like nine years old and it might've had some debilitating side effects. enjoy with an entire pile of salt.

about music now. I'm one of those people that is the ugly kind of pretentious about character playlists (his ass would NOT listen to hayloft by mother mother, shit like that) but also spends net zero time actually building a playlist that follows a timeline or theme. so I just sort everything into two separate playlists/categories: songs that [insert character] would listen to "canonically" and songs [insert character] is aligned with in my own opinion. sometimes there's overlap!!! and sometimes I'm forcing myself to decide if Bradley listens to third eye blind or is the kind of guy who makes fun of people who listen to third eye blind. I still can't decide. I wasn't alive when he was in high school. and you know you're up a creek without a paddle when American Pie (1999) becomes reliable historical material. anyway here's the best way I can describe the difference in the two:

Bradley's own playlist: teenage boy from SoCal in the late 90s early 2000s. in my mind he was always kinda quiet in school and did partake in band so he could play the piano (yes, in jazz band. if I hear a Whiplash joke I'm airing the room out) and spent a lot of time listening to anything and everything that wasn't uhhh Britney Spears adjacent. but lots of blink-182, foo fighters, Pearl Jam, nirvana. probably some early Coldplay. maybe some of The Killers when he got to college, and Radiohead but in secret and when Maverick wouldn't bully him for listening to so much "sad ass (unspoken: gay) music." and of course he's Goose's son, soooo: Tom Petty & the Heartbreakers, Jim Croce, Billy Joel, Allman Brother's Band, Hall & Oates, CCR, Eagles, etc. From Maverick (and Ice): U2, Pearl Jam, The Cars, more dad yacht rock, maybe Metallica (??) depends on if you think Maverick would ever mess around with something hair metal adjacent. of course he prays at the alter of Bruce Springsteen like his fathers before him. and his mom filled in everything else: Fleetwood Mac, Elton John, Paul Simon, Wham! (George Michael being outed....hoo boy. #1 topic NOT discussed at the Bradshaw-Mitchell-Kazansky dinner table.), George Strait, Hootie & The Blowfish, miscellaneous female country music from the 90s like Faith Hill and Shania Twain. Alison Krauss & Union Station! Alanis Morissette! The Goo Goo Dolls? now I'm just listing things but you get the picture.

my playlist about Bradley: anything about hating your dad or your hometown with lyrics that apply. see photo below and you'll get the vibe.

[also, that ONE specific photo of miles teller in project x is the photo that sailed a thousand fics. i love that photo. i wrote this entire fucking fic around that photo. it’s so bradley nicolas bradshaw to me.]

but overall my biggest examples of songs that apply to him (for me) are Little Giant by Roo Panes, Release by Pearl Jam, and The Long Way Around by the Chicks. Seventeen by Sharon Van Etten bc of how it makes me feel about Maverick and him (sick in the head.) souvenir by boygenius. faith by bon iver. Hot & Heavy by Lucy Dacus and The Steps by HAIM for hangster vibes. too much Taylor Swift and Maggie Rogers that I don't know how to explain without having a published fic. I have a ton more and I want to pick like 10 songs from each section and go into heavier detail, but I should probably put something out before I dig myself a hole pffft.

#writing #top gun #bradley rooster bradshaw #writing all of this instead of packing for school uuuuhhh #on the bright side i’ve been writing much that usual #and no promises but there’s something cooking. it’s not related to any of this but i wrote about 8k for a one shot and have not stopped #never back down never WHAT?#it’s…sad. very sad. maybe too sad. but when is icemav not

7 notes · View notes

jumptheshark · 4 years

Text

trumannatural is so fucked up because yes tfw was a big truman show for chuck, he used sam and dean as characters in his story for their entire lives. but it always makes me think about how his own sons were just nothing to him. they are not real, they are not interesting. michael is just a sword, all he’s good for is giving them a gate to purgatory and dying. raphael never stood a chance at controlling heaven because chuck didn’t want him to. he’s just an obstacle for cas. how much of lucifer falling was even his own choice? or gabriel leaving? how much is chuck a writer and how much is he the writers? how much of these characters exist outside of what they’re good for?

#this makes no sense but whatever. also can probably b applied to whatever side character #i just thought the archangels were a good example #anyway #ghostfacers spn-is-more-than-they-show-on-tv theory my beloved #chuck #archangels #michael #raphael #gabriel #lucifer

15 notes · View notes

orionsangel86 · 4 years

Text

SPN Conspiracies - Applying Logic to Chaos

Its been over 2 months now since the Supernatural finale aired. I am still so angry, hurt, and confused by it and I don’t think I will ever get closure unless someone like Andrew Dabb, or Jensen Ackles, actually opens up and gives us an explanation that makes sense.

What annoys me most right now is people trying to gaslight fans into believing that we should accept the narrative we have been given at face value: That the finale was always planned to be that way, that Destiel was never on the cards, that there was no Network interference, that the only changes made were due to covid and were minor at best.

This harmful gaslighting is FALSE.

NO ONE KNOWS THE TRUTH OF WHAT HAPPENED.

Look, I don’t agree with some of the crazier conspiracy theories. I don’t believe that there was some huge campaign among the CW Network execs to remove anything remotely gay out of homophobia. I don’t believe that the finale was changed because of some desire to make it into a Walker promo. I don’t believe that the finale was really bad on purpose in protest by Dabb for not getting to do an ending he truly wanted. I don’t believe that Dabb left us smart fans a bunch of secret messages in the finale to hint that he was on our side all along and that everything was fake.

I do, however, believe that all of these conspiracy theories have some elements in them that are plausible. At least, more plausible than the bullshit narrative mentioned above that some people are pushing in some desperate attempt to defend the Network (which imo is really strange behaviour anyway - why would anyone care about a TV network with a history of terrible behaviour?!?)

We have facts, based on information provided before the covid lockdown, which for some reason, people like Misha have since backpeddled on. So let me try to outline some of the information that makes no sense.

Below the cut I go on a deep dive into the conspiracies and statements I have heard about the SPN finale and try to make some sense of this whole fucked up situation. It gets long.

1. “Cas was never gonna be in the finale”.

False: We have many fan accounts of Misha confirming that he was filming the finale. We have video evidence of Misha confirming he was going back to film the finale after the lockdown. We have confirmation from fans in Misha M&Gs from March that he had about 5 days of filming left.

We also had fan accounts of discussions with Alex Calvert (I think) where he confirmed the final shot of the final episode was all four of them though I would LOVE if someone can find a source for this.

2. Okay, Misha was gonna be in the finale, but only as Jimmy Novak

False: I heavily side eyed Misha when he said this. But I think I can come up with a plausible explanation for it. Per above, Misha was supposed to film for 5 days. This does not align with the half a day he described of filming as Jimmy Novak. My own belief is that after Cas was cut from the finale (for whatever reason we don’t know) someone (probably Jensen Ackles) put up a fight and complained that Misha should be there for the final episode. The writers probably tried to come up with a way to bring Misha back without having to deal with Cas, and pitched the idea of Jimmy Novak being in Heaven. Misha, obviously annoyed about this, turned this stupid pitch down.

3. Destiel was never a thing, never planned, never part of Dabb’s ending. Bobo and Misha pushing the confession was the part of the season that was Wrong.

False: We have a SPN writer on record saying that Castiel’s confession was the first thing written for Season 15 when the writers returned to the writers room. If it wasn’t planned, why was it the first thing written, why does it align so well with the rest of season 15? Look I know some people either a. hate destiel and refuse to see it even if it slaps them in the face, or b. have major heteronormative goggles on, or c. are just homophobes in denial, but 15x18 fits in perfectly with the narrative of season 15. Everything Cas says, everything that happened in that scene was so in character it just works. It fit. If you just rewatch the season whilst applying some critical thinking skills and pay attention to the narrative and character arcs, trust me, the confession fits in with pretty much every other plot point, and character story in the season.

Also: We have known for a while that the network did market research into Destiel, wanting to know if it would go down well or not. They were well aware of its popularity and considering it. Where would this have come from if not pitched by the showrunner? Dabb must have at least been considering it. If you take all of Dabb era into consideration, starting with mid season 11, all the way through the season 12 build up, season 13 grief arc, and then Bobo’s Destiel break up arc in late season 14, early season 15, it is clear that there was some toing and froing on the issue of Destiel, but ultimately, I still believe that Dabb was on board. He wrote 13x01 for christs sake. No way he wasn’t taking it seriously.

4. It’s always been about the brothers. The finale just stays true to what Supernatural is all about.

*rubs temples* Fundamentally FALSE: The show has time and again reasserted the message of “Family don’t end with blood”, as well as the messages of AKF and YANA. Sam and Dean may be at the heart of the show, but a heart can’t exist without a body to support it. Without bones, and lungs, and blood, and muscles, and a BRAIN. The finale abandons the shows core messages. It forces the characters back into their season 1 characterisations and the whole thing becomes hollow and souless. But I’m not here to complain, I’m here to lay down the facts. Dean’s heaven was supposed to be surrounded by loved ones right? We know OG Charlie Bradbury was gonna be in his Heaven, we also know CAS was gonna be in there. So this idea that the finale as it currently stands was how it was meant to be is wrong. Dean was supposed to die and reunite with his found family and loved ones. This alone would have been a far better ending than the one given. Do I think this was solely a covid issue? Fuck no.

The randoms that WERE in the finale are proof alone that they could have got people in and quarantined. We also have several actors on record saying that they WOULD have quarantined for the finale had they been asked to return but they WEREN’T.

Lies have been told. Samantha Ferris and Chad Limberg have confirmed that we have been lied to about the original plans for the finale.

This alone is proof enough that there is more plausibility in some of the conspiracy theories than any bullshit narrative some people are pushing in defence of the barbaric mess of a finale we were given.

So lets address some of the conspiracy theories now:

Conspiracy No.1: The CW Network reviewed Supernatural during the covid break, and due to homophobia, refused any Destiel arc that wasn’t already filmed, shut down any potential reciprocation from Dean, and forced Dabb to change his finale.

I don’t think this is entirely what happened. But I do think it is very strange how there is a such a huge disconnect particularly in Dean’s characterisations between what had come before the lockdown, and what came after. The one fact we have here, and please someone provide a source if you can find it because I know there is one, the finale script was still going through changes up to only 2 weeks before it was filmed. We know that there was some weird editing in 15x18 (which was still in post and uncompleted before lockdown) and we know from Jensen’s own mouth that there was more to the confession scene on Dean’s side that was cut. We also know that this isn’t the first time that Destiel heavy moments have been changed in post - the prayer scene is another big scene that went through a lot of changes and Bobo fought to have his script play out the way he wanted it.

There are certain things that in my own opinions, are basically true of SPN which I have put together from years of keeping one eye on the writers room, the network, and all the various comments made. My opinion is this:

The writers room has always been split on Destiel. Some writers heavily supported making it canon, others did not care, or were against it.

The Network considered it over the course of several years, did market research, green lit it, then changed their minds, possibly several times over the course of Dabb’s era. Destiel was pitched to the Network early in Dabb era.

The crew on set were also split. Some people heavily supported it, and worked to assist the reading, whereas others did not care/did not support it. The same can be said for the editing room.

Bob Singer supported the subtextual homoeroticism, but never supported bringing it into text (this is an opinion, but I think it aligns with everything we know about him.) IMO Bob Singer also supported subtextual homoeroticism between Sam and Dean - the guy is gross is what I’m saying. He isn’t exactly a progressive person.

Fun fact - a while back our old enemy Sera Gamble went on a Twitter rant about writers rooms and the ways a script goes through changes. I don’t think this was in relation to the SPN finale wank but she basically inadvertantly confirmed that the Network can step in and make sweeping changes to a script if they want to and if they decide they don’t like the direction of a story. Sera Gamble confirmed this as a fact.

Now. I’m not saying that this is what the CW did with Destiel. I just think its very strange how pre lockdown, the last thing filmed is a heartfelt homosexual declaration of love between Dean and Cas, and we have a finale script that Misha had not seen, but knew that he was meant to film as Castiel for 5 days (5 days on set is over half of an episode as far as I know). Then all of a sudden, Covid happens, and Cas is cut from the finale completely, a desperate attempt to bring Misha back only as Jimmy Novak takes place, which Misha rightly refuses, leading to a finale which makes zero sense narratively and appears in every way completely and utterly butchered.

The only explanation provided by anyone involved is that Covid meant changes had to happen - but that covid didn’t change the actual story at all.

But this makes no sense because we know that Cas was cut from the finale. This is FACT. Do not let anyone gaslight you into thinking otherwise. Misha was preparing to quaranting to return to set as Cas post Covid, so whatever happened to cut Cas from the finale, it wasn’t Covid.

I’m gonna have to Occum’s Razor this and say that the most logical explanation here is the one that is most likely true. Someone got cold feet with the Destiel story, and to prevent any possible interpretation that included Dean reciprocating, any hints of Destiel were removed from the finale script, including Castiel’s whole appearance.

Now, this isn’t me saying I think that Dabb’s original finale was full of Destiel love confessions and a homosexual kiss or whatever, but I am asking you all to really think about it and ask yourselves WHY Cas would have been totally cut from an episode he was supposed to be in at LEAST half of?

We will probably never know the real reason Cas was cut, but he WAS cut. I’m not saying it was all homophobia, but some fuckery went down.

Conspiracy No. 2: The CW Network changed the finale to make it into a Walker promo because they only cared about raising up Jared and not Jensen and Misha as they were losing them anyway.

I don’t agree with this in terms of the finale being butchered solely to make it into a Walker promo. There are however moments in the finale that are clearly supposed to be Walker Easter Eggs and added to excite fans of Jared/Sam in particular such as Sam’s gratuitous and unnecessary topless scene, as well as the call on the “case in Austin”.

I will take this moment to say something pretty damn controversial though.

*Deep breath*

The fact is, Dean Winchester has been the “lead” character of Supernatural’s narrative for years now, with Sam often being sidelined and not given great storylines himself. Even in Season 15, right up until the finale, I myself felt bad for Sam sometimes because so much of this show has become all about Dean. Jensen Ackles is clearly the better actor when it comes to emotional story arcs, so the emotional heart of the story has most often leant on him.

So you can understand my confusion, when this is turned on its head in the final episode, to make Sam carry all the emotional weight, and have the most lines/screentime, and story resolution (even if his story resolution was just as crappy as Dean’s).

If we pretend that Destiel is not a thing, and ignore Cas’s confession, the story change in the finale from Dean focus to Sam focus is still rather suspicious. Again, I’m not saying I completely approve of or agree to the conspiracy theory that Walker influenced the butchering of the script, but I can believe that perhaps a note went down from the CW to someone like Bob Singer, to emphasise Sam/Jared more than they perhaps would normally, because the CW wanted to shine the spotlight on Jared to raise excitement for Walker.

I can also believe this note might have said something like “we wanna cater to fans of Sam/Jared the most - don’t do anything to piss them off.” but now I am getting into my own conspiracy theories so by all means dismiss this as me being bitter.

Conspiracy No.3: Dabb purposely made it bad, as a secret message to Destiel fans that he had been silenced, by layering meta clues into the episode that he knew fans would notice.

I doubt this one is true. Though some of the theories are quite compelling. The old vampire silent movie theory for instance starts off quite well, but loses me the moment it brings up Urban Dictionary slang.

Sometimes I have just had to accept that Supernatural is a bad show that is sometimes accidentally a masterpiece. However, some writers really did go That Deep with their stories - anything by Ben Edlund or Steve Yockey for instance, their episodes are meta masterpieces with a hundred different layers of beautiful subtextual storytelling and are a joy to analyse. Bobo Berens has certainly done some A+++ work especially now we KNOW that he was working hard all this time to bring Destiel to canon text (so any analysis of Destiel in the subtext in his episodes is very accurate). There have been many other key elements analysed over the years which have been confirmed true. Cas’s death in Season 12, Dean’s time as a demon in season 10, Season 11 ending in unity of dark and light, these were all plot points predicted by meta writers just by analysing the narrative. Sometimes the writers really have been very smart and they do add things to the show to aid us in our meta.

Richard Speight Jr for instance, confirmed that SPN has a visual library that the production team use to give clues and hints in the narrative. Pizza, for example, always means a lie has been told. Whenever Pizza is being eaten or even just mentioned on screen, there is dishonesty in that particular moment.

The beers also have a very specific message and the one thing I can’t let go about the finale, was that Dean was drinking El Sol beer. The beer his dad gave him, that was terrible.

El Sol has been used in the show to indicate something being wrong, a fake reality, or another lie, for the longest time. It is the beer of deception.

The fact that in the final episode of this entire show, Dean is in Heaven, supposedly at peace, and then he gets handed an El Sol beer to drink? Thats a HUGE red flag for any meta writer watching who can read SPNs visual library.

If they had given him the Margiekugel beer of family then it would make sense. Dean is in Heaven, with Bobby, his family, at peace. Margiekugel should have been the beer of choice. But nope. El Sol. Something is wrong.

I don’t know if it was Dabb, or Singer, or some disgruntled ADs and crew members who added these elements into the finale, but their very presence confirms some message of Wrongness.

I could go into a huge rant about Vampire Mimes not making sense and the very glaringly obvious symbolism of cutting out peoples tongues too, but that is high school level film analysis. It’s obvious. It means to silence someone. There is validity in interpreting this as Dabb saying he was silenced. I don’t know how true it is, but i can’t 100% dismiss it, because as I said, this is high school analysis levels of obvious subtextual storytelling.

So in summary, whilst I don’t think that Dabb intentionally went out of his way to sabotage his own script, and leave a breadtrail of secret messages for savvy fans to put together to confirm that he was silenced by an evil network into not getting what he wanted... I do think that there is validity in questioning these odd choices for the finale. Cutting out tongues? Vampire Mimes? El Sol beer?

The evidence is somewhat compelling is all I’m saying. I don’t believe the full conspiracy theories, but as I have said many times before, some fuckery went down.

So What Do I Believe?

That some fuckery went down and whatever company line they are pushing is bullshit.

I believe that the original script included Cas (since thats fact). I believe that the original script probably always had Dean dying on a vampire hunt (due to Jensen’s issues with it and in particular, his sarcastic comments about vampires in the past year or so which in hindsight are hilarious and prove he never really came to terms with Dean’s idiotic death). I believe Dabb’s original script was some less crappy version of what we got, which potentially included showing Jack rescuing Cas from the Empty and resolving the outstanding Empty plot points (potentially this was actually a 15x19 plot since Mark P commented that his final scenes were supposed to be with Jack and Cas), had Cas reunite with Dean in Heaven and had them have a discussion about Cas’s confession. I believe that there was probably a lot of back and forth over how to handle that with some people wanting Dean to obviously reciprocate and others believing they should keep it ambiguous. I believe that Dean and Cas would have reunited with Charlie Bradbury, and Bobby Singer, and possibly others (though if this was the case it must have been very early on since no one ever looped in Sam Ferris, Chad Linberg or any other Roadhouse people).

I believe that Sam’s ending probably didn’t change much, but I do feel that initially they were planning on him ending up with Eileen, because it is the only thing that narratively makes sense. Cutting Eileen and giving him a blurry wife is something I won’t ever understand and Jared’s bullshit explanations are quite clearly pulled out of his ass to appease bronly types. I believe the reunion on the bridge would have included Cas and Jack, with a final shot of all four of them together, at peace (as this aligns with Alex’s comments from around a year or so ago that the final shot was all four of them). (I also am not sure it was always supposed to be on a bridge since the foreshadowing in an earlier episode showed Dean, Cas and Sam all in the Roadhouse together).

I believe that script went through countless changes and redrafts, and not even production people or the types that some fandom people claim as their “sources” would even have seen those early scripts, since even Misha never saw it. I believe that these rumours of Dabb never having Cas in his finale and ignoring all Destiel elements likely come from people who only saw later versions, weren’t party to network discussions and felt bitter about the final scripts they did see (being the crappy butchered one that was ultimately filmed). Those “sources” are now spreading rumours to discredit Dabb.

I obviously believe Dabb is a weak ass pushover who either didn’t care enough to fight back, or gave up since he’s been stuck with fucking Bob Singer on his back for years, but I will NEVER believe he didn’t care about the DeanCas love story, because he has been one of the few writers who has championed for it for years. You can’t look back at Dabb’s episodes in earlier seasons and claim he didn’t care. Dabb was a writer whose creative ideas were beaten out of him by an unforgiving Network only concerned about where their future money was coming from. Do I think he gave up too easily? Yes. But I also have one other huge reason for not believing the bullshit about Dabb being this anti-Destiel villain.

Bobo. Because if Bobo truly believed Dabb was gonna fuck that up at the end, I don’t think he would have given us Cas’s love confession to begin with. If he had known it was gonna end like that, I think he would have reconsidered, because had Cas not confessed his love, I don’t think he would have been cut from the finale. Bobo - a gay man, would not have wanted such a horrible message for queer fans being put across in the show he worked so hard on. He started writing that confession scene the day they returned to the writers room. Dabb would have been there, would have seen what he was writing, probably discussed it with him, after all, other episodes were written with the confession in mind. No way was Dabb planning to fuck up the ending knowing what Bobo was giving us. Nope.

Something went very wrong over lockdown. Someone, somewhere up the chain of power caught wind of the confession scene in 15x18, realised that it demanded a resolution which would make Dean Winchester, their protagonist, queer, and pulled the plug. I believe this did not come from a place of homophobia, but of bad business sense.

The CW is constantly trying to win the approval and attention of the one demo group that they seem to fail at getting the most: young straight men. Supernatural was one of their only remaining shows that appeals to young straight men, and Dean Winchester is more often than not the fave character of those young straight men who project onto him. Making Dean Winchester, established Han Solo of Supernatural, queer and in love with his best friend in the finale would have come across as a betrayal to those young straight men. The CW probably feared they would lose that demo group for good, and with a show like Walker starting soon with Jared at the helm, they couldn’t take the risk.

Hence there was probably a whole bunch of back and forth script redrafts with the Network, with Dabb and Singer fighting to make a finale that would appeal to everyone. There was most likely no way that they could bring Cas back without addressing what had already been filmed, because any resolution of that plot would either a. make Dean queer, or b. address it awkwardly by having Dean reject Cas (this storyline would probably have been slammed by critics worse than the finale because it meant addressing it. It might have got the attention of LGBTQ activist groups and caused a bigger shitstorm than what we got). The best option was therefore C. Bury it and Cas, pretend it never happened. Never address it again and distract Dean with other things. Hope that Destiel fans will accept no answer from Dean as ambiguous enough to imagine a future reunion rather than shutting it down with a rejection, and still keep hold of the blissfully ignorant heteronormative straight boys so they can carry over to Walker when it starts.

I also believe (controversially probably) that there was concern that any resolution of Dean and Cas would have overshadowed network darling Jared Padalecki. If Dean and Cas had come together in the finale, with a very clearly textual homosexual reunion, then that would have been all anyone talked about. The reviewers, the critics, the audience, everyone. It would have been nothing but Dean and Cas (and look, if they did think this, they were right, Destiel trending over the US ELECTION.)

So what is the network to do, when they are losing the two stars who would get the most attention from this storyline? The one star they were holding on to and getting his own show, relegated to third place in the finale of the show where he was first on the call sheet? Nope. That’s pretty unacceptable. Even without Walker I can imagine people at all levels side eyeing the Destiel thing over the years. This IS a show about two brothers, and their relationship should be the core relationship, we can’t have one brother pushed aside in the finale to make way for a queer relationship that will get all the attention instead. It was never gonna get approved for this reason ALONE.

At the end of the day, if I look at it from a business perspective, it makes far more sense that the CW shut down Destiel, rather than “oh Dabb never cared and ruined it because he’s an idiot.” The writers cared, and had built on that story over years. But their mistake was leaving any Destiel resolution to the finale. If they had instead gone and got Dean and Cas together in early season 15, then they could have ended it in a way that satisfied everyone. Destiel wouldn’t have threatened pulling focus away from Sam and Dean, and the show could have gone out on a high.

When I lay out all the conspiracy theories, and line them up next to the cold hard facts, the conspiracy theories in some way or another, make more sense. To believe the company line, the narrative we have been fed, is to ignore your own eyes, ears, and memories pre March 2020.

All I’m asking people to do is take a look at the show, the narrative presented in the show, and the information presented above. I’m not telling you to believe what I’ve written here, half of which is just my own opinion. I’m asking you to ask yourselves if it makes sense to you. Because it sure as hell doesn’t make sense to me. I don’t think I’ll ever be satisfied.

2K notes · View notes

sundayswiththeilluminati · 3 years

Text

The unplanned fourth part to my apparently-a-series on Essek Thelyss in the context of real-world espionage (parts 1, 2, and 3), today we look at an aspect of his story that doesn’t always apply in a D&D world: how do you prosecute espionage?

Psych! That’s not the real question. The real question is: do you prosecute espionage? The answer is a) not as obvious as it might seem; and b) going to differ between D&D and the real world, because D&D governments are storytelling tools and IRL governments are...not.

The benefits of prosecuting espionage are obvious: the interests of justice are served, the person responsible can be punished appropriately and in accordance with the law, the full extent of their crimes are revealed (including potentially exonerating other suspects), counterintelligence gets to chalk up a win, and other people thinking about committing espionage themselves are hopefully discouraged. But there are a surprising number of arguments in the “against” column.

Some agencies that identify enemy assets want to leave them in place for their own purposes. For about 20 years during the Cold War CIA reserved the right to just plain not tell the Department of Justice if they had proof someone was engaged in espionage because they wanted the opportunity to turn them as double agents, feed them misinformation, etc. rather than outing and punishing them (President Gerald Ford ended this arrangement by executive order in 1976). This isn’t necessarily a good idea IRL, but it forms the bread and butter of RPG espionage storylines and is definitely something to think about in a D&D context.

In the real world, ideally someone can only be found guilty of a crime and punished accordingly after a trial, and an agency often finds itself with sufficient evidence to doubt a person’s trustworthiness but not enough hard proof to take to court. In those cases agencies may decide to leave that person in place but cut off their access to classified info. Ironically, sometimes this means promoting them - moving the person into a higher-ranking job in a different area that just so happens not to deal in secrets. Sometimes the asset realizes they’re close to being rumbled and goes along with the effort, maybe taking retirement early or changing jobs before they can be pushed, and the whole matter will quietly lapse without anything so formal as a trial. Sometimes someone makes a mistake and sidelines a loyal, competent employee. That’s a judgement call.

In the real world, ideally someone can only be found guilty of a crime and punished accordingly after an open trial. Given how severe the punishments are for espionage, civilized countries do try to stick to that even though holding such a trial carries risks. Providing proof that someone stole secrets generally requires talking about said secrets, which means revealing classified info in court, which may negate trying to keep the information secret in the first place. They may also not want to reveal in court how they figured out that person was a spy, especially if it was a double agent or cryptographic source that fingered them. In D&D-land where monarchs are common and still wield judicial power, fantasy rulers may hand down whatever punishment they please based on whatever evidence they (or the DM) will accept, so this isn’t as much of a concern.

Even a D&D monarchy that doesn’t have to worry about revealing secrets in court might think twice before publicly punishing a high-ranking spy, though, because the only thing more embarrassing than failing to convict a major spy is succeeding. A government having to admit that its people were compromised, especially high-ranking people, is a body-blow to its standing both at home and abroad. It damages trust in the government, makes the public feel unsafe, and makes allies hesitant to share information lest their secrets be leaked as well. Lower-ranking government employees may think, “My boss is selling secrets, why not me too?” or “Why bother to follow security protocol when some mole will give it all away?” Every decision and contribution made by the asset becomes retroactively suspect, even those that had nothing to do with whatever secrets they leaked. The foreign nation to whom they passed information inevitably gets drawn in as well, negatively affecting those relations. And of course everyone involved looks very, very bad.

All of which leads me to say I think there’s a chance - maybe not a good chance, but a chance - that Essek could privately confess the affair to the Bright Queen without major public repercussions. Leylas Kryn could simply declare him a traitor and order his public execution without justifying herself, but it would raise a lot of questions and none of the answers would help her or the ruling dens; Den Thelyss allowing Den Kryn to unilaterally execute a high-profile member - a child of the umavi - without explanation would stoke ferocious rumors about what Essek might have done and cast a major shadow over the entire den. But publicly declaring what Essek had done also doesn’t do the Dynasty any favors. It makes everyone involved look very bad - how could they miss a spy at the highest level? so close to the Bright Queen herself?? who can be trusted??? - especially Den Thelyss, which might lose its place among the ruling three as a result. Publicly outing such a high-ranking Kryn official as compromised might set off the Dynasty equivalent of a Red Scare, too, since the Explorer’s Guide to Wildemount mentions the constant and well-justified Dynasty fear of agents sent by Lolth to destabilize the Kryn out of sheer spite that they got away from her.

By the time Campaign 2 ended the latest clash between Empire and Dynasty had been settled and neither side seemed to want to stir it up again right away. The fact that both stolen beacons have been returned also bolsters the case for letting the matter lie. A confession from Essek clears up remaining doubt on the Bright Queen’s end - while he doesn’t know every Empire agent in the Dynasty, he can tell her exactly how the beacons were stolen and who else was involved, probably clearing the names of many currently under suspicion. Essek would have to resign as Shadowhand, of course, and leave the Dynasty (at least for a couple centuries), but he never seemed interested in being Shadowhand and he wants to go exploring anyway. Den Thelyss definitely wants the whole affair swept under the rug and would go along with whatever story made that happen. Other than Verin I don’t get the impression many people would miss Essek except as a lost opportunity. I hope they’d give him long enough before leaving Rosohna to pack up his cool leyline-weathervane though. He could totally mount that on Yussa’s tower. Or Allura’s!

And that concludes this particular train of thought re: Essek Thelyss in the context of IRL spies and espionage. Again, all of this is only as relevant to the campaign as the players decide it is, so don’t go giving people crap for being “unrealistic” about their versions of how the beacon trade went down. Frankly the last thing you should want here is realism, because “realistic” espionage is a callous world of deception, manipulation, and general human pettiness with no sense of narrative flow.

None of what I’ve talked about is an excuse for Essek’s actions. But it is a reason. It’s why and how a person entrusted with precious national assets could get into a headspace where it seems reasonable, even necessary, to trade them away to foreign enemies. It’s how a person of otherwise decent character & beliefs can end up committing terrible crimes. It’s why that person might sincerely regret what they’ve done, and not just because they fear punishment. The Warmind Rasputin paraphrases Octavia E. Butler saying, “Misdirected by accident or intent, intelligence can foster its own ecstasies of growth and decay.” In other words: sometimes you get too far into your own head. Without an anchor to reality, without perspective, your own mind gets twisted up. Sometimes you just need a friend (or seven) to grab your arm and say, “Breathe.”

(This accidentally turned into a series on Essek & IRL espionage: Parts 1, 2, 3, 4)

#Critical Role #Critical Role spoilers #not really but just to be safe #Essek Thelyss #CR meta #hey let's talk about Cold War espionage!#trufax #And That's What I Think About That.#words words words #I hope you like words #this poor foolish drow #bless this dumbass #it's been a long pandemic

231 notes · View notes

fumiko-matsubara · 3 years

Text

List of Multi-talented AssClass Characters

This includes both characters who have actually showcased their many skills and characters who had shown potential to be multi talented.

¤ The teachers, assassins, and Gakuhou won't be included in the list as they are already a given.

Asano Gakushuu

I mean, do I even have to say anything? He's got the grades, the athleticism, the artistry, the reputation, and even being able to responsibly handle all of these at the same time. Rather than asking what else he can do, the better question is: What CAN'T he do??

This guy is the epitome of multi talented because it's not just him having a lot of skills, but you can really expect him to be good at each and every single one of them. Truly an ace.

Akabane Karma

This one is just half-assed lol. But let's be real, I can't even expressed how much of a genius this guy is, it's actually terrifying. Like imagine being able to remember the stuffs you've secretly studied for after two weeks of study ban, to the point that you managed to place 2nd in rankings among the entire 3rd years?? He's ridiculous.

I think it's just him being disinterested that's stopping him, because it should be obvious that he'd be the type to easily become scarily good at the skills he just picked up.

Isogai Yuuma

Being practical is his strongest suit. It probably stemmed from the fact that he's currently the one providing for his family, but I could totally see Isogai picking up plenty of skills just for the sake of making things easier. For all we know, he could've tried applying for different kinds of jobs that required certain skills before he settled on being a waiter.

Then top it all off with his good grades, being athletic, and leading the class well, yeah he's got it good.

Sugino Tomohito

One day we are going to have a whole discussion about Sugino having many hidden talents (that he's also VERY good at doing). Let's start off with baseball. It has been confirmed by Matsui himself that ever since Sugino had joined a local baseball team in town, along with perfecting his own curved ball pitching technique, it's been assessed that in the technical side of baseball, Sugino should have already surpassed Shindou in most areas.

As stated by Karasuma in the character book, Sugino literally has ZERO flaws in his assassination skills and if you look at his stats, there was not a single category that he was lacking in omg. Sugino had also shown exceptional skills in the art department, specifically in acting and drawing, as repeatedly praised by Korosensei.

Chiba Ryuunosuke

Being multi-talented isn't just about having as many skills as possible, it's also about being incredibly good at the skills you have even if they aren't that many. Chiba is a great example of this.

Sniping, maths, architecture, and spatial awareness ー those are some of the skills he was explicitly shown to have in canon and there is no denying that he is good at every single of one these. Not just good actually, but exceptional, to the point of being directly praised by actual professionals themselves.

Kayano Kaede

Being a gifted young actress, it would be no surprise that Kayano would have to have a very wide range of skills in order to be able to tackle any acting role given to her, which is what she was specifically known for.

And who passes the entrance exams of an academically renowned school on their first try at the last minute? She has it all lol.

Kataoka Megu

I think Megu is the type to find herself picking up skills and become good at them since she is a leader with a natural sense of responsibility. Especially when it's sports, because you're telling me that this ace swimmer with a record for freestyle swimming is also good at basketball, enough to both coach, lead, and carry her team all at the same time?? Damn.

Of course not forgetting the fact that she's also one with exceptional grades and is good at languages, Megu is defintely a well-rounded leader. Wish we could have seen more from her.

Hayami Rinka

As remarked by Koro-sensei, Hayami is a "jack of all trades but lacks in her own individuality and passion". Because she is said to be skilled enough in so many things, she became a reliable worker who people can depend on no matter what it is for as she can surely tackle them.

Perhaps a little bit too reliable? While there are some skills that she is obviously good at, like her sniping and dancing, I don't think people would really notice how much of an ace she is at first glance, likely because she wasn't being loud about it (as in she was lowkey).

Maehara Hiroto

Defintely the dress to impress type.

I am adding Maehara to this list because this dude came back 3 years later and suddenly he's good at b-boying!

He's good at sports, dancing, singing, he gets along with people, he dresses well, and for a carefree playboy like him, the last thing you would expect from him is his best subject being Maths, right?

I won't be surprised if plenty of these were just because he wanted to impress the girls he goes on dates with. If anything, it's likely lol. Whatever helps him I guess.

Bonus: Potentially multi-talented

Yada Touka

Being under the tutelage of Irina, it would be no surprise that Yada would end up wanting to expand her skillset as she'd find it beneficial for her in the future.

Nakamura Rio

Maybe because she's bored or just wants to be funny, but Nakamura had shown skills with... random stuffs (like diassembling gadgets or the ability to make geeky boys flustered with her dirty jokes through the school radio... 😭). As long as it can be funny, I think she can pick up anything she can use to toy with others.

Kurahashi Hinano

Drawing! It's surprising because no one can argue that she is the best at it among the girls, but it wasn't explicitly showcased AT ALL (if it weren't for that skills ranking in the manga extras, we wouldn't have known this). I wonder what else she's really good at that haven't been addressed.

Takebayashi Koutarou

I am adding that joke from the career chapter of Koro q that Takebayashi is apparently good enough at dancing to land a career for it 😂

But yes, he also ranked 4th best artist among the boys for being the "2D master". Being an anime fan does have plenty of perks... I wonder how good his singing is 🤔

232 notes · View notes

whump-whump-baby · 4 years

Text

So your Fictional Universe has Horses in it

Alternatively: People Ride Horses in Your Fic, and you’re Not Sure What to Do About It

horse rider/owner and baby writer here, throwing you an infodump that will maybe help with the whole ‘There’s a Horse in the Background here but I Don’t Know What to Do With it’ thing I sometimes see in writing!

Inside this infodump: Horse riding, horse care, horse tack (equipment), falling off a horse (and what usually gets injured), horse lingo, and behaviour.

1. Tame that beast (aka, riding the horse)

a couple things here: Getting on the horse, getting off, steering, etc

Honestly, I’m only including this part because I find that a lot of people skip past the whole ‘getting on the horse’ bit and I find it hilarious. It’s not a weird thing but it can be weird to describe. I get it!

Getting On

Experienced riders will always mount from the left side of the horse. It's a weird tradition that doesn’t really make sense anymore, but it’s still followed because most don’t really see a reason to change it. It supposedly dates back to medieval times and has something to do with where a sword would traditionally be hung on a person’s hip- mounting (Putting your foot in the stirrup, grabbing up high on the saddle, pulling yourself up and over while using your foot in the stirrup to help yourself) from the left means you wouldn’t accidentally poke your horse with your sheath. Not sure if this story has any validity to it, but we all still follow the left rule unless we’re specifically getting a horse used to mounting from the other side for whatever reason.

Getting off

I have a bone to pick with this. Nobody gets off their horse by swinging a leg in front of themselves, over the horse’s neck in front of them, and hopping down facing away from their horse. It’s not the safest bet to attempt because 1. It actually requires a lot of hip strength to swing your leg like that without kicking your poor horse in the neck, and 2. It doesn’t give you a legitimate way to hold onto your horse after dismounting, which is inherently unsafe. Even if you are in possession of The World’s Best Behaved Horse Ever, you always want to be holding onto the reins. Riders usually dismount by leaning forward, swinging a leg behind them and over the horse’s butt, pivoting sideways on their stomach, and sliding down off the horse- keeping a hand on the rein and one on the saddle to slow their descent. That way you always have a hand on your wild beast, who may decide at any given time that the nearby grass is more important than standing still for your dismount. Plus, swinging a leg like that is basically impossible in saddles that feature a saddle horn, like a western saddle.

It’s a little hard to see in this photo, but Geralt’s saddle definitely has some kind of high pommel to it- so he’d most likely dismount the normal way. It’s just easier!

If you tried to dismount like that in this western saddle you would definitely bruise something.

In this saddle (a Dressage saddle) you could probably pull it off.. but why?? All that struggle just to slide down on your butt and land funny, sprawled away from your horse. It’s just not worth it.

Steering and Etc.

Believe it or not, most steering movement actually comes from the rider’s weight in the saddle than their grip on the reins. If we’re looking at this from the realm of something like The Witcher (which is probably going to be my go-to media example because it’s still pretty recent) a relaxed turn is going to look like Geralt isn’t doing too much with his upper body, because he’d be weighting his seat bones in the saddle. Despite his saddle looking a little bulky, Roach could definitely feel it and respond accordingly- horses are pretty sensitive little friends and can feel most of what you’re doing up there, including looking down. (Protip, if you’re learning to ride horses, don’t look down- it’ll unbalance your upper body and make you pitch forward, unbalancing your horse and making yourself more likely to fall off)

A good way to have a character look experienced with riding is to describe someone relaxed but upright, shoulders back, hands closed but relaxed on the reins. They don’t have to be bolt upright, but at ease. A good way to describe a character with little to no riding experience would be to describe them as tense, probably hunching forward a little; hands too high or low and reins too long. See the lovely photos below:

A Dressage rider: she’s looking pretty evenly balanced, is sitting tall but not bolt upright, hands are low, elbows relaxed. Wonderful!

A Beginner: Absolutely no hate to beginners! We all have to start somewhere, But there’s definitely a difference in body language between this rider and our dressage rider. (Side note: PLEASE always wear a helmet on a horse, especially if you’re a beginner, good grief)

2. Horse Care

I don’t think too much needs to be said here, but there’s a couple things that are worth noting.

Grooming

Most horses love a good brushing. They’ll even lean into it if you find an itchy spot!

If your character has a ton of experience, grooming their horse makes a lovely backdrop for conversations. Riders usually brush their horses before and after riding, to remove dirt and mud and sweat. Manes and tails are brushed if you want to be detail oriented, and feet should always be picked out (A good chance for Character B to oogle Character A’s butt, if thats the kind of story you’re writing) to remove dirt and stones.

When Not Riding

Your furry partner-in-crime should be untacked and eating grass somewhere. Untacked means all gear removed and put away for the day- in stories like The Witcher, tied to a tree branch or a rest area in a halter is fine. As a horse person it wouldn’t make sense to leave their tack on all night- you’d leave it nearby, but not on them. If your characters are just pausing for a break or something, it’s totally ok- but done for the day? Nah. Let your pony be naked.

Injuries

Horses, like most prey animals, will hide injuries and illness until they physically can’t anymore. Small cuts and scrapes, dependent on where they are, will probably not give a physical response unless you manipulate them somehow (cleaning, applying antibiotics, etc). A horse may show discomfort by a number of signs, but if it really hurts your horse will probably shy away from your touch or may lash out at your hands to keep you from touching it. Signs of discomfort can be pinning their ears back against their head (aka Ow Ow OW, DON’T TOUCH IT, I’m UPSET) to straight up trying to run from you if they think you’re going to attempt to touch it (a more severe reaction for a more severe wound, like a deep cut/laceration/puncture etc). If a horse is in very dire straits you might get no reaction at all- your horse might be hanging its head low, not really responding to your voice or touch, appearing bleary eyed or dull eyed or sleepy. Generally that kind of severe behavior change is considered Very Very Bad and definitely grounds to call a vet for, especially if there’s no sign of physical injury.

3. Horse Tack (Equipment!)

Here’s a quick rundown of horse tack.

All these pieces make up the bridle, reins included.

*Side note- Bits are not cruel, and riders choosing to use them with their horses are not abusive. Bits are a tool riders use to communicate with their horses and there are hundreds of metal finishes, textures, shapes and sizes to fit a horse with a bit that makes them happy and keeps them comfortable. There are some horses who refuse to take bits, and their owners usually turn to a bitless bridle to keep them comfortable- however this is not “kinder” just because of the lack of bit. These bridles are just designed to exert gentle pressure to tell the horse to slow or stop instead of the gentle pressure on the bit. Different horses prefer different things, and none of these things are harmful to the horse if used properly and with care.

This is a diagram of a close contact or Hunter saddle, but the terminology generally applies to all different kinds of saddles. Girths are considered their own piece of tack and not as a part of the saddle.

Riders who are riding consistently usually at least wipe their tack down with a wet cloth after finishing with it for the day. Because tack is almost always leather, well cared for leather lasts a lot longer if cared for. This is also a great thing to have a character talk over in a fic- have them clean tack while having a hard conversation, or maybe show how quick and not-great of a job they do on their tack if they’re angry or trying to get away from another character closeby. Lots of opportunities! (If you really want to get detailed, cleaning usually looks like: a damp cloth to wipe dirt off and then rubbing a leather conditioner into the tack, which may smell lovely or a little weird depending on the brand)

4. Falling off

I see you, whump writers. (and I love you.)

So You Want your Character to Fall Off:

Falling off is rarely graceful. It can be caused by anything from an unexpected trip to your horse spooking at something, to a jump taken at the wrong spot/speed/angle... opportunities are endless. I have fallen off my horse at the walk because he startled at a dog and I slipped to the side, and I have fallen off over jumps, because my horse actively tried to get me off, or because I just wasn’t paying attention and Oops, how’d I get in the dirt? Generally if you’re looking for a reason for your character to fall off, they are endless. If the one at fault is the horse common reasons are the rider becoming unseated and slipping back/forward/sideways by the horse startling (at legitimately anything sometimes, depending on the horse.. let your imagination go wild!) changing speed or direction suddenly. All of these things will affect how your character comes off and how they’ll hit dirt with what body part. IE- pitching forward will probably land you on the top of your shoulders, if you’re lucky- if not, you’ll land on your head. Most people will land on the tops of their shoulders as the instinct to protect their head kicks in, but sometimes gravity is a bitch. It happens.

This is where experience comes in, too- Experienced riders will usually react quicker and will try to save themselves, either grabbing onto their horse’s mane or neck or even just keeping a death grip on the reins as adrenaline kicks in- all of which keeps your upper body higher than your lower and can lead to landing on your bum/side/feet instead of your head. Beginner or inexperienced riders might not react that quickly and end up landing roughly. This is not to say that more experienced riders will always come out less injured than beginners, but that experienced riders sense of self preservation will kick in faster frankly just because they’ve fallen off more. This is also why you see more beginners breaking arms in riding accidents- as you learn to ride you are taught (if you were taught like I was) to NEVER throw your arms out to catch yourself during a fall- it’s more likely that you will land on top of your straight arm and give yourself a wicked compound break. Your instinct changes from trying to save yourself to trying everything you can to staying in your saddle. Self preservation is a wonderful thing!

If Your Character is Sick/Already Injured:

The motion of the horse, even in walk, is going to make them feel worse- especially any injury to the lower stomach area. That’s where the body absorbs most of the motion from the horse’s gaits, especially in the hips/lower abdomen. So if Character A has a stab wound in his stomach and Character B has gotten them into the saddle to bring them to help.... Character A is gonna be in some pretty decent pain until they can dismount. For head injuries the same motion might make them dizzy or nauseous. But, good news! If your character slumps forward completely while keeping their arms on either side of the horse’s neck, they will probably manage to stay in the saddle for a decent amount of time. Their lower body and leg (hopefully still in the stirrups) will keep them in the saddle unless jostled out of it. (This, of course, only making sense if the saddle in question doesn’t have a horn, because otherwise your character won’t be able to slump forward far at all. )If they manage to slip off the horse in this position, they’re going to land head/chest/upper body first, especially if only semi-conscious due to previous injuries.

If dealing with any other injuries, getting on the horse might be nicer than walking but will definitely not keep anything still- any motion the horse makes will make the rider’s body move and jostle the injury, no matter where the injury is.

5. Wrapping it up: Horse Lingo and Behaviour

Horse terms are easy to find and but a google search away, but here’s some of the main terms:

Gaits: A horse’s movement. Walk, trot, canter and gallop with gallop being the fastest.

Aids: what riders use to communicate with the horse. This includes your hand (on the reins) your leg (squeezing to ask for gaits) and your voice.

(Riders talk to their horses! all the time. Even if just to say good boy/girl. Commonly we say things like hoooh, whoa, easy, no, etc. Sometimes just talking to your nervous horse helps calm them down)

Green horse: Inexperienced horse, usually new to being ridden, usually young.

Mare: Female Horse.

Stallion: Male horse, not neutered. Stallions can have a reputation for being hotheaded and sometimes hard to handle, but not all are like that.

Gelding: Male horse, neutered. Most people who have male horses will refer to them as geldings on paperwork.

Pony: a small horse. Not a baby horse. Just smaller.

Colt: Baby male.

Filly: Baby female.

You can probably use google for anything else without concern that you’re using a term that's unnatural.

Behaviour

My rule of thumb for writing behaviour is this: If it seems like a disney dog in a movie would do it........ it’s safe to say a horse wouldn’t. Writing a horse like a disney dog is too unnatural and will definitely make any horse people reading your story give an eye roll.

An example:

Your character has just dismounted their horse after a long ride.

A horse would: maybe sniff your pockets for treats (especially if you had some before you got on) stand next to you as you talked to someone, try to rub their head on you (scratches!! especially if they’re sweaty) maybe perk up at something in the distance if distracted enough

A horse would not: Shake their head at you, whinny at you, prance around and “smile” at you... roll their eyes at something you said... point like Lassie at something in the distance... etc.

Horses definitely have personalities! They can be affectionate and snuggly, nervous or brave, flighty or stoic... but they don’t emote the same way a cartoon character would. The best example i’ve seen of horse interaction in media would probably be the horses in Disney’s Brave. If you pay attention to the way horses interact with each other and react to events in the movie, it’s pretty spot on!

Follow your gut. You can still have a horse with a personality, but if it feels too cartoony, it probably is!

This is a great infographic that explains body language as well.

I hope this helps anyone who wants to include more horse interaction in their writing!

#writing #fiction #writeblr #writblr #whump #whumpblr #fanfiction #hopefully tagging this right!#photos are not mine

3K notes · View notes

ninma · 3 years

Text

A look at Dream's punishment through irl rules and taking into account UN's rules regarding prisons. Because it is just interesting and it proves how there is NO justification for it. But mostly because it's interesting to look at and you may learn a thing or two.

I have seen too many times people trying to justify Dream's punishment. I did research and read through multiple articles and documents (over 73 pages of two different documents) about the more legal sides of his punishment. While Quackity's physical torture is obvious, I am here to address that even before that it was still very illegal. I know it is fictional! This is just a look into the real life facts and rules regarding prisons because it is interesting to look at Dream's punishment and Pandora's Vault under the light of these. So keep that in mind while reading this!

Welcome to my ted talk with actual facts and be prepared for quite the ride!

While yes, he has done bad things...however he has not done something so bad that he deserves a punishment so cruel that it's considered too inhumane for even mass murderers. Like actually! Stay tooned and you'll see what I mean.

His sentence is indefinite solidary confinement. Which is defined by the united nations as:

"the confinement of prisoners for 22 hours or more a day without meaningful human contact."

This means his punishment fits the definition for all his time (including visits) except when Tommy was locked inn and now with Quackity (although I'd consider the last one a turn for the worse). Now that we have that cleared up- lets get into the rule breaking. But first, let me introduce you to The Mandela Rules!

"The Mandela Rules reinforce human rights principles, including

the recognition of the absolute prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman

or degrading treatment or punishment and effective guidance

to national prison administrations for persons deprived of their liberty"

Now that we have established that, lets get into this concerning fact train!

Rule 43

1. In no circumstances may restrictions or disciplinary sanctions amount to torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

The following practices, in particular, shall be prohibited:

(a) Indefinite solitary confinement;

(b) Prolonged solitary confinement;

(d) Corporal punishment or the reduction of a prisoner’s diet or drinking water;

(e) Collective punishment.

Yeah...pretty clear breaking of 4/5 there. They can't even break e! Not to mention the pretty explicit breaking of d that was probably a surprise. You can count it as them breaking 4/4 if you count the fact that they can’t even break e. Rest assured my friend, this is just the beginning.

Rule 44

For the purpose of these rules, solitary confinement shall refer to the confinement of prisoners for 22

hours or more a day without meaningful human contact. Prolonged solitary confinement shall refer to

solitary confinement for a time period in excess of 15 consecutive days.

Already broken this one too huh. Even visiting days counts because I don't think anyone has been there for hours and I also don't think Sam's interactions would be long enough or count as meaningful human contact. The time with Tommy and Quackity is the only time it dosen't count as solidary. So this is getting...very much concerinng. But this is still only the start.

Rule 45

1. Solitary confinement shall be used only in exceptional cases as a last

resort*, for as* short a time as possible and subject to independent

review, and only pursuant to the authorization by a competent authority. It

shall not be imposed by virtue of a prisoner’s sentence.

2. The imposition of solitary confinement should be prohibited in the case

of prisoners with mental or physical disabilities when their conditions

would be exacerbated by such measures

Woops...so not only is it illegal as a punishment...but also the "he is a psychopath" argument (which is already a bad stereotype, but I won't get into psychology here. It's a common misconception and c!Tommy not knowing is almost to be expected. However please do not say that someone, character or real person, have a mental disorder or illness without proper knowledge about psychology and in the case of characters we shouldn’t put labels unless the writer has said that they have taken mental disorders or illnesses into account when making the character) just got yeeted out the window. Actually that argument just took a loop and now is an argument for the other side. It makes sense because as it says: it exacerbates their preexisting mental illnesses. Which is why it's prohibited.

"In no case may a detainee’s contact with the outside world be

dependent on his or her cooperativeness, be used as a disciplinary

sanction or form part of the sentence."

- Special Rapporteur on Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, Civil and Political Rights, Including the Questions of Torture and Detention, ¶ 43, Comm’n on Human Rights,

“…The medical officer should visit prisoners held in solitary confinement

every day, on the understanding that such visits should be in the interests

of the prisoners ’ health. Furthermore, prisoners held in solitary

confinement for more than 12 hours should have access to fresh air for at

least 1 hour each day” - Subcomm. on Prevention of Torture [SPT]

Wow Sam...it is almost impressive in a dark way just how explicitly these are broken. The Warden's very punishments for disobedience just straight up counts as torture. And for the obvious record I highly doubt Quackity's daily visits to the green bloob counts as anything but 'the interests of the prisoners' health'. You can disagree here...but I am being very sarcastic.

Rule 22

1. Every prisoner shall be provided by the prison administration at the

usual hours with food of nutritional value adequate for health and

strength, of wholesome quality and well prepared and served.

Raw potatoes every day for the rest of your life..eehhh no thanks. If Dream ever gets out he will probably join me in the 'eating potatoes trauma' box. As funny as that sounds, it isn't a joke. I was force fed potatoes as a child and I hated it to the point where it gave me a mental block that stops me from eating them as my body just does not want to swallow it. It's a problem. But I can joke about it. Maybe Tommy will join us too, although it wasn't really the eating potatoes that caused that trauma...rip. Rest in anything but potatoes.

Rule 42

General living conditions addressed in these rules, including those related

to light, ventilation, temperature, sanitation, nutrition, drinking water,

access to open air and physical exercise, personal hygiene, health care

and adequate personal space, shall apply to all prisoners without

exception.

I think it's pointless to say more on that topic as it's pretty much already summed up. Let us now move over to what are probably some of the qoutes so specific that it's scary.

“Furthermore, [the Committee] is concerned about the use of solitary

confinement for indefinite periods of time.... Full isolation of 22 to 23

hours a day in supermaximum security prisons is unacceptable

(art. 16).” - Committee. against Torture [CAT]

Oh wow.. talk about on the nose. I should've just started with this one as it pretty much says pretty clearly how it is unacceptable. Like yikes...can you get more specific? It is just downright ridiculous at this point. (-_-;)

“Solitary confinement, when used for the purpose of punishment,

cannot be justified for any reason, precisely because it imposes severe

mental pain and suffering beyond any reasonable retribution for

criminal behaviour and thus constitutes an act defined in article 1 or article

16 of the Convention against Torture, and a breach of article 7 of the

International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights."

Ahaha...ha....yeah for those who justify it...the convention against torture is very much against it being justified...Imagine if the characters could read these rules, that'd be interesting. Although I am pretty sure they don't follow realism for the imprisonment. As I have already said; this is just an interesting look at the irl rules and how Dream's punishment and Pandora's Vault stand under light of them.

“No prisoner, including those serving life sentence [sic] and prisoners on

death row, shall be held in solitary confinement merely because of the

gravity of the crime.”

- Special Rapporteur on Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment

Like...there are no loopholes here. It is so extremely clear that it truly is darkly impressive how the characters don't seem to have a second thought about this. How do you accidentally sentence someone to a lifetime of torture without realizing? If they do know...It'd be very dark.

Btw Tommy's exile and his time in prison doesn't count as solidary confinement. Just to clear that up.

It amazes me how badly they break these rules...I know they probably didn't take the realism into consideration. However it is still kind of darkly impressive. Especially considering how scary specific they break them too. Even though this is just a interesting (I was about to write fun, however I wouldn't count realizing how inhuman the prison is is 'fun'. But it is interesting) look at Dream's punishment and Pandora's Vault under the light of real life rules for prisons. (lol my paranoid self have said this so much)

These facts also proves how saying it's justified...is kind of morally bad. Not attacking anyone! I just want to also say how while it is pure fiction and the characters in the story can have whatever opinion they want as they are characters. However when it comes to fans approving and justifying it without taking time to consider how it really isn't something that can be justified (real or no). You can have whatever opinion you want, however just maybe take some of what you have learned today and reflect over it? To think twice after having received new information dosen't hurt. I am not here to tell you what to think, so rest easy. Only to share some facts^^ (*so obviously scared of offending anyone*)

I recommend taking some time to look it up yourself if you want to look further into it. The psychological aspects of it is also interesting to look at!

I hope you have learned something here today and found this post and my research interesting! I spent hours on this so I hope you have enjoyed this! I originally posted this on reddit and I was very surprised at how many stopped by to read it and therefore I choose to post it here as well because you learn something and hopefully also gained a new perspective.

Ninma over and out!

#dream smp #pandora's vault

101 notes · View notes

kill-your-authors · 4 years

Text

Hundred Year Exile Thoughts

I’m really torn on everyone’s interpretations of who suggested a hundred year exile for Booker and how likely everyone is of holding to that hundred years.

On the one hand, I’m pretty sure in the bar scene at the end of the movie, the only dialogue we hear over the sound of the music playing is Joe saying, “I’m at one,” (and I never see anyone else discussing this so I’m half-convinced I’ve made it up) which I interpreted as shorthand for one hundred, and therefore initially believed that Joe suggested the one hundred year exile.

And I guess on the surface, it appears to make the most sense, because Joe is the most outspoken about Booker’s betrayal while they’re still in the lab, and it’s Nicky who is trying to calm Joe down and stop him from saying harsh things to Booker.

However, someone more observant than me (and again I reliably have no post to link to give proper credit, but know that I didn’t notice this) pointed out that once Booker’s betrayal is exposed, Nicky is the only one who cuts communication off completely. With everyone else, we see something happen between them. Booker and Nile talk about her family and we know from what Andy says Nile wouldn’t have even punished him. Booker also says goodbye to Andy, who leaves him on an ambiguously hopeful note of “Have a little faith.” And of course there’s Joe and Booker arguing in the lab over his betrayal. But Nicky never says anything to Booker, never even looks at him.

And the thing is I can see Nicky expressing anger and hurt in this way. I can’t see him being the type when angry or upset to throw low-blows at the person he’s mad at, or try to escalate the argument by yelling at or insulting the person. I think it’s very true to his character to be angry with someone and on principle, not fuel that anger with an argument. I think he’s probably very much the type of person, who, when angry, leaves the room or house or whatever to cool off, and is probably the type to not confront that anger until he knows he can do so calmly and peacefully. He doesn’t want to make things worse, he doesn’t want to say things he doesn’t mean, and he doesn’t see the point in trying to argue when the damage is done and can’t be repaired any time soon regardless of how much he and the person he’s angry with talk about what that person’s done.

While Joe on the other hand, I think is quite the opposite. We see very clearly that he’s the type to wear his heart on his sleeve and he’s a very impassioned man who I don’t think holds back what he’s feeling at any given moment. When he’s happy he’s very visibly happy, when his love for Nicky is challenged he’s very openly romantic, and when a friend has hurt him he is visibly hurt. That being said, Joe, by definition of his origin story with Nicky, literally can’t be a grudge-holder. He literally can’t be the type to “Forgive but never forget”. How could he be with Nicky if he was? Both he and Nicky fought in the Crusades but Nicky was undeniably on the wrong side of that war. His side of the war was completely unjustified and Joe, if it was in his nature, would have every right to never forgive Nicky for what he did. But Joe is obviously not that person. He’s obviously not someone who can hold on to anger, even if it’s justified, and even if the wrongdoing was outright evil (Like Nicky was before changing his ways), let alone if that wrongdoing was a misguided decision someone in pain made in an attempt to end that pain.

And on the other side of that coin, is Nicky, who we can clearly see has established some sort of moral code since the crusades, and very likely because he knows he was on the wrong side of that war. He doesn’t tell Nile, “We do what’s right,” he says, “We do what we think is right,” acknowledging that sometimes, someone can be doing something they think is right that is in fact very very wrong.

There’s no way Nicky isn’t talking about himself, and isn’t talking about the crusades. The same thing appears to be happening when the doctor testing on them tells Nicky that what she’s doing can change the world, and Nicky says, “A fine justification. I’ve heard it so many times before.” Here, he could easily be referring to himself again. He’s acknowledging that doing something you believe will better the world is a fine justification, but he’s clearly implying that doesn’t make it right. It’s still immoral, as he says it. And between his Catholic upbringing which would have taught him that people need to do penance for their sins, and Nicky establishing a moral code of sorts for himself that he undoubtedly wouldn’t hesitate to apply to himself, it makes a lot of sense that Nicky sooner than Joe, Andy or Nile would hold out for that one hundred years.

Not just because he’s the type to step away when he’s upset to cool off and collect himself before attempting to talk to the person he’s upset with and give them the opportunity to apologize and make up for it in some kind of way, but also because he believes more devoutly than any of the others, due to his history of being on the wrong side, that people have to make up for what they’ve done wrong. There needs to be penance. Nicky believes that in order for someone to be forgiven they have to do more than ask forgiveness. They have to earn it.

Which is why that line I swear I hear Joe say in the bar, “I’m at one,” confuses the shit out of me. The only way I can think to explain it is either A) at some point in their discussion, a lot more years were on the table than one hundred, and Joe is talking the others - Nicky - down, or B) Joe isn’t suggesting one hundred, but seconding it, after Nicky says it first. If Nicky says it first, and Nile and Andy are opposed, that’s two against one. So Joe seconds it, on Nicky’s side regardless of what he personally feels is necessary in that moment, because he knows Nicky needs it to be that much in order for him to ever wipe the slate clean with Booker, which naturally, Joe - the man capable of not only forgiving someone who fought to slaughter his people, but capable of loving that man once he changed his ways - would want for Nicky and Booker.

Personally, I headcanon the second theory.

#the old guard #joe x nicky #sebastian le livre #nicolo di genova #meta

305 notes · View notes

heraldofzaun · 3 years

Note

what are your thoughts on viktor and being neurodivergent? though like, obligatory disclaimer that if riot ever did come out and say that "hey! viktor is canonically [something]" that would be catastrophic but i think it is a little bit of fun for consideration

Oh! Well I like to think he's autistic, which is partially because I am too. (Of course in canon it would be catastrophic because haha, oh man, look at how they've treated Blitzcrank's biographies ever since they gave him an updated one. There's some coding in there, alright, and I am... not a fan...)

I’ve posted a lot of long posts recently (this is no exception) and this is also on a kind of tricky subject, so I’m readmore’ing it.

So anyways, while I have to admit that some of the reason why (my) Viktor is autistic is because I am - I think that you can make a general semi-convincing argument. Or I'm so wrapped up in my own interpretations that I can, at the least. Anyways, from here on out when I say Viktor I mean my personal take. Your mileage may vary on applying this to other interpretations.

(Also, thoughts on new lore Jayce's being kind of coded to be like, a stereotypical autistic dude? (If you have any I mean.) I don't like that Riot is doing it, of course, but I've seen a few good rehabilitative takes on it in fandom. @hamartio's Jayce springs to mind, because their Jayce has been developed over the years and also written by someone who like. Cares. Anyways, I have my own personal Jayce ideas that rely on his old lore so he's not really an asshole there, at least in those regards, so I don't really have many thoughts on new Jayce. I think new Viktor is... pretty coded as well, but it’s also insanely stereotypical. The whole “always working, always wants certainty, gets into automation not because he (primarily) wants to help those injured by catastrophes in Zaun but because the catastrophes interrupt his work” thing makes me uncomfortable. Maybe I’ll write sometime on why the rewrite of his lore fails, in my opinion, to hit upon the same themes of his first - would that be of interest to folks? Anyways, this parenthetical is too long.)

I think that autistic Viktor is cool and makes sense, somewhat because of the fact that the ways he goes about solving his problems are, er, unorthodox. (Of course I am not saying that the GE is because he’s autistic, because that’s stupid. This is why I’m kind of squirrely about talking so openly about what I think Viktor’s got going on, and why I don’t really trust if a non-autistic person headcanons him as autistic. There’s a lot of room for that headcanon to just reinforce the “autistic people are supergeniuses with no emotions that work based off of Facts and Logic” trope, and I hate that.) Since a lot of autism is about feeling adrift from/at odds with neurotypical society, I think that Viktor’s general solutions and also his idealistic leanings in the face of everything Zaun is tracks for that. Roboticization makes sense as a way to stop suffering and death, because it’s more achievable than individual feats of immortality through magic or whatever. Viktor doesn’t really get why people would be so opposed to it - he’s made it clear that while he dislikes his own emotions and wants them gone, he doesn’t expect others to cast off theirs. (Maybe he expected that when he was in the thick of his emotional pain, mostly because he couldn’t imagine others choosing differently than he at the time, but not in the current day.)

Of course, externally, when the scary cyborg man who admits to cutting off his own limbs says “no, being a robot is cool, you can keep your emotions even”, any Zaunite (or any person) is going to interpret that as “he is definitely lying”. Viktor doesn’t quite make that leap. (I have thoughts on the whole Theory of Mind concept and I don’t mean to say that Viktor can’t empathize - he does, and does too much - with others, but I think that in this instance he just can’t quite understand sometimes why people don’t believe him.) He also doesn’t quite get why people would be so attached to the bodies that they’re currently in, especially if he can make a mechanical replica. Or why people might want to die and pass into non-existence after a life well lived. (To him, personally, there’s always more to do. Also he’s terrified of death but that’s another topic.)

I also think that Viktor’s empathy is of the hyper- rather than hypo- kind, partially because I feel like outside of self-advocacy groups the mere concept of autistic hyperempathy is seen as like... impossible? It’s also because he generally seems to be kind of an emotional guy in canon before Stanwick, what with the lore saying that “almost no trace of the original man remained” in reference to Viktor reemerging as someone without emotions. That, combined with the fact that he was described as having a “hope to better society” before everything went down, kind of makes me believe that he was a naive idealist type. (Again, not that autism makes you naive, but...) But yes, hyperempathy. Hence "no pain, no wars, no suffering, no death” being part of his ideology for the Glorious Evolution. He gets pretty ripped up about people being hurt, and it’s really only gotten worse over the years as he’s grasped the full scope of pain in the world.

Personally, I write pre-Stanwick-incident Viktor as someone who is still somewhat awkward with expressing emotion, but it’s not due to him not having them. It’s due to the fact that the ways in which he naturally expressed them and in which he interacted with the world were just... seen as odd/different/etc. (I don’t think Runeterra has an autism diagnosis or particularly excellent psychology, even in Piltover and Zaun, so he just gets the “you’re a weird dude” treatment for his entire life.) Stimming or smiling a certain way or talking a lot about his interests or, you know, the general autistic existence is weird to most people around him, as it unfortunately is in real life. So he’s more reserved until you actually know him, because he’s just masking all the time. (Fun fact about my Viktor: he’s pretty expressive under that actual mask of his. It helps to not have to micromanage expressions all the time when he isn’t experiencing a bout of flat affect due to [gestures vaguely at everything else going on with his mental state], although he sometimes feels poorly about not being able to manage himself. But that’s his issues, and I think it’s good for him to show emotion.)

Side note - Stanwick was able to do such a number on Viktor due to: a) Stanwick being very charismatic and manipulative, on top of being an actually smart man and scientist - he’s really a great example of a “good Zaunite”, in the sense of being good at being what the culture rewards, b) Viktor actively dealing with the death of his parents and Stanwick being an older adult who’d treated him kindly and had never seemed put-off by Viktor’s oddities, and c) Viktor not realizing that he’d get backstabbed, because yes he knows that that happens in academia but Stanwick’s nice. Whether or not the outcomes would have been the same if Viktor were more competent at being “a good Zaunite”... well, probably not. Viktor ended up where he did because of who he is.

(Secondary side note: Viktor has a very strong and very black-and-white sense of what’s right and wrong, as well as general black-and-white thinking. You can see how that would have... not helped in the situations he was put through.)

This is getting kind of rambling, but I guess the point of this is that Viktor’s wanting to remove his emotions may be cloaked in the language of them being “inefficient” or “unhelpful”, which would feed into autistic stereotypes, but it’s really more of a matter of them being too painful and raw for him to process. He feels too much and hurts too much, and no amount of positive emotions in the world will (in his mind) make up for the pain he’s felt and will feel. So it’s better to not feel anything at all, isn’t it? At least then you aren’t overwhelmed by it all.

Viktor just hasn’t fit in with Zaun for all his life, really. Not as an odd child who can tell you all about science-fiction and techmaturgy, not as an odd and reserved teenager/young adult, not as a bright young doctoral student still dealing with grief but trying to make the best of it, and... not as the Machine Herald. But now he’s given up on trying to fit in, for better or for worse.

(Other miscellaneous and less serious autistic thoughts on him: generally a pretty fixed diet, partially due to being autistic but also due to what’s easily available in Zaun + what agrees with his stomach. A fan of weight and pressure - I like to think that the reason his outfit is like that is that he finds it comforting, and also that he has a weighted blanket or two around. Special interests of general techmaturgy, robotics, and science-fiction. He can talk for hours about any of those, and has. Both his parents were mildly spectrum-y, his mother a little bit moreso, so they just kinda assumed that him being him was out-of-the-ordinary and a bit strange but not something “horribly wrong”. Oh! And his third arm, which is under a little less conscious control than the rest of him, still stims sometimes when he’s working or otherwise not paying attention to it.)

This was very long and jumped around a lot, because I find it hard to give a convincing paragraph-by-paragraph argument about exactly why I think that Viktor is autistic, or rather why I headcanon him as such. But hopefully it was interesting! I just have a lot of thoughts on him, as well as the general state of autistic-coded or perceived-as-autistic-by-individuals (both allistic and autistic) characters in media and so it’s very hard to do anything concise without branching out into discussing other topics.

#anonymous #headcanons | beneath the mask #//preemptive remark that these are my own thoughts on autism which are filtered through the lens of my life experiences #//as well as that of some aspects (emphasis on some) of academic research. baron-cohen can choke with his theories #//also i did not explain some terms here under the assumption that those reading would probably already know them. feel free to ask if not!

15 notes · View notes

lhs3020b · 3 years

Text

Axiom’s End, by Lindsay Ellis

I finished this book last night, and it’s very likely the most interesting book I’ve read so far in 2021.

This is a book that’s hard to discuss without spoilers, so please be aware that the Spoiler Light is on for all commentary below the cut...

SYNOPSIS

Cora Sabino’s life is a bit of a mess. She’s dropped out from college, is currently living with her mother Demi (a situation that neither of them like) and is working in a soul-destroying temp job at a crap company. To make it worse, her estranged father Nils is a Julian Assange-type figure whose continual leaks of classified documents have made Cora’s family a surveillance target for various three-letter agencies. The year is 2007, Bush is the President and it’s the era of peak War on Terror hysteria.

Then a meteor comes down just outside Los Angeles. In the aftermath of this event, Nils releases documents alledging that the US government has secretly held a group of aliens - the so-called “Fremda group” - prisoner for years, and that the public is being misled about the occurence of this First Contact.

Cora wants nothing to do with Nils or his schemes - the man is a toxic narcissist who abandoned his wife and children, after all, and has been a source of nothing but trouble in their lives. Then, one night, Demi’s house gets burgled.

The burgler turns out to be Ampersand, an actual literal alien, who recently arrived on Earth. The meteor that smashed windows across Los Angeles was actually his spacecraft (the fact that the descent seems to have been uncontrolled is a detail that’s never elaborated on in the story, interestingly). Ampersand is very much on Earth for his own reasons, and they may not align with any human concerns. Ampersand wants data on where the Fremda group may have been kept - as Cora’s family are relatives of Nils, he assumes they may know something, hence the burglary. Once it becomes apparent they don’t, he resorts to a Plan B. And Cora finds herself ensnared in an escalating mess of both human and alien schemes.

DISCUSSION

Ampersand is a character who is hard to work out in some ways. On the one hand, it’s arguable whether “he” is really anyone’s friend. (A small side-note on the gendering: Cora notes in-universe that assigning “him” a male gender is probably misleading - it’s doubtful that Ampersand sees himself as being either male or female in the human sense - but his translated voice sounds male, so in the end she just decided to roll with it. Ampersand him - or itself/themself - doesn’t seem to care one way or the other about this particular issue.)

Ampersand’s behaviour is quite amoral. He’s happy to deceive people, lie by omission and - as we learn later on - has some quite grim things in his backstory. His evident dislike of humans becomes particularly ironic when you learn what he did to learn how human language works. (Yes, Superorganism, we have moral flaws. But honestly? You’re not any better.) He also has no problem abducting Cora and sticking a chip in her - but, that said, he also passes on a few opportunities to Kick the Proverbial Dog. Once he makes his agreement with Cora, he actually sticks to it and keeps up his end of the bargain.

Also, his underlying motivation - trying to help a group of refugees who have fled an alien genocide - is sympathetic.

Lastly, there are the events of the ending. He could easily have abandoned Cora while she was severely injured after the final encounter with Obelus - in fact it probably would have made his escape easier, and he might even have been able to save the Genome if he had - but instead he stops the bleeding, repairs the worst of her injuries and then takes her straight to the nearest hospital. (Whether he also settled her hospital bills is never addressed...)

But on the other hand, Ampersand is frankly the architect of many of his own problems. It’s clear he’s lied to everyone about everything, including his own people in the Fremda group. As the book goes on it becomes less and less clear whose side he’s actually on - honestly it’s not entirely clear if he even knows himself. (He stops Cora from killing Obelus, when she very nearly did.) It’s also notable that had Cora actually followed Ampersand’s directions late in the book - roughly, “leave this place and never come back, no matter how you feel” - then what remained of the Fremda group would almost certainly have been exterminated by Obelus. There are only any survivors at all basically because Cora decides to take matters into her own hands and sneaks back to the barn when Ampersand isn’t looking.

There is a definite theme in this book about narcism; Nils is the most obvious example, but I think it can also be applied to Ampersand and the Superorganism more generally. Ampersand has trouble wrapping his alien head around the idea that humans have agency or indeed any “skin in the game”. He also has a low opinion of our species as a whole - but the more you find out about the Superorganism, it cannot be argued that they’re any better than us, just older and more advanced. Lastly, the Superorganism itself seems to have the same problem - they seem to be baffled that the transients are so hostile, but it’s no surprise given that the Superorganism never misses a chance to try to kill them whenever it meets them. Meanwhile the Autocrat’s plan to solve a political problem through internal genocide has clearly backfired - whatever you think of the situation, dragging a third species (us!) into the Superorganism/transient mess has not worked out to the Autocrat’s advantage. (If nothing else, the Autocrat is now having to expend resources on a situation that does not directly-relate to containing the transients and while the Superorganism’s capabilities are clearly large, they’re also ultimately-finite.)

People think they know better, but each clever scheme just escalates the mess they’re already in. If you’re in a hole you should stop digging, but instead this lot go and fetch themselves a Channel Tunnel-style boring machine!

As for Cora, she’s in the “ordinary person in extraordinary circumstances” role. Honestly, she does pretty well, all considered. You couldn’t really blame her if she’d ended up sat in a darkened corner rocking backwards and forwards, but she doesn’t. She stays on her feet throughout, manages to react effectively to changing circumstances, and more-or-less threads the needle on a whole mess of competing factions (Obelus/Ampersand/the Fremdas/the US government). Her relationship with Ampersand also evolves over the book, from intense mutual suspicion to something a bit more nuanced. There’s also a hilariously fan-ficcy bit near the very end, though I won’t spoil it if you haven’t read the book :)

One thing I couldn’t quite work out was, when exactly did Ampersand fusion-bond Cora? It was apparently subtle - she didn’t seem to specifically-notice anything when it happened, though the aftereffects became increasingly obvious. (Apparently it also didn’t play out in quite the way Ampersand expected either, though given that Cora’s central nervous system is completely different from his, it’s a bit surprising that he thought it would behave predictably. Though, this arguably does bring us back to the point about the narcissm issue - do something without any thought to the consequences is a very narcisstic way to act.)

Lastly, the ending does leave quite a few things open. What did Luciana actually know? What are the Fremda group survivors going to do now? Who or what is the third species? Are the transients really here on Earth and if so, why? But there are going to be sequels, so I’m sure we’ll find out :)

#LHS reads #books 2021 #lindsey ellis #axiom's end

14 notes · View notes

elencelebrindal · 4 years

Note

What about the 17th century Gold saints if they come back to life and see the world and everything that they know change? And what they will react and meet to the classic 20th gold saints?

I’m so sorry for taking so long to answer this, I’m having a ton of issues and cannot concentrate on long posts. I’m also sorry about any mistakes you may find in this, I kept forgetting what I was writing and how I was writing it. Stress is a beast.

Also... I assume you meant TLC or ND, but that XVII century throws me off. Maybe you meant XVIII? I panicked and double checked, and there’s no XVII century Saints side from the XVII century alterative (aka Sage, if the internet is not betraying me, I’m not good with dates). I went with TLC.

First of all, they will ask themselves “where the hell are Shion and Dohko?!”, because obviously they will be missing. Since, you know, they didn’t die back then. And... the premise is: everyone’s back to life. The only moment in time where the Golds were almost all together as adults was during the Sanctuary Battle, and half of them died in 12 hours. Before that, with Pope Ares being a tyrant and half the Sanctuary being empty, doesn’t work. Shion is a bit of a problem, so there’s two options: either his old friends get traumatized again upon knowing he was assassinated, or traumatized again because they learn he became a Specter (kinda). Or both. Pretty sure that at least one of them, if Shion presents himself wearing a Surplice, will instinctively punch him. They don’t even realize it’s him, they just see the Surplice and all their fight or flight responses light up more than a beacon. And then they’ll be traumatized again upon learning Shion was Pope before dying.

Dohko... well, how would you react upon discovering one of your companions didn’t die, but stayed alive and well thanks to Athena’s misopethamenos? Minus the accidental punching, obviously.

Anyway, once they finally get over that shock, it’s time for them to check out the world and the other Saints. And of course, they start from the beginning.

Aries Temple At least a couple of them will mention how Mu resembles Atla (same thing I did when I saw the kid, after all). Then, they will ask about his master, because obviously he’s Shion’s successor, so bring in another shock. Mu is Shion’s disciple. Great. They keep getting showered with Shion knowledge without even searching for it, and every single piece of information is a punch in the gut. They will leave with a dumbfounded expression on their faces, onward to the next temple.

Taurus Temple Rasgado will be absolutely jealous of Aldebaran’s name. He gets to have it since birth, who wouldn’t be jealous of that? They immediately bond, though. They’re both good-hearted people, after all, even if ready to wreck everything if they need to. Manigoldo really likes his sense of humor.

Gemini Temple Now, for this I’m in bit of a pickle. I don’t know if Aspros and Defteros are both there, if there’s only one of them, I don’t know. The fact the both Saga and Kanon have been the Gemini Saint doesn’t help either. Let’s say this. If they meet Saga, they will like him as a Saint. Powerful extremely skilled, with a great mind? All of them are going to appreciate such a man. And then, they learn about him as a tyrant, and collectively take a step back. If they meet Kanon, Athena please help them. Someone will try to punch him. Kanon will trap them in his labyrinth because there’s no way he’s going to let Aspros pass without testing him (I know, poor Aspros, but I love doing this to him). He’s going to bond with Kardia, though. They can both brag about how they defeated Rhadamanthys, even though Kanon will emphasize that he actually killed him.

Cancer Temple Please, someone take Manigoldo away from this wretched place. As soon as they step in, Manigoldo will either faint from shock upon hearing all those distressed laments, or try to kick Deathmask in the jewels for keeping innocents as trophies. There’s no way the whole ordeal could end well.

Leo Temple Immediately after seeing Regulus, Aiolia will pat him on the head. No one can resist Regulus, not even him, I won’t change my mind. And then onward to more serious stuff. Precisely, Aiolia will talk with all of them, to make sure they’re actually the real Gold Saints, and there’s a high probability he’s going to ask for a fight just to be even more sure. Just like he did with Athena, back then.

Virgo Temple Remember when I told you that Shaka, in my humble opinion, is the most powerful Gold Saint of his generation? Close to the gods? Well, at least a couple of them will hesitate before stepping inside his temple, because his cosmo is terrifying. Asmita, though... he’s curious. He’s going to step in and stand in front of Shaka, comparing his cosmo to his own, trying to understand him. Of course, as soon as he learn that his eyes are closed, Asmita will ask if he’s blind or just chose to keep them shut. They’re probably going to have the longest conversation of the group, both yearning to learn about how the other uses his cosmo and fights. And, Shaka uses that time to test them, again, because he needs to protect Athena and the best way to do that is to be careful. Libra Temple They met Dohko before reaching it. I didn’t specify it at the beginning of the post.

Scorpio Temple Milo and Kardia? Oh boy, someone’s getting hurt. Kardia, being the reckless fighter he is, will definitely want to fight his successor. Just to see how different they are. Cue Degél being forced to stop him because “there’s no way I’m going to drag your sorry ass when your heart catches fire”, and Milo watching as his “older” counterpart gets frozen in place. Though, he will tell Kardia how amusing the coincidence of both of them being close to an Aquarius is (friendship, love, whatever you want, these two are close).

Sagittarius Temple Right after meeting each other, how long do you think it’ll take for Aiolos and Sisyphus to start talking about their family? To brag about how much they love their lions? Don’t get Aiolos wrong, though. He is going to be the hardest Gold Saint to convince. He has to make sure they’re not there to hurt Athena, even if he trusts his companions. They will read his testament, and most of them will finally realize how painful and horrible those years of tyranny were for the Sanctuary. They will think about how Shion made the Sanctuary a livable place, and how Ares destroyed everything and betrayed everyone. Sisyphus will be the most shocked of the group, thinking back to when he took Sasha away from his family because Athena was more important, seeing himself both similar to Aiolos and completely different. It ends with a melacholic feeling permeating all the past Saints.

Capricorn Temple El Cid and Shura talking about their Excalibur is the first thing that happens. Who has the best sword? They keep arguing about it (El Cid more calmly) until Sisyphus intervenes. As soon as he learn the Shura gave Excalibus to a Bronze Saint, though, El Cid almost loses his cool. The encounter goes on without other accidents, luckily, so the Gold Saints can pass.

Aquarius Temple Degél and Kardia, thanks to what Milo told them at his temple, will try to understand what kind of person is Camus. Only to be confused and surprised at how a cold and calm man like him could actively be close to someone like Milo. Of course, right after they realize it’s the same situation they live in, so everyone moves on to more serious stuff, aka Degél trying to understand what happened in their Holy War, since learning from Saga wasn’t an option and Deathmask risked getting knocked out of existence by Manigoldo. Obviously, the Golds of the past are even more horrified to know that, aside from Shion, five more Gold Saints chose to betray Athena, even if they didn’t really stand by Hades’ side. Sisyphus especially, since he actually experienced what was like being covered by a Surplice (I loved that scene, I have to pay homage to it). They also learn about the Athena Exclamation used to kill one of their companions, though Camus avoids telling them of the second time they used it. After this, once the shock subsided, it’s time for the last temple.

Pisces Temple The very first thing Albafica will do when stepping in that temple is ask Aphrodite how he manages to live the life of a Pisces Saint. There’s two possible options for this: the more canon approach, where Aphrodite doesn’t have poisonous blood, so the answer Albafica receives cannot be applied to his experience; my own approach, where Aphrodite was born with poisonous blood, and he can tell Albafica that it’s not as dangerous for other people as it might seem to him, because the problem resides in his blood, not in his general person. On a more general note, Albafica will have a good conversation with him and will actually approach him, since they’re both Pisces Saints. His companions leave him be, because it’s the first time that Albafica gets that close to someone without feeling on edge, and even though they end up feeling a bit ill upon knowing Aphrodite was one of the real traitors of Athena in the past, they’ll leave with no incidents happening.

I know this is a way more generic approach to the topic compared to what I would actually write, but I don’t have a clear mind at the moment and it’s difficult for me to concentrate too much on sigle characters and situations. Also, there is one main issue with these Saints coming back to life that I didn’t tackle: how their mentality is out of place in a way more modern time like the XX century. This is too difficult for me to elaborate now, especially with a serious approach (I often see the TLC Saints being thrown into the XX or XXI century with a comedic intent, instead of a serious one, so I don’t know how other people deal with the issue), so I avoided it. Another problem is how Dohko and Shion would react to them. For the TLC Saints is not that big of a deal, they died back then, but Shion and Dohko survived. They outlived them, they saw them die. I made it sound really simple in this post, but I believe this kind of emotions cannot be easily summed up in a couple sentences. And there’s the fact that some of the classic Golds betrayed Athena, a very heavy topic for a Gold Saint. Again, I made it sound simple, from Ares to the Holy War, but in reality this would take a much bigger toll on past Saints coming back. How would you react upon knowing that your successors, the people you hoped were going to protect Athena after your death, not only didn’t follow that path but also tried to kill her? It would take some time for them to understand how those Saints got a redemption.

Again, I’m sorry for the terrible amount of time that passed since you asked me this, dear anon. I always answer asks, but sometimes I don’t have time to do so as soon as I get them. I hope you found this at least a bit interesting, and I hope I didn’t misinterpret what you asked me.

Have a good day, guys!

#saint seiya #i cavalieri dello zodiaco #los caballeros del zodiaco #os cavaleiros do zodiaco #knights of the zodiac #the lost canvas #gold saints

29 notes · View notes

k-i-ssmyash · 3 years

Note

Pls I would love to hear your analysis on why those mitski songs fit each iz boy (feel free to ignore this but if you'd like do tell bcs I think it is interesting B) )

Oh buddy you've made a mistake. You'd love to hear the analysis? Well I love to talk; I hope your ready for the absolute word vomit and rambling that's under the cut. But yeah, no, i'll never turn down asks like this! Interact with me! I'm but a simple, lonely tumblr hermit.

Let's start off with the first post containing Zim and referencing A Pearl. I tie this song in with his (fandom assumed) character development and how it effects both his mental state, Dib, and his ideology of the Irken Empire as a whole. In a way, I think a lot of us over-sympathize or find common ground with our alien and it prompts us to victimize him and excuse a lot of his actions. And for good reasons honestly? It's easy to do so consider that he was born under the rule of a tyrannical society where flaws are looked down upon. He does wrong but to him it's not exactly wrong, is it? It's unfair to judge him and scrutinize him the same way we do humans. The show is slap-stick at it's core and despite the grim and black-humor based undertones, not much is taken seriously. Although it often ends up in failure, everything he attempts to do is to better the empire, to receive recognition from the beings they hail to about the same degree as a deity. The long and short of it is that he wants to make the Tallest happy. To prove that he's worth their time and that he can live up to everything he dreamed he could be, but the truth is that he can't. He loves the people that hate him the most. It's an abusive relationship at it's finest, really. So he picks up the most unhealthy coping mechanism: Denial. He can't accept the fact that he's a fake invader, or that his Tallest weren't coming to Earth, because it would genuinely destroy him. And why wouldn't it? Pleasing his superiors and contributing to the hive-collective is encoded in him. It's all he's ever known. I specifically chose the given lines "(It's just that) I fell in love with a war and nobody told me it ended-" because that's the back-bone of Zim's character. You can take it both literally and metaphorically if you'd like. He's invader Zim. He likes being an invader because it gives him a purpose. The Tallest give him a fake mission and play into his delusion of doing good and being someone important (of being loved, even) and never truly hammer in the fact that he's exiled--not counting the unaired episode or the bit of commentary mumbled under the Tallests breath-- because they find the situation funny to an extent. (also, what gets me just in general with it is that Zim thinks that people like him but he's actually just one big joke and ow goddamn it my feelings) Main lyric(s) out of the way there I similarly associate the song to Zim's uh 'character redemption' so to say. I think he'd struggle to become accustomed to Earth and the fact that he doesn't have to rely on commands to live his life. I relate the line(s): "You're getting tired of me (and all of the things I don't talk about) / You love me so hard and I still can't sleep / It's not that I don't want you / It's not that I don't want your touch / There's a hole that you fill" With his relationship with Dib-- platonic, romantic, whatever-- and the general give and take of it all. He'd like to assimilate and believe in the freedom given by living on Earth. He wants it and in a way Dib provides the stability he needs there and it would be so, so, easy to give in to it. But he can't because the Empire continues to loom over him and his day-to-day life. As it's been proven, without Dib there to provoke Zim, the little alien falls into a depression, not unlike the one he fell into in Enter The Florpus when he saw the truth in his mission. Dib is his substitute, essentially. (there's something to be said with that relationship and how I view it but this is already dragging on and this is only the first analysis, so maybe another time.) And lastly, I'd like to think that the Pearl the song is eluding to can be compared to Zim's PAK. The whole 'Pearls are parasites that live inside of mollusks' bit can relate to the PAK and it's purpose. But I see it more in the sense that the PAK is the second brain, a computer memory drive that grants Zim access to the memories he can't bring himself to forget or delete. I.e., "And it left a pearl in my hand / And i roll it around every night just to watch it glow /

Every night, baby, that's where I go" Every time he takes a step forward, he takes two back because he just can't let go of what he knows (the Empire).

--- As for Dib and I Bet On Losing Dogs, well, it's a little more complicated and I'm still not entirely sure of my break-down here because there's so many layers to apply. Originally when I started messing around with this idea, it was going to be centered on Membrane "My baby, you're my baby, say it to me" and him loving Dib despite his flaws. And I still think it could apply. While Dadbrane doesn't support Dib's paranormal bull-shit, and he shouldn't considering the lengths Dib goes through to prove it (bus hoping, obsessive behavior, the fucking trench-coat) he does support and love his son despite the absentness. Hence the "I bet on losing dogs" and you know, Dadbrane just being there to pick him up and have his back when he really needs to. But then we get to the last line of the first verse. "Tell your baby that I'm your baby" To which Dib, in all of his edgy glory, decided to stick his big-head in to my thought process. I saw it as Dib wishing that Membrane would pick him over Science. Kind of a plea for attention? Like: Put your work away, I know you love it but you need to love me more. Dib has got to have the biggest hero-complex out of everyone in the show. He also has an inferiority-complex that compels him to try and prove himself. Quite frankly, and pun fully intended, he is the underdog. The odds are always against him and he almost never comes out victorious in the end, in that way, I feel like Dib himself is the loosing dog. His belief in the supernatural is the loosing dog. No one will ever believe him, "I bet on losing dogs / I know they're losing and I'll pay for my place" but he's too stubborn to give up. Even if he's mocked and ridiculed he would never stop trying to prove himself correct and would continue to stick to his guns. "I'll be there on their side / I'm losing by their side" He ostracizes himself from his peers by not letting belief go. He is purposely sabotaging his chance of being seen as someone other than the crazy kid.

That being said, the next line is where his Hero-complex comes back into play. "Where I'll be looking in their eyes when they're down" in Enter the Florpus, his sworn enemy was in a funk that he knew all too well. Sure, in the end he wanted to use Zim for his own gain, but before that he sympathized with him. And in a way, he possibly wouldn't know how to act if he ever did actually succeed? I couldn't help but think that Dib, who has always lost wouldn't feel like exposing Zim would be a win? He'd miss the fight. Dib would miss the struggle of being beaten down only to rise up when he finally gets some sort of substantial evidence: "I wanna feel it / I bet on losing dogs" he hopes that Zim will come up with something big and bad not because he wants him to win either, but because then Dib has something to fight against. Along with that, the one time Dib actually broke away from paranormal to go along with his father's wishes he was absolutely miserable. He was successful. He made his father happy, he could have made something out of his life but he couldn't; the appeal of Zim and their on-going stalemate was too much to resist-- "I always want you when I'm finally fine / Someone to watch me die" -- Dib is ruining himself by obsessing over the truth and Zim would be going down, right there with him. ahaha, that was a lot wasn't it? It probably didn't make sense either as it's just my personal rambling here, but I'd be interested to hear your thoughts and opinions on it all.

#smoke break #Ash Answers #invader zim #mitski

4 notes · View notes

thiswaycomessomethingwicked · 4 years

Note

I have a silly Napoleon ask for you: if he suddenly woke up in the present day what do you think he would a)like most about it b) like least about it c)get unreasonably addicted to d)decide to do for a living

hahah I’ve answered a similar one before here and here.

Most Like About It: A lot, I think. Central heating. Guys, he’d fucking love central heating.

In general, he’d love most technological advances. Cars, planes, trains etc. like he’d be very into that. “Bertrand we’re going to ride the TGV all day every day. Look at how fast we are going! This is genius.”

“Bertrand WE ARE IN THE SKY. This is AMAZING. We are going from Paris to Rome in a matter of HOURS. HOURS BERTRAND. WE DON’T HAVE TO CROSS MOUNTAINS.” (sorry just assuming this is exile Napoleon who woke up in modern day.)

Public transit in general - the metro, buses - anything that makes life more efficient for people. Dishwasher, washers/dryers, modern electricity, laptops, printers, ball point pens etc.

I suspect he’d be a big supporter of public health care and all the advances made on vaccines and medicine in general. 100% would hate anti-vaxxers. Pro-modern glasses (he’d get himself a pair asap. Then they’d explain contacts to him and I think he’d be like “WAIT NO, I WANT THOSE.” He would not be into lasik, I suspect).

Modern hygiene! Razors, tooth brushes, floss, moisturizer - general daily body care he’d probably be keen on. (All that stuff we take for granted.) Though maybe not all of it, he was quite traditional in certain things (his penchant for older fashion, par exemple). Maybe he’d keep the old straight razor shaving approach. But modern dentistry would be a huge improvement and I can’t see him being against it. Especially as someone who had a tooth extracted in the early 19th century.

‘Oh they give you pain killers now? Fantastic.’

‘Sir, we just numb the area where we are doing the work.’

‘So it doesn’t impede my awareness? Amazing. Please, fix all my teeth right now.’

He’d also support the greater access to education that exists, especially compared to his day. Also, streaming services. He would binge so many things. ‘Bertrand we are watching every thing this very soothing sounding British naturalist made about planet earth. Holy shit look at that they’re under water! They’re at the bottom of the ocean! Bertrand look at this. if only Josephine were here. She’d be so excited.’

Pro-zoom/Microsoft teams/facetime etc. 100%. ‘If I had this instead of people relying on my bad handwriting ...’

Oh, he’d like the EU as a concept. Except he would be very disappointed that France wasn’t at the helm. I think France’s position globally would disappoint him, overall. But yeah, the broad principles espoused by the concept of the European Union would appeal to him.

Brexit though. Lol. I think he’d enjoy watching England shoot itself in the foot. But if you asked him for his opinion, as in “do you think the UK should do this” he would answer no. They should remain.

He would like globalization, trade agreements, things like NAFTA, CETA etc. Supporter of big government. Reduction of religion in public sphere. Though would he be pro-banning visual manifestations of faith? (i.e. Hijab etc.) I don’t know. I doubt it. Simply because he was very focused on religion in government, so if churches aren’t involved in decision making, what citizens get up to on their own is their business (so long as you don’t cause problems). But I don’t know, he might be pro-it, because he was also into assimilation and creating a broad sense of a French culture. I could see him really going either way on it. It’d probably come down to whatever he thought would garner the most public support as a political move (since a lot of his more liberal moves as a leader were tied to understanding that marginalized communities would gun hard for him if he helped them).

He would be pro-mask wearing for COVID because he wasn’t a fucking idiot and lived in a time when pandemics were still a real going concern.

He would also probably like how comfortable modern clothing is. I don’t think he’d like how cheap and made-to-wear-out that most brands are, but he’d like the over all philosophy. Like Napoleon would dig t-shirts. Lounge wear. The fact that jeans have some stretch in them. That sort of thing.

Least Like: I think he’d be very wary of the internet. For many reasons. For the lack of government control (Napoleon “What is a free press? never heard of her” Bonaparte). But also, because of the misinformation problems. The side effects many of us are now bearing witness to, and experiencing the ramifications of.

He would dislike the whole fake news nonsense. Oh this man was a master spin-doctor, very good at twisting a narrative around to suit him, but he still did have respect for and a firm belief in basic facts. Especially fake news that usurped the sound advise of scientists and doctors (i.e. COVID nonsense).

Free press, I think he would be wary of it. Mostly from a government control perspective. Like as a day-to-day citizen, since he wouldn’t be anyone in power in this hypothetical, I think he’d value it. He would do that disassocative thing he did when he talked about things in the abstract. That cold, calculating way he would position himself in a situation and be like “Ah yes, these are the things that need to be tamped down if you want control of a populace as a monarch”. Then he had his more liberal, call-back-to-that-misspent-jacobin-youth moments where his views shifted.

I suppose it would also depend what age this hypothetical Napoleon is. He softened a lot in retirement exile. Napoleon at the height of his power, thirty-odd years old, different man to fifty year old Napoleon.

Would not be into women in politics. He’d be like ‘Why is there a woman in charge of Germany? Also what happened to the Habsburgs? Where’s Prussia? Silesia? What the FuCk is happening in the Balkans? I’m very confused about Europe’s current geographic layout. ...Corsica...still doing you, I see.’

He’d dislike Trump and his cronies. As I wrote before: “ I think Napoleon would find Trump disgusting on a personal level. Uneducated, incapable of holding a real conversation, gauche, anti-intellectual, anti-fact-based discussion, anti-science, anti-art etc. He’d also feel that Trump is disgracing the position of President and that he is unworthy of leadership. Napoleon would also find Trump physically repulsive as he could be a wee bit shallow in some of his assessments (though, very early modern to 19th century to assume your physical appearance is a manifestation of your interiority).”

Steve Bannon’s fiddling with finances? Napoleon would find that repulsive. Mitch Mcconnell disgracing his office by fucking around with constitutional loop holes? Napoleon would think it a disgrace.

He had a lot of respect for America’s experiment with democracy. Like, quite a lot of respect. So I think he’d be vastly disappointed in not only the person occupying the white house, but also a lot of the apathy in voting that is going around. (Yes, this coming from a [mostly] absolutest monarch, too.) But Napoleon valued and respected the notion of civic duty. If you live in a democracy, you have a duty to participate. To opt out is to shirk that duty which he would find insulting and distasteful. Because, I would argue, he was very much a believer in people doing right by their fellow citizens.

Get unreasonably addicted to: MODERN BATHS. HE WOULD NEVER LEAVE THE BATHTUB. THEY CAN HAVE JETS AND EVERYTHING BERTRAND THIS IS GREAT.

Also central heating. Saunas. Jacuzzis. He was like a wee lizard seeking warmth at all times.

I think he’d be into driving. I don’t know if he would be good at it. Don’t let Napoleon take the wheel, guys. But if someone else was driving he’d be that person “go faster. you’re driving like my grandmother.” And gods, he’d do dumb shit like drive like a maniac around the arc de triumph six times in a row because he’s an adrenaline junkie and a risk-taker (it’s that bored ADD brain of his). The autobahn would be his dream.

I think he’d be super into epic fantasy series. Like the big sweeping ones like Lord of the Rings. I think less so GRRM because GRRM is unrealistic and Napoleon is pedantic. Especially about politics and war. Exhibit A: consider Napoleon’s very detailed nitpicking of Virgil on his inaccurate rendition of Troy from a military perspective. Therefore, I suspect GRRM’s lack of accuracy in how society works, how war works, how politics works, all the plot holes and illogical character decisions, would drive him up the wall. Napoleon liked Homer because he could tell Homer had been to war. And you can tell Tolkien has been to war. Also LOTR hits all those notes of high-hearted emotion and big sweeping scenes that Napoleon so liked in Ossian and the Illiad etc.

All this to say, overall, as a genre, I think those big, sweeping fantasies with lots of plot, politics, intrigue, soaring battles, great heights of emotion - he’d love that. It would hit all of his buttons for what he liked in fiction. Lots of emotion, lots of action, lots of big scenes, lots of crazy shenanigans. This can also be applied to Sci-fi. I think he’d be a big nerd on that too. But the science would have to make sense.

I think he’d be into Star Trek, particularly Picard, if only for the philosophical aspects of it. He liked those sorts of questions and hypotheticals. So I think he’d binge all of The Next Generation (among other seasons).

Do for a living: Teach? God knows. This is Napoleon from 18-something who just woke up? He could be paid for consultant work for historians and film crews and the like, I guess. Just to tell them how accurate stuff is. Of course, be wary, this is Napoleon I Am A Spin Doctor Bonaparte.

I think he could lean into writing histories - particularly the classics, early French and European history - that sort of thing, where he already has a strong background in it and it wouldn’t require him basically learning an entirely new trade. Like, will Napoleon ever fully be a natural with computers and cell phones? Probably not. Could he be like your old school Professor emeritus who still churns out papers and does 90% of it the old fashioned by-hand way? Yes. And Napoleon had a bunch of histories planned on St. Helena that he wanted to write, so I think he could do that.

As this is literally Napoleon Bonaparte he’d get a book deal in seconds. There’d be a bidding war over it.

Thank you for the ask! This was very amusing :D

#napoleon #napoleon was his own shitpost #napoleon bonaparte #napoleonic #napoleon in the modern day #ask #reply #anon

38 notes · View notes