#with their audience/fans while they are actively creating

[faunandfloraas]

After The Rain - Seungmin for the June issue of Harper's Bazaar Korea by Yoon Hye-young - interview under the cut

How was the Harper's Bazaar shoot today? It rained on and off all day, was it gloomy?

Seungmin: When we started, I was worried because it was raining so hard, but then the sun came out and it felt like it was meant to be. I loved the location, and I actually have this running scene as my phone wallpaper these days. (Shows phone screen) Cows running around at the foot of the Alps.... I was thinking that I would love to spend the whole day in such an open space, just lying still, watching the animals and having a beer, and then today I was lucky enough to have my favorite backdrop spread out in front of me. It's even better that it's with Burberry, because I've always loved their outdoor clothing, especially the trench coats. The first luxury item I bought after my debut was a Burberry card wallet.

Harper's Bazaar: You're the main vocalist of Stray Kids, looking at your activities so far, you can clearly feel the sincerity in your singing. I heard that you've been receiving vocal lessons consistently without a break since your debut. Are you practicing every day these days?

Seungmin: When I first started learning songs, I would do some math, right? If there was a lyric sheet, I would check every breathing part and make a calculation- in this part, I would sing like this, and in that part, I would put this kind of emotion... That's how I practiced. These days, without a written record, I try to make my own interpretation based on what I've honed inside. I think it feels better to hear compliments like "you have a different side" than "you sing well."

How would you define your style as a vocalist?

Seungmin: It's abstract. What I'm striving for these days is that when I drop a pebble of a song into the lake of emotion, the ripples continue until the end of the song, and I want those ripples to carry over to the audience. For this reason, I'm trying to be freer with my emotions than before. If I'm sad, I cry, if I'm angry, I complain... I've always been a very patient person, and I think this change in me is slowly being reflected in my songs, as fans often notice.

Harper's Bazaar: Talent and effort each play a role in becoming a good singer.

Seungmin: I think talent is 10% and effort is 90%. As the years go by, I realize how much a singer's attitude is connected to the song. When I sing without feeling, the listeners don't feel anything.

Harper's Bazaar: Was the current Seungmin also created with 10% talent and 90% effort?

Seungmin: I'd add more. (Laughs) I would say talent 5% effort 95% If I skip a day of practice, it shows right away. When I first joined the team, I wasn't even the main vocalist. I don't remember standing in front of others singing even when I was young. There are stories of famous singers who were exceptionally good at singing since childhood, going to auditions or standing out at school plays. I just listened to what I liked and worked hard as much as I liked, and that's how I got here. I vaguely dreamed of being a band vocalist while listening to Muse, and I learned what it means to feel heartbroken while listening to Kim Dong Ryul. What's really great about practice is the sense of satisfaction you get when you face a wall and overcome it, one by one. You can't always get good results in real life, but you increase your odds through practice.

Harper's Bazaar Muse and Kim Dong-ryul? That's an analog sensibility. (Laughs)

Seungmin: I'm really slow. I don't have TikTok on my phone, and I don't really watch shorts. I like old things more than new things. The world seems too fast. It's a time where you can easily make something without putting in effort. Even if you just leave the translation to AI, it's done in an instant. Of course, it's an efficient system, but I think I'm more interested in authenticity. That's why I often hear people say that I'm an old man. What can I do? It's my style (laughs)

Harper's Bazaar So you keep a diary too?

Seungmin: I've been keeping a practice journal since 2017. At that time, I used to mechanically write down what I learned today and what I have to learn tomorrow, but now I think it's become a habit. These days, I write down my feelings in a journal. No matter how trivial the content is, when I look back later, the memories from that time come back vividly and it helps. I could use a notepad on my phone, but I insist on paper and pen. The time I write in my journal is an opportunity to sit at my desk every night and look into my heart for at least 5 minutes. Even if I write, "I don't want to write today. I'll just sleep," no matter how tired I am, I always write at least two lines and go to bed.

Please tell me a passage from Harper's Bazaar diary (laughs)

Seungmin starts off by saying, "Tomorrow is a very important day, so I've put a sheet mask on and even if I'm really sleepy right now, I'm holding this pen." I really write anything (Laughs)

Harper's Bazaar: I believe that what kind of music you're listening to these days can tell you a lot about a person, so I'm curious about Seungmin's recent playlist.

Seungmin: When I get into a song, I listen to it until I get sick of it, or until my emotions run out. That's why my playlists are always concise and well-organized. These days, I've been listening to Ariana Grande's "Twilight Zone" for over a week. I'm the type that's weak in imagination. My MBTI is Sensing (S), not Intuitive (N). But this song makes imagination possible, which is amazing.

According to Stray kids members, Seungmin is the type that once he gets into something, he sticks with it until the end- are you a stable type?

Seungmin: I can't handle anxiety very well. Stability is the best (laugh). Whether it's baseball or singing, if I get into something, I don't get tired of it and just keep going. It's the same with relationships. Once I'm connected to someone, I want to keep the relationship with that person until the end. My closest friends right now are all from elementary, middle, and high school. If you take loyalty out of it, it's dead (smile). I never betray people who are close to me.

Harpers bazaar: Everyone wears a t-shirt of their favorite band from their teenage years, so it seems like people live their whole lives with the music they listened to in their teens and 20s. Looking back, which song do you think will be your theme song?

Seungmin: I think it's "As We Are" that I wrote. It's the song that best represents my 20s. I would choose another song, but this song means a lot to me, and I had a hard time writing the lyrics. It was really hard to bring out the parts of myself that I wanted to be recognized, and didn't want to be recognized. It's a song that reflects me. The reason why the aspect ratio of the MV is 4:3 instead of 16:9 is because it is based on actual memories from my childhood.

Harper's Bazaar: The lyrics in the introduction of this song, "I tried to do well/ I ran forward without looking back/ but i tripped and fell/ And I ended up falling behind/ why does this only happen to me" these lyrics must have been a moment of wanting to be recognized and not wanting to be recognized for you, right?

Seungmin: Everyone has those. Words that are hard to say out loud, feelings that are kept inside, stories that only I know. At that time, I honestly put my thoughts and feelings into the lyrics. I might have thought it was my own personal story and just wrote it, but I tried to muster up the courage. I wanted to tell you that I was thinking the same thing as you, and you were thinking the same thing as me, and I wanted to comfort you.

Harper's Bazaar: Are you the kind of person who thinks music is life and life is music? Or are you the kind of person who thinks there is a real life outside of the stage? If I had to guess, I would say that vocalist Seungmin is a believer.

Seungmin: I want to express my feelings about music off stage, on stage. I believe that living the everyday life I like, even if it's not necessarily music, enriches my feelings about music. I don't want to live a life that's too different from the music I do. Seungmin the singer is Seungmin the person.

[foreverppl]

I so appreciate authors who really stick to their guns both in terms of characterization and overall narrative decisions.

[rascalentertainments]

Something I just realized about Jack Frost, his depiction and story is actually brilliant.

If you think about the depictions of him prior to the DreamWorks movie, he really wasn't in the media that much until then. Jack had his own Rankin/Bass special, and was the antagonist in The Santa Clause 3. After that, I don't recall him being mentioned or seen in anything afterwards.

Jack Frost being barely talked about or ignored is more accurate than ever. Sandman and Tooth Fairy are active everyday, and Santa and Easter Bunny ALWAYS get attention at the beginning and end of the year. But Jack? We maybe remember the line "Jack Frost nipping at your nose." at best. The movie is right, we DON'T talk about Jack Frost.

No matter what Jack does, the kids don't see him. Even the adults brush him off and he's right in front of them most of the time. So Jack having this whole character arc of being seen and believed in makes a lot more sense. The world had forgotten him because more people got cynical and lost their fun, while he does his best to get their attention.

Then Rise of the Guardians changed everything. Jack Frost's popularity blew up a few months after the movie. Parts of the internet became obsessed with the guy and he became the favorite character of the movie. The movie itself helped Jack become a household name. Now you can NEVER forget him, now he's part of the holiday season with Santa, Rudolph and many others.

Hell, this version is so iconic, no one else has even tried to do their own take. Its kind of like 2003's Teen Titans, its such a perfect version that any other adaptation pales in comparison. ROTG Jack Frost is so good, its now the definitive version of him. No matter what version comes next, THIS is Jack Frost now.

Props to the crew and design team of the film, because they nailed this concept and perfectly updated him. They created the BEST version of this nearly forgotten character, and now he's known worldwide. Even at the end its implied more people will start to believe in him now (I NEED A SEQUEL), and his final words to the audience mean much more now that he's a guardian.

Everytime I keep finding out just how much heart is in this movie, I keep getting obsessed with film every December and its a never ending book of surprises when fans catch more things about Rise of the Guardians.

God, I love this movie

[nahimjustfeelingit-writes]

SOON COME…

Charleston Dance

Elias ‘Smoke’ Moore x Zora

Warnings: Smut, Angst, Violence

At the beginning of the 20th century, most Americans kept things pretty buttoned up, figuratively and literally. Sure, some took in a vaudeville show, and perhaps one of those acts would involve early burlesque dancers showing off their calves, but the skirt-lifting tended to stop there — and dancers' legs were usually covered with stockings to boot. It may have been shocking to at least some folks at this time, but burlesque dancers in just a short time would be doing far more than lifting their dress a bit and telling cheeky jokes. By the 1920s, some would even be getting very close indeed to the audience while wearing almost nothing at all…

Kita ‘Kitty’ Daniels is Chicago’s favorite mulatto burlesque dancer and singer. She loves performing on stage, her enigmatic voice and captivating smile stunning the audience before her. As sweet as she may seem, she’s a bitch to the core. She viewed the other dancers as beneath her. Every one—white and black—came to see her perform in Chicago.

Ringing in that roaring, raucous and ragtime flair to your party. Performing high energy, fully choreographed Charleston routines, The Show Girls are sure to add that air of elegance and energy to your evening. These ladies are the “hostesses with the mostest…

Zora itched to be a star. The swinging era of glittering Jazz and loosening morals with its sumptuous sparkling costumes and tongue in cheek Charleston routines she craved. Zora worked closely with Big Mama as well as cleaning the dressing rooms and the stage after The Show Girls performed. Stitching costumes and creating feathered headbands and feathered boa’s and elaborate feathered fans. She was the back bone of the show, and yet she was overshadowed.

The 1920s saw a rise in organized crime, with numerous prominent gangsters gaining notoriety during Prohibition. Notable figures included Al Capone, Lucky Luciano, Bugs Moran, and Bugsy Siegel. These individuals and their gangs were involved in various criminal activities, including bootlegging, racketeering, and violence, often targeting rival gangs...

Elias ‘Stack’ Moore was the muscle for The Chicago Outfit. His suit was made of expensive fabrics such as wool and silk and were tailored to fit his body perfectly. His suits were adorned with pinstripes and lapel pins, possessing a bravado that garnered attention. His slick mouth and boisterous laugh displayed fashionable teeth jewelry. He loved the vaudeville scene, it matched his playful energy. His red fedora with its sharp brim gave style to his gangster ways.

Kitty adored him, but Stack wasn’t a man to tie down.

Especially when he had eyes for a certain Wallflower.

His Dahlia.

It's the idea that a flower can be so beautiful and resilient, but in the end it withers away…

[ac1dmeow]

girly i really think we need how jinx would reassure reader in her toughest moments since reader is always there for her in her moments..

headcannons — jinx x fem!reader. men dni.

⋆ 𐙚 ̊. jinx’s tactics are unconventional and unusual considering she hasn’t been used to receiving or even giving comfort for a long time. but once she met you, she slowly began to learn how!

(her charm makes her quite the natural though)

⋆ 𐙚 ̊. after the countless times you’ve been there—comforting her and taking care of her during her highs and her lows—jinx naturally formed her own ways of being there for you too.

⋆ 𐙚 ̊. i think a part of her might feel a little frantic trying to find different ways to make you stop feeling bad. if you’re feeling particularly insecure for whatever reason, she’ll be quick and witty to uplift you with a vomit of compliments.

“are you kiddin’ babe?! you’re way more talented than that brain dead dud.”

“listen to me and listen closely, ‘kay? you are the most beautiful person i have ever laid my eyes on! even right now i’m trying so hard to keep myself from jumping your bones, y’hear me?!”

⋆ 𐙚 ̊. that girl is cheering you on like she’s the audience of the whole soccer field whenever you’re stressing out over trying something that you’re not confident about.

⋆ 𐙚 ̊. a similar example is when you’re both on a job and you find yourselves surrounded by people from the opposing side. hidden behind a large crate while people fight on the other side, jinx is in your ear hyping you up to make the grand attack; sneak up and ambush from above, then take the enemy out easy peasy.

“c’mon. you can do this. you’re strong, they’re weaklings who don’t stand a chance! look at that guy over there built like a string bean! snap him in half, toots!!!”

⋆ 𐙚 ̊. when you’re making your move, settling into position on a level above one of the enemies distracted by loading their own weapon, jinx is watching the scene play out with wide eyes and baited breath. the second you do a running start and leap down onto the unfortunate target’s head, jinx is yelling and whistling in approval. jumping around and waving her arms in the air like her favourite sports team just made a winning-goal at the buzzer.

“YEAAAH, THAT’S MY GIRL! EVERYONE LOOK AT THAT, THAT’S MY GIRLFRIEND!!! SHE’S BETTER THAN YOU!!!”

⋆ 𐙚 ̊. jinx has days where she’ll stay inside the whole 24 hours (shocking?). if what you need is a day like that where you don’t wanna bother doing too much activities or work around the place, she’ll force herself to be hyperactive on other and more quieter things.

⋆ 𐙚 ̊. like fiddling with her little inventions and creating blueprints at her workbench. or getting stuff for you that she thinks you may want or just ordering you to stay put and look pretty so she can do everything for you—afterwards sitting down in front of you and staring at you hoping her efforts are satisfactory.

⋆ 𐙚 ̊. or even cleaning the place up. organizing things the way she notices you do, and then going the extra mile to try to rearrange furniture, but then putting it back where it was because she realizes there’s no point she lives on a fan.

⋆ 𐙚 ̊. jinx is a massive cuddle bug! so she’ll accept the opportunity with a huge smile and open arms if you want to relax with her for a while. she doesn’t really have a preference when being the big or little spoon. but naturally her limbs will gravitate around you because she like to keep you close—it makes her feel secure having you in her arms pressed up snuggly against her, assured that you’re there and that you won’t disappear.

⋆ 𐙚 ̊. then those sweet quiet moments where you gaze into each others eyes, soft airy giggles sounding quietly in the little fort in jinx’s hideout while she caresses your face or plays with your hair while complimenting you sweetly. or while just simply talking about anything and everything. conversations can go as deep as the last flower you saw in passing, or the concept of existence and karma. both of your faces are filled with adoration, and you couldn’t appreciate her more.

⋆ 𐙚 ̊. you always feel how much jinx cares about you. but you feel her love most profoundly during times like these. you cherish those tender moments the most.

this is an old request so girl if ur still out there… i’m sorry for making u wait babes 😔💔 pls enjoy.

[theunsinkableship1]

CRAZY ABOUT THEIR LOVE

"There's love there" dixit Nicola.

Yesterday, Nicola received a BAFTA nomination for her work in Big Mood, which has been renewed for a second season. She is a talented actress with a good heart and an agreeable personality. I hope that she’ll win and if she doesn’t it’s ok. Whether she wins or not, there are likely more opportunities ahead for her to achieve further successes. There have also been discussions regarding her private life, which is unfortunate on a day that marks a significant milestone in her career.

Was it unfortunate? Yes! Unexpected? No!

Her talent and beauty are widely recognized, but much of the interest in her online is centered around her private life. She may not be comfortable with this aspect of her popularity, and public figures often have limited control over how they are perceived. I’ve never been a real fan of a person before and certainly not to the point of knowing as much as I know now about lukola. The fact is that I’m just a casual fan of both actors and normally I wouldn’t follow their activities that closely and wouldn’t be much interested in their private lives, this why I restate that I will not follow their other relationships as I am not fully aware of the dynamics or background information necessary to form a conclusive opinion and what has transpired to this day isn’t appealing to me and to be fair can’t really be because we don’t have years of interactions and the deep dive with world tour like background knowledge .

Luke and Nicola have already recognized that a significant part of their public appeal stems from their dynamic together. This could be one of the reasons why they’re creating distance, whether for personal reasons, professional positioning, or external pressures.

By stepping back, they control the narrative, preventing their careers from being overshadowed by speculation. It allows them to establish individual identities beyond their joint appeal, ensuring their work is taken seriously on its own merit.

It could also be a missed opportunity , their bond is a force that transcends standard co-star dynamics. Instead of resisting it, embracing their unique impact could elevate their legacy beyond just a TV show. Some connections aren’t meant to be hidden; they become cultural moments that inspire, move, and even change people’s perspectives on love and human connection.

Ultimately, while they may try to control the perception of their relationship, the way the world receives and resonates with them is beyond their control. And perhaps, that’s not something to fight, but something to embrace.

Yesterday, someone, not a close friend called me crazy because I asked them to listen to a Lukola clip I had posted on my Tumblr. Some people could hear what I was pointing out, while others couldn’t, even after I boosted the audio to make it clearer. My immediate test some of my audience couldn’t hear anything, and one person went so far as to call me crazy. I didn’t appreciate it and struggled to understand why they were unable to hear it. Was I really imagining things? Was there truly nothing there?

The answer is simple: No, I wasn’t imagining things. And yes, there is something there.

Human perception is far from uniform, especially when it comes to hearing. Just as some people have sharper eyesight or better spatial awareness, hearing ability varies greatly from person to person. Factors like age, frequency sensitivity, past exposure to loud sounds, and even genetic predisposition affect how we process audio.

In my case, I didn’t just rely on my own ears. I took the clip, and had it analyzed through audio spectrum tools that visually display sound frequencies. The analysis confirmed that the frequencies of the words were indeed present in the audio file, proving that I wasn’t "hearing voices" or imagining things. AI tools, interestingly, also struggled to transcribe certain parts, just as some humans did. This is similar to the well-known "blue and gold dress" phenomenon, where different people perceived the same visual input in vastly different ways. Just as with color perception, auditory perception can differ dramatically based on how an individual's brain processes sound.

This extends beyond just hearing. In general, people interpret reality based on personal biases, past experiences, and even subconscious conditioning. Some are more attuned to body language, micro-expressions, and emotional undercurrents, while others need more explicit confirmation to recognize what’s right in front of them.

In the case of Lukola, shippers often see and feel something an energy that transcends mere friendship. Yet skeptics, for various reasons, might dismiss these same moments, either because they aren’t looking closely enough, don’t want to see it, or simply don’t have the intuitive ability to pick up on subtle dynamics.

If Lukola were just a projection of wishful thinking, then why does the same pattern of interactions, glances, physical closeness, and emotional depth consistently appear? Why do so many unrelated observers, across different cultures, backgrounds, and levels of analytical skill, pick up on the same chemistry? And why does every attempt to disprove Lukola rely on external factors rather than what’s actually happening between Luke and Nicola?

Lukola possesses unique and exceptional qualities. Their interactions, reactions, and ability to reconnect despite adverse circumstances defy conventional understanding. It is not possible to simulate the level of ease, tension, or emotional resonance they exhibit. For those who can observe and interpret the details, the patterns become unmistakable.

So no, I’m not crazy. And neither are the countless others who perceive what’s right there in front of us. Some may not hear it. Some may not see it. But that doesn’t mean it isn’t real.

Luke and Nicola's dynamic appears to go beyond a typical co-star relationship. This level of interest is absolutely unusual for me, and others in the Lukola community have reported similar feelings of attachment to their bond. Whether this relationship is romantic, deeply intimate, or something else, it seems to resonate strongly with many observers. The reasons behind this strong resonance remain unclear.

Humans are wired to seek patterns, to make sense of connections that may not be immediately obvious. Lukola shippers aren’t just indulging in wishful thinking; many of us sense undeniable chemistry, subtle moments of tension, and contradictions in their public narrative. This sparks an instinct to analyze, to decode, to uncover something that doesn’t quite fit into the "just friends" framework.

Additionally, the longer one observes and collects evidence, whether it’s body language, micro expressions, or the apparent shifts in behavior when they are together, the deeper the emotional investment grows. The brain seeks to validate what it already suspects, reinforcing the belief that there is something real happening beneath the surface.

For many, the draw toward Lukola feels intuitive. There is a gut feeling, an unshakable certainty that their bond holds more meaning than what is publicly acknowledged. Some might describe it as an energetic connection, a frequency that people unconsciously pick up on.

Carl Jung’s concept of the collective unconscious suggests that groups of people can tap into hidden truths before they become widely accepted. Could it be that Lukola shippers are picking up on an unspoken reality that the world hasn’t fully acknowledged yet? It would explain why so many independent observers arrive at the same conclusion despite official narratives trying to steer them away.

There’s also the idea of twin flames or fated connections, relationships that seem destined, even if obstacles stand in the way. Many Lukola supporters believe that what they see in Luke and Nicola is more than just friendly affection; it’s the kind of deep bond that challenges both people involved.

Lukola stands out in today's media for its authenticity, countering the trend of PR-driven relationships and polished celebrity personas. People crave something genuine and unique. Their potential is intoxicating.

There’s also a subconscious rebellion at play. The media tells us one thing, but the evidence and our instincts tell us another. Lukola shippers challenge mainstream narratives by trusting their own observations over curated publicity.

Here lies an interesting paradox: should we accept the public version of events while continuing to ship Lukola? The answer for me is yes because the two are not incompatible. If Luke and Nicola (or their teams) are actively presenting a certain narrative, it means they want us to believe it. Respecting that choice doesn’t mean we have to stop believing in what we’ve already seen and felt.

Lukola, in a way, is a submarine ship, it moves beneath the surface, unseen but always present. To the outside world, we might nod along, acknowledging what is being presented, but deep down, we stay steady in what we know. The Three Wise Monkeys philosophy applies here: see no truth, hear no truth, speak no truth…until it is time.

Despite external narratives, Lukola remains afloat. Luke and Nicola are the ones who can steer it into harbor, let it drift, or sink it, and they have kept it sailing so far. Watching Lukola sometimes feels like you're in a theater, being trapped and forced to watch a mix of romantic comedy and a horror movie, where you want to yell—_ “Don’t go there! Stay safe!” _—but you’re just a spectator. It’s not your story to steer or your choices to make. You can only watch, hope, and brace for what comes next.

[literaryvein-reblogs]

Writing Notes: Parasocial Relationship

Parasocial Interaction (PSI) - semblance of interpersonal exchange whereby members of an audience come to feel that they personally know a performer they have encountered in mass media.

Parasocial Relationship (PSR) - generally defined as a relationship in which one member of the relationship isn’t aware of the other—e.g., a fan loves a celebrity, but the celebrity doesn’t know they exist. Not restricted to celebrities, PSRs also exist between people and fictional characters, whether portrayed by an actor or not.

PSRs tend to occur because of our natural tendency to link to others.

PSIs are thought to have a psychological effect similar to that of face-to-face communication.

Over time, PSIs with a performer may lead audience members to develop a parasocial relationship—a one-sided sense of connection with the performer.

The first examinations of parasocial relationships came in the 1950s, when psychologists tried to understand how television viewers reacted to the hosts, MCs, and TV personalities speaking to them directly out of the screen—a novel concept at the time.

It caused concern that viewers at home wouldn’t be able to tell the difference between the relationships they had with a television personality and ones they had with “real” people— “victim[s] of the 'magic mirror'” as Richard Horton and Donald Wohl described in the 1956 paper.

The term parasocial interaction first appeared in the writings of American sociologists Donald Horton and R. Richard Wohl in the 1956 article “Mass Communication and Para-Social Interaction: Observations on Intimacy at a Distance.” The article describes how PSIs may gradually lead to the formation of a parasocial relationship.

Most theoretical work attempting to define and differentiate PSIs and parasocial relationships was published in the latter half of the 20th century.

Generally, modern sociologists and media theorists agree that the concepts are distinct but deeply related.

The Parasocial Interaction Scale, devised in the 1980s in order to better quantify PSIs and parasocial relationships, asks subjects to answer questions about both phenomena.

PSIs occur when audience members feel that they are actively interacting with a mass media personality.

Human brains appear to process PSIs in much the same way as real-life interpersonal interactions because of the novelty of technologically mediated encounters.

While people do recognize the artificiality of the media apparatus, their perception of PSIs causes a real psychological reaction.

PSIs are strongest when a media personality cultivates the illusion of interpersonal intimacy.

Certain genres, programs, and celebrities have purposely fostered such a sense of intimacy in their tone and setting.

For example, TV talk shows have their hosts directly address the camera as if in conversation with each viewer, creating the illusion of face-to-face closeness.

Situation comedies manufacture familial settings that viewers grow more and more accustomed to.

Certain podcasts and radio shows—especially those crafted around one or more hosts—adopt an informal tone resembling that of a gathering of friends.

As PSIs become increasingly frequent, many audience members enter into a parasocial relationship built on comfort, satisfaction, and commitment.

In contrast, Horton and Wohl posited, people whose encounters with mass media figures are infrequent may feel detached and even cynical when they do encounter those figures.

Indeed, the researchers suggested, audience members must tune in regularly and of their own volition for the relationship to become parasocial.

Such relationships bridge genre and style. In one key study, researchers found that commitment levels (measured on a scale used for interpersonal relationships) for viewers of both fictional and nonfictional television programs were predicted by how invested the viewers were.

Consequently, when a program went off the air, committed viewers experienced higher levels of distress, dubbed a “parasocial breakup,” than uncommitted viewers.

Audience members often have a parasocial relationship with the same celebrity without feeling jealous of one another; in fact, in many cases, sharing their dedication to a mass media persona brings people closer together.

While parasocial relationships can enrich your life, these one-sided affairs can also hurt you.

They won't love you back. "They're like fake food. They taste good, but they have no nutritional content and won't meet your needs. You need to love and be loved in return to thrive," social scientist and professor Arthur C. Brooks says.

They might contribute to loneliness and isolation if you rely on them too much. Loneliness and isolation are linked to increased risks of many chronic health problems such as depression, anxiety, dementia, and heart disease, and even premature death.

They might have a negative influence on you. Are you picking up unhealthy ideas from the people you follow? Brooks says this should be a special concern for parents whose kids have parasocial relationships: The messages kids glean might be at odds with your values — perhaps because they are controversial political or adult themes.

Two red alerts:

Ask yourself if you're too attached. For example, are you skipping dinner with friends because you prefer watching a TV show with a character you care about and want to connect with?

Be wary. "If someone is trying to brainwash you, saying, 'I'm your friend, you can trust me,' that person is using a personal social bond to get you to do something — like vote a certain way," Brooks says. He points out that social media stars try to establish parasocial relationships with followers to get more clicks and make money. "That's what the new economy is all about — monetizing parasocial relationships on a mass scale," Brooks says.

A PSR that starts with healthy boundaries, can turn sour when a mob mentality forms, resulting in harassment.

PSRs are natural and not inherently unhealthy.

But, as Stever says, “Anything that can be true about a regular social relationship can be true about a parasocial relationship. Are they positive? Can they be good for us? Absolutely. Can they be negative? Can they be toxic for us? We all know examples of that.”

Sources: 1 2 3 4 ⚜ More: References ⚜ Writing Resources PDFs

[centrally-unplanned]

IRL (In Real Life) - Buffydom Propaganda And The Internet-That-Was

It is 1997. You just got back from the latest Hot Topic run to restock on whatever the most raven-black bomb of Manic Panic they have on the shelves is, so you can do double-duty bleaching your hair in the shower while watching a CRT TV precariously mounted on the lip of your sink. On that TV is the Season 1 finale of Buffy the Vampire Slayer, and you are obsessed. Unfortunately for you, no one else in Bowling Green, Ohio, shares your passion for a CW WB show about vampire hunting teens who purposefully fumble their line deliveries. You are alone, and you have shit you gotta say about it to someone, anyone, who will understand.

Fortunately for you, the marketing team at ye old WB anticipated that their audience would be a bunch of fucking nerds, and boy do they have a solution to your problem! Welcome to the Bronze:

A while back I stumbled upon the inexplicable existence of "IRL (In Real Life)", a 2007 documentary about the community that formed around the aforementioned Buffy fan discussion forum/chatboard. Officially running from around the launch of the show until it switched over to UPN after its fifth season (with the forum dying a dramatic death in the process), The Bronze was a highly active center for the Buffy fandom, which generated several spillovers into real life. In particular, it was famous for the creatives and even actors on the show occasionally posting on the forum, which culminated in members of the community organizing a yearly party in Los Angeles where posters would fly out and be joined by said cast and crew. This documentary charts its culture & history via interviewing an array of its members.

As always, I am not here to give the blow-by-blow; instead, what is the narrative this documentary is trying to sell?

My previous documentary write-up was about nerd culture in the 2010’s; newly ascendant, growing confident in its own values and looking to justify that to itself, wealthy and with a developed enough ecosystem for crowdfunding to create professional, polished documentaries of its own heroes. None of that is true for IRL. Filmed on whatever camcorder/potato hybrid proto-Ebay would cough up from its zero-bid listings in a series of hotel rooms and people’s living rooms in 2003-2004 after the forum had died, this is the era of nerd culture at its most conflicted and insecure; mocked by the mainstream and unsure if it should be proud of that fact or deeply ashamed of it. And this documentary wears this conflict right on its sleeve; one of its opening lines is a confident assurance to the audience of “don’t worry, we aren’t like those nerds”:

Throwing Trekkies under the bus in the process, cold! Particularly given how it proceeds to barely even blink before pivoting to explaining their hobby of running “WITTs”, multi-day-long collaborative roleplays:

You are exactly those Trekkies my dudes; you weren’t just at the devil’s sacrament you were hosting it! "WITT" stands for Whedon Improvisational Theatre Troupe, you can't recover from that guys.

(I love how “dozens” is large by the way - it was for the internet in 2001, right?)

Anyway, beyond documenting the forum and its members, the conclusion this documentary wants you to hold is that the Bronze was a special place of real community, and it is a community of “normal” people, who made real relationships. And in particular, that internet relationships can be just as real as those found in meatspace, that these relationships transcended the digital and entered the physical; and that this is what fandom can be about.

I want to start with the ways that narrative was correct within the context of the time. I can actually explain that Klingon comment! I have one extant interview with the director of the film, Stephanie Tuszynski, and she put her motivation as follows: 

FFN: What made you decide to study Buffy fandom, particularly the Bronze, for your documentary? ST: The idea to do a documentary film about the Bronze actually came to me very early on, because "Trekkies" came out in the late 1990s so I was already a Bronzer at that point. And when I saw it I started throwing things at my television. I was incensed. That wasn't a documentary about the fandom experience, it was "hey let's find the most extreme examples possible and have a freak show!" It infuriated me […] It reinforced every awful stereotype about media fans while purporting to be objective.

It wasn’t a random example - the 1997 documentary Trekkies set the “standard” view of fandom as extremist oddballs, and Tuszynski specifically wanted to counter that. It was the early 2000’s after all, nerd stereotypes were strong, you had to fight them explicitly! In a society where there is strong background hostility to one’s identity, you will attempt to normalize it using known reference points; and certainly the people on these forums were more “normal” than the stereotypes admitted to because that entire binary framework is a dead end.

More importantly to the narrative is the online aspect, “making friends on the internet”. Another find I have is a blog post from a professor who used the film in a class; and in the film’s narrative of “people with no one ‘irl’ to share their hobby with finding friends online” triggered a debate around if the online relationships are “taking away” from in-person relationships that are presumed to be more valuable. A debate that still rages to this day over social media! But the contours were different back then, the internet was presumed to be niche, ancillary, and relationships made online in a completely separate box from “in person” friendships. The documentary goes to great lengths to explain that they were a real community because that idea is so contested. Ironically, they do this by emphasizing that they met up in person, hung out, attended each other's weddings, etc; as if only by meeting up in person could the relationships be validated as real? But you can’t truly fault them for meeting their implicit critics halfway in making their case.

So what can I fault them for?

*****

I was perpetually amused when watching the doc that they included two married couples in the filming, and for both one of the spouses would talk and the other would sit there, in silence, the entire time. Maybe they were members of the community and just not talkers; maybe their lines got cut in post. But what I kept thinking was that they were there selling normality to me; married couples are just inherently less oddball, less threatening, and in the era where “nerd = virgin” just less nerdy. Like with the Klingon line, there is an intentionality to the “just like you” vibe.

Which, as mentioned with the extensive forum roleplay, inevitably breaks down once the reality of forum activity is dug into. And I buried the lede here - you may have seen the title of the “longest” roleplay was “RTBS Soul Restoration Project”, but what does that mean? RTBS was a forum member’s name, and well:

Oh yeah, we are saving our friend from “a fate worse than death: worshiping Britney Spears” - welcome to 2001 baby! This is peak “nerd wars” stuff, the normies hate our shit so we hate the normie shit right back. Which is exactly how nerd culture was in the 2000's. I am not at all throwing shade at their tongue-in-cheek roleplay, resplendent in the ludicrously purple prose and asterisk-laden action descriptions as required by the early internet; but it sits in clear tension with some of the other messaging in this film. Leave Britney alone guys!

The documentary highlights a number of common practices from the forum - people doing daily greetings, the way that it being one unending massive chain of posts with no threading or topics meant people would mass-tag individual people to respond to and form “circles” that way - but there are things it leaves out. I did what any normal person would do after watching this documentary and read through over a year of archived posts on The Bronze to understand the community - but man did I not have to, as on literally the first page of my archived link I see:

And through God’s good grace that second link is archived:

Yes there are pictures at the link, and yes later on it does compare Buffy’s cleavage to the Mona Lisa. (The Giles link is not quite functional, but I was able to find it; sadly it is not nearly as thirsty)

I also found these “onboarding” sites for new members. Remember, this forum was the official forum, which meant there were no community mods or ability to “pin rules”, it was pure anarchy - so advice filled the gaps. And one of the bigger ones, in its *sighs and rubs forehead* blue font on black background, warns against “hottie posting” aka talking about how hot say Angel is, not because it isn’t allowed, but because it is like “pointing out the sky is blue” - it is so common that it will just get washed out.

It might seem like a similarly sky-is-blue comment to note that this forum was heavily about shipping, hotness discussion, fanfiction, and the like. Of course it was, right? These website “senior members” were trying to minimize it, police it, but it broke through constantly and also simmered under the surface through discussions and RP’s from my own review of the forum. The documentary, however, spends incredibly little time on it. Brief mentions of Angel fics, and no mention (iirc) of discussion of how hot the women were at all. Because once again those details really don’t fit into the narrative it is trying to sell.

At one point in the documentary someone notes how diverse all the friends they met in this community were? Which I broke out laughing over. In one way it is not wrong, I get it! Midwest college kids meeting people from all over the country, ages 40 to 14, talking about something no one in their podunk town understands. But on the other hand, you could not come up with a more standardized slice of humanity if you tried to rig it. Everyone here is an American+ with computer access in 1998, it is a grab bag of sys admins, nerd creatives, and comp sci majors.  I did a random sampling googling the people interviewed to see what they are up to now, and literally a third of them are librarians. Even their fashion is like God played a prank on this director; not even a 2000’s anime con panel lineup is this stereotypical in the combinations of alt-goth lit girls and nerdcore computer bros.

The evolutionary process of joining this forum -> liking it enough to go to the live meetups -> liking that enough to participate in a documentary about it was a pressure cooker spitting out only a certain kind of person. Which is truly fascinating to see on display! This is the internet-that-was; and it bleeds through the grainy film despite the director’s efforts at times to the contrary.

Though even then it was only a very specific slice of the internet-that-was, because this is a very special breed of Online; namely, the professionals.

*****

Something that is decidedly not typical of The Bronze as an online community is that, as mentioned before, Joss Whedon and other creatives posted on the web forum, answering questions and also just playing around, and how that led to in-person parties where both forum members and cast/crew attended - the Posting Board Parties, or PBP’s. At these they hosted fundraisers, talked about the show, and in the documentary one girl reverently describes with incredible Repressed Lesbian Energy her experience of seeing Eliza Dushku dancing next to her. The PBP had a panel of party organizers, admission systems to keep out the “undesirables”, budgets, the works.

All this the documentary shares openly; it is a peak moment where the digital becomes real in a transcendent way, opening doors analog reality never could. It is also a cold-sweat-waking nightmare story from the lens of a modern Hollywood social media manager; one person in the documentary tells the tale of how one time lead actress Allyson Hannigan posted her phone number on the forum asking people to leave her cute voicemails. The person in question immediately called, and got Hannigan herself instead of the voicemail, so they chatted for a bit (The guy telling this tale is obviously lovestruck; his wife is sitting in typical silence next to him). Today this would be a code-red, nuke your phone situation; but the circle was so cloistered, and the rules so unwritten, that no one cared in these early years.

What they share less openly is all the drama that went into this event. They wax nostalgic about how the parties brought them together, but what isn’t mentioned is the church schism it caused, as the moment cast from the show started attending the party it got mobbed by outsiders. By its ~3rd year there were approximately 400 guests but only ~50 or so were from the forum. They had a huge fight about it, the head of PFP planning committee - “Morbius the Vampire”, who was later jailed for financial fraud btw - told the dissenting faction why don’t they just throw their own party if they hate his so much, and so they did. There was more fighting about it, and eventually they held a peace summit at an LA joint called Mel’s Diner to merge the two factions together. (My source for this is a book, which I will link later)

Hilarious, for sure, but while so much of what we have discussed is “proto online nerd communities”, this part is most decidedly not. The typical web forum absolutely cannot replicate the experience of roleplay-posting your way into shaking hands with Joss Whedon and having a shitfight over party budgets in LA. But most posters never got to attend these parties, of course, this didn’t mean much to them. While for those who did, you cannot help but imagine that this played a gigantic role in making them all become a “real” community. And care enough about that circle to, well after the forum was gone, schlep to a hotel room to be interviewed for a documentary about it. Participating in a documentary is always, in some way, an exercise in selection bias; but here the pruning is turned up to 11 - this is a very elite slice of a very unique fandom experience.

*****

I have one deeper level to go on this thread, somewhat buried in time today, that further shaped the participants here: “Whedon Studies”. The 2000’s was not the birth of media studies as an academic discipline; but it was the birth of fandom-driven media studies, and Buffy was nearly unassailably the leading light of that movement. Academics hosted entire conferences (and inexplicably still do!) on Buffy, Firefly, etc; almost all from the lens of gender & media, as Buffy’s brand was deeply entrenched in that deconstructive milieu. This movement would die a fiery death during the 2010’s shift in media & gender politics, and when the controversies around the toxic working conditions on the set of Buffy/Angel led to Joss Whedon’s near-total expulsion from creative pursuits. The whole edifice is, in a deep way, “cringe” for many of its former participants today.

But what is relevant for our story is that director Stephanie Tuszynski was a full member of that movement; while composing this film she was, for example, giving talks like these at conferences devoted to the Buffyverse:

God that is a lot of talks. This film itself was her thesis project for her I believe philosophy masters, and in our scant interviews lists other fandom-academic film projects she wanted to tackle (which as best I can tell fizzled out later). And the interview subjects were often participants in the same space as well! Academic-types doing media studies with a Buffy bent, or things like culture writers for new media outlets. One of them, writer Allyson Beatrice, even published a book about the Buffy fandom that was in regular bookstores:

To quote the blurb:

A hilarious collection of true stories from Allyson's days as one of the Internet's leading cult TV fan gurus, her mind-boggling escapades include meetings with network executives in dark steakhouses to try to save doomed TV shows and one hastily arranged wedding for two committed Buffy fans. 

I highlight this not to say that academics cannot make documentaries, they certainly can. What I am saying is that if you point your camera at career Buffyverse writer Allyson Beatrice, and label her as a typical forum member giving you the hometown everygirl perspective on the community, you are, however unintentionally, lying to your audience. In its quest to give you the just-like-me Buffy fandom experience, what this documentary elides is that it is often giving you the lens of people who are fans of Buffy as a career. Those people are going to be bringing very different experiences to the table - of course they are concerned with sanitization, with nerd culture debates, the works. That is their bread-and-butter trade.

This dynamic bled into the forum’s day-to-day; there was a very clear hierarchy of “veterans” and “top” posters, who organize the live parties, have deep roots in the community, and even the ear of the show team...and everyone else. Particularly because as mentioned there were no rules on the forum, but since that can’t actually function in practice they self-generated community rules and thus their own leadership class. Cliques and groups were common and named, and veteran posters even had formally designated groupies:

I had also by this time become a groupie. I so enjoyed one particular Bronzer’s posts that she allowed me to become the seventh of her groupies. It was through groupie-dom that I got my first taste of firsthand WITT: several Bronzers, on the occasion of the birthday of she-to-whom-we-group, each took turns grabbing the microphone and praising the day that she was born. In retrospect, I’m not sure why we did this. But it was fun, and very funny, too, as we each took turns waxing melodramatic off the top of our heads. And from work, no less.

The source for this by the way is a 400 page ethnography of The Bronze posted by academic who did *cough* “field research” there; I am sure their membership in the “Bronzers Adoring Darla” fangroup was purely for comprehensive data collection purposes.

And to emphasize, I am not saying this is problematic or anything - the groupie things were all in good fun, best I can tell. I simply aim to showcase how the Bronze wasn’t just a baby version of online fandom forum dynamics; but also a baby version of e-celebrity mechanics. Something the documentary does not even attempt to touch on because that would be something normal people would not understand.

*****

All of the above may have come off like one big roast, and it is a little bit, but as I have mentioned before every documentary is propaganda. It is just impossible to have a tight film building a narrative out of the pieces of letting people speak to the camera without that narrative being but a slice of the truth those people want you to know. The Bronze web forum was a very special place to these highly invested fans, and this documentary is not lying to you about that.

But it is also a big part of early internet fandom! The Bronze was famous at the time, and it is right there at the beginning of so many shifts; the first generation of non-technical internet users, a new era of ‘fantasy’ media with the trappings of prestige and social critique, a boom in critique-as-community, and more. I very much want the full picture of that community; who made it up, what did they want from it and what did they get from it, and so on. No film could offer the full picture; this film’s homebrew rawness gives a valuable piece of it, and I enjoyed it for that. I just aimed here to draw out not only what the broader, more accurate dynamics of The Bronze were, but also the cultural question of why the film focuses on what it does, hides what it refuses to show, and what that says about 2000’s internet & nerd culture. Hopefully I succeeded in that.

And also to have fun looking at some incredibly dated Buffy fandom bullshit. May it have been fun for you too! {hugs you and waves goodbye}

[criticalcrusherbot]

From Adoration to Outrage: How Helluva Boss Became a Target of Its Own Fandom

By Crushbot 🤖 and Human Assistant 💁🏽‍♀️

🤖💁🏽‍♀️: The Helluva Boss critic community has evolved into something that feels less like media analysis and more like a bloodsport. What began as fair critiques of this popular indie animation has morphed into relentless scrutiny of Vivienne Medrano (Vivziepop) and her work. This phenomenon reflects broader, troubling trends in online discourse, particularly in spaces where shared values often lead to intense self-policing and overblown backlash. At the heart of this issue are several key factors: moral purity and rigid dichotomies, which reduce media to simplistic notions of “good” or “bad”; the death of nuance in online discussions, where social media rewards outrage over thoughtful critique; the “customer service” fandom mentality, which treats creators as if they are obligated to cater to fan demands; hyper-criticism within shared-values communities, where progressive works face heightened scrutiny from the very audiences they attract; and subverted genre expectations & slow episode releases, which amplify frustration and impatience. Together, these dynamics have turned Helluva Boss into a case study of how modern fandom discourse can become hostile, reactionary, and deeply unforgiving.

Moral Purity & Rigid Dichotomies

Social media thrives on moral absolutism, where individuals are either “good” or “bad,” with little room for nuance. This black-and-white thinking creates a culture where creators aren’t just critiqued—they’re put on trial. The idea that an artist can make mistakes, learn, and grow is often overlooked. Instead, once someone is deemed “problematic,” they are expected to either be fully condemned or endlessly redeemed through public self-flagellation. In Helluva Boss’s case, critiques of writing choices have spiraled into personal attacks on Vivziepop herself. People discuss her as if she’s some nefarious figure rather than an animator making a raunchy, character-driven show about demon furries.

This moral absolutism is often reinforced by the misapplication of social justice theory. Concepts originally designed to analyze power structures—such as privilege, systemic oppression, and heteronormativity—are increasingly being weaponized against individuals, including fictional characters and their creators. These frameworks are valuable for understanding broad societal trends, but they were never meant to be applied with such rigidity on a case-by-case basis. Yet, online discourse frequently reduces storytelling choices to moral failings rather than artistic decisions. For example, some critics argue that Helluva Boss is misogynistic simply because its narrative centers male characters more often than female ones, disregarding how the show’s themes, genre conventions, and character arcs inform those choices. While this critique can certainly be valid in a good-faith analysis, this tendency to view every aspect of a work through a hyper-politicized lens turns artistic expression into a moral battleground rather than an avenue for storytelling.

As a result, fandom spaces often function less like communities of discussion and more like ideological battlegrounds where perceived “injustices” must be corrected. If a creator’s work doesn’t align with a rigid, ever-evolving moral standard, they are framed as actively harmful rather than imperfect or evolving. This fuels a social justice “witch hunt” mentality, where bad-faith readings of a work snowball into coordinated outrage campaigns. In Vivziepop’s case, minor creative decisions—such as Stolas’ depiction as a flawed father or the focus on male leads—have been blown out of proportion, treated not as narrative choices but as damning evidence of her supposed biases. This reactionary approach to critique makes it nearly impossible for creators to engage in meaningful dialogue about their work. Any attempt at clarification is dismissed as defensiveness, and any change made in response to criticism is seen as either too little, too late, or as pandering. Instead of fostering critical thinking and discussion, this culture creates a hostile environment where art is judged primarily on whether it aligns with a narrow, idealized vision of representation and morality.

The Death of Nuance in Online Discussions

Social media platforms reward controversy and outrage over thoughtful discourse. Complex, well-reasoned analysis loses out to the most provocative hot takes. Instead of acknowledging that Helluva Boss is doing something unique—even if it’s not to everyone’s taste—critics are incentivized to portray it as fundamentally broken or misguided. The lack of nuance in these discussions makes it difficult to separate legitimate critiques from reactionary pile-ons.

A prime example of this phenomenon is the reaction to Stolas’ character arc, particularly regarding his affair with Blitz and his flaws as a parent. Rather than engaging with the complexity of his situation—being trapped in a loveless, politically motivated marriage while yearning for real connection—many critics reduced the discussion to a binary: Stolas is a “cheater,” and therefore irredeemable. This framing disregards the fact that his relationship with Stella was clearly toxic and emotionally abusive, with the show heavily implying that their marriage was never truly consensual. However, instead of critiquing how the show handles these themes, some critics fixated solely on the affair itself, often stripping the context entirely to frame Stolas as a selfish homewrecker rather than a tragic, morally complicated character.

Additionally, Stolas’ parenting has faced heavy criticism, particularly after Sinsmas, with some critics focusing on his flaws while overlooking his efforts to improve. Instead of recognizing his character arc as one of growth, detractors label him a negligent father, exaggerating or misrepresenting his actions. For example, despite Seeing Stars showing Stolas dropping everything to help find Octavia when she ran away, some still claim he “only cares about Blitz” or that his parenting is beyond repair. This narrow perspective overlooks his complexity and growth, including his gentle reprimand to Octavia in Seeing Stars—“You know I haven’t taught you spells like this yet”—which suggests he has been actively teaching her magic. This is significant, as Stolas himself was expected to learn from the Grimoire at a much younger age without guidance. His willingness to provide Octavia with the support and education he lacked underscores his commitment to her growth and safety.

This kind of reactionary discourse, driven by the need for easy moral judgments, ignores the depth of Stolas’ characterization and the themes the show explores. By flattening nuanced storytelling into simplistic narratives of “good” and “bad,” the conversation shifts away from meaningful critique and into outrage-driven dogpiling.

The “Customer Service” Fandom Mentality

A growing expectation in fandom spaces is that creators must treat their work like a customer-driven business, with fans acting as stakeholders who expect direct influence over creative decisions. If a creator doesn’t adjust their work accordingly, they’re often labeled as dismissive, arrogant, or unwilling to “listen to the fans.” This mindset overlooks the fact that Helluva Boss is an independent project driven by its creator’s vision, not a product designed by committee. While Vivziepop does monetize her work, her business model is fundamentally different from a service industry; she is selling a creative vision, not a customizable product designed to meet every consumer demand. Fans are free to critique the show, but expecting it to be tailor-made to suit every viewer’s preferences is unrealistic.

This tension between Medrano and segments of her fanbase has escalated as fans expect her work to adapt to their demands. A notable example is the ongoing discourse surrounding character development, particularly the criticism that Millie lacks focus. Medrano has responded by reaffirming that although the show’s narrative centers on male characters (a sentiment certainly worthy of some critique), she has assured fans Millie will receive more attention in future episodes. Some perceived this response as dismissive, fueling accusations that she is resistant to fan input. This friction highlights the broader clash between audience expectations for creative responsiveness and Medrano’s commitment to her artistic vision.

Medrano’s active social media presence has only complicated this dynamic. Her direct engagement with criticism—especially hostile or bad-faith comments—has sometimes intensified rather than diffused tensions. Critics argue that she focuses on extreme negativity while overlooking more balanced critiques, leading some fans to feel ignored or invalidated. This raises important questions about whether creators should be obligated to engage with every critique or maintain their autonomy in shaping their work.

The independent nature of Helluva Boss adds another layer to this tension. Unlike corporate-backed franchises that are shaped by committees, the series reflects Medrano’s unique creative vision. Fans who expect a collaborative, customer-driven approach may struggle to reconcile this with an independent creator’s priorities. While critique is essential to media discourse, demanding that Medrano overhaul her work to satisfy fan expectations undermines the individuality of her art. This ongoing disconnect between fan entitlement and creator autonomy underscores the challenges independent artists face in an era of heightened audience engagement.

Hyper-Criticism Within Shared-Values Communities

Ironically, Helluva Boss—a show that is unapologetically queer and left-leaning—has attracted some of its harshest criticism from within the very communities that initially embraced it. This phenomenon isn’t just about disagreement over specific plot points or character arcs; it reflects a broader issue within progressive fandoms. When a creator’s work resonates with a progressive audience, the bar for criticism often becomes unreasonably high, with even minor missteps receiving disproportionate backlash. The irony lies in how these same audiences, who initially celebrated the show’s embrace of queer themes and progressive ideals, become some of its harshest critics when their expectations are not fully met.

In these cases, criticism morphs from a means of constructive feedback to a weapon of moral purity, where a creator’s every move is scrutinized and judged against an ever-shifting standard of political and social correctness. A single perceived misstep or failure to address every concern can lead to a swift and often hostile backlash, transforming former supporters into some of the loudest detractors. The result is an atmosphere where creators are forced to constantly navigate the precarious balance between artistic expression and audience expectation, often to the point where the space for nuanced or exploratory storytelling is suffocated by demands for ideological perfection.

This pattern isn’t unique to Helluva Boss. It is a recurring theme across various platforms, where left-leaning creators, once celebrated for their boldness or inclusivity, are quickly vilified when their work doesn’t meet the impossible standards set by their audience. This dynamic reflects a larger trend within identity politics, where creators are not only expected to push boundaries but to do so in ways that align with every nuance of a particular moral or political stance. When these creators inevitably fail to meet all of these expectations, they often find themselves treated as villains or sellouts, punished for not adhering to the impossible purity tests that the very communities that once supported them have set in place.

Subverted Genre Expectations & Slow Releases

Helluva Boss defies many traditional storytelling and production conventions, which has led to a particularly visceral response from some fans and critics. Unlike mainstream animated series that follow a structured episodic formula or a tightly woven overarching plot, Helluva Boss shifts fluidly between character-driven vignettes, long-term arcs, and experimental genre shifts. While this approach allows for rich, introspective storytelling, it also disrupts conventional audience expectations, making it harder for viewers to predict where the narrative is headed.

The show further challenges norms by prioritizing character development over a clear-cut hero-villain dynamic. Its morally gray protagonists don’t always follow traditional redemption arcs or undergo neatly resolved conflicts, and tonal shifts between comedic absurdity and emotional depth can be jarring for those expecting more consistency. This unpredictability, while artistically ambitious, has alienated viewers who anticipated a more conventional storytelling structure.

Compounding this frustration is Helluva Boss’s sporadic release schedule. With long gaps between episodes, fan theories and expectations often take on a life of their own, building up rigid assumptions about where the story should go. When new episodes defy these expectations, the resulting disconnect can lead to reactionary criticism that prioritizes disappointment over analysis. Rather than engaging with what the show is actually doing, some critics fixate on what they believe it should be doing, leading to discourse that is often more performative than reflective.

Final Thoughts: What Now?

Ultimately, Helluva Boss is not a flawless work, but its imperfections make it all the more valuable for analysis. Engaging critically with media—whether through appreciation, critique, or a combination of both—allows for deeper discussion and understanding. Criticism itself isn’t the problem; constructive feedback is essential for artistic growth. The issue lies in how criticism has become increasingly performative, moralistic, and detached from meaningful discussion.

The way Helluva Boss is dissected online says far more about internet culture than about the show itself. The most vocal bad-faith critics engage in a cycle of outrage, framing the same critiques as evidence of fundamental artistic or ethical failure. At this point, we do not expect productive discourse from such spaces. However, since we’ve found ourselves deep in the discourse, it’s worth periodically asking ourselves: are we engaging in meaningful dialogue and contributing thoughtful insights, or are we simply fueling the outrage machine? We’ve definitely contributed to the latter in the earlier stages of this blog.

Admittedly, healthier discussions don’t come from public condemnation but from open conversations that recognize both valid criticisms and the artistic intentions behind works like Helluva Boss. That’s the approach we try to take—analyzing with nuance rather than reducing every perceived flaw to a moral failing. As for the critics, we document and anonymize the most egregious takes as case studies in reactionary discourse, with the goal that this criticism is discussed and debunked without resorting to online harassment, or the fabled ‘Flamewars’ of olde.

But should a detractor choose to engage with us directly? Then, as the saying goes, it’s on like Donkey Kong.

[403tarot]

hello, i know u said cute questions but i wanted to know how does jungkook really view the pop star lifestyle and how will he fit it around his future spouses lifestyle?

thanks very much in advance!

🎡 JUNGKOOK'S VIEWS ON THE POPSTAR LIFESTYLE & HIS FUTURE SPOUSE IN THIS

starting this reading with the way jungkook sees life as a popstar in general, i'd say he's truly passionate about being an artist. the euphoria of being on stage, taking part in creating new things, setting trends, and having an audience to please is something intoxicating for him. it's what he naturally gravitates toward... it motivates him and is the center of his focus.

i know that many artists with a large fanbase feel a lot of pressure to be perfect in everything they do, and i don’t rule out the possibility that jungkook has moments like that too. but what i get from this is that jungkook actually feels very free within his artist persona, as if he knows he can present the best aspects of his personality and always work on showing his positive growth.

i feel like jungkook is currently happy with the way the general public perceives him as an artist. he deeply feels the support of his fans and genuinely believes he has a commitment to honor with them.

i do think there were moments in the past when he felt trapped or restricted by the idol life, missing out on things he wished he could have done. but today, it feels like he’s broken free from those restraints, and it’s no longer the case. now that he's busy fulfilling his duties as a citizen in korea, i can see that he misses expressing this artistic side of himself and is looking forward to dedicating himself to it again.

regarding how he's going to balance this lifestyle with the lifestyle of his future spouse, well, first of all, i see that jungkook isn't really thinking about being with the person he's going to marry anytime soon, so he doesn't see it as something to worry about right now.

jungkook might believe that he'll only be with someone he wants to marry much later in life because the cards i got give me the impression that, in his mind, by the time he's with that person, he'll be much further along in his career. he sees himself being able to slow down his activities as an artist to focus more on the person he's marrying and on building a family in calmer waters, away from the public waves.

i honestly don’t think it’s going to take as long as he thinks for him to meet this person, so i asked how he’s actually going to handle balancing his pop star life with his relationship and his future spouse’s life. the answer is that he already has a mature understanding of what he wants as an artist and how to separate that from his personal life. he won’t act impulsively (like dropping everything) just because he falls in love. i see that jungkook will be very careful and private about this future romantic relationship, making sure to approach it with as much clarity as possible so that he can maintain both his career and his role as a committed partner, working to make the relationship solid and fulfilling.

he'll likely want to continue his career while developing this relationship, and interestingly, being with someone won't be something that stresses him out (like worrying about fans finding out or anything like that). he’ll probably stay private, but if the time comes when he feels he should make the relationship public, he will and he’ll have the courage to stand by it.

to me, this reading feels like it speaks about a slightly older jungkook, someone who has become more seasoned in the industry compared to the persona he's been presenting more clearly since the start of his solo career.

[atricksterproblem]

We're All Thinking It

Yeah, I don't fucking know. Here's a gross one-shot about it. XD

If it's possible for a minific to also be a shitpost, this is it.

V x Reader. Reader can be any gender.

[side note on worldbuilding: what V is talking about when he mentions his House is that his demonic sire was part of House Lilith. Her House is devoted to the sin of lust.]

You always waited up for V back at your hotel room post-ritual. It was a tradition of yours to monitor your socials to see the early reports from the audience while you waited for him to return.

Tonight's posts were difficult to parse.

The commentary was largely composed of people declaring themselves dead after...whatever it was that had happened.

There were a few things involving hair.

And now the door opened and here was V, looking smug. Indeed, suspiciously smug. Like not only did the cat get the canary but it had the cream for dessert smug.

"V. Sweetheart. What did you do?"

He grinned. The grin was even more worrisome than the smugness.

"Whatever do you mean?"

Oh. Oh, it was going to be one of those conversations. Satan help us all.

You squinted at him suspiciously. "Just tell me, will you? my feeds are blowing up and nobody's coherent enough to say why. What. Did. You. Do?"

"Nothing much." He was still wearing most of his stage outfit, silky shirt, absurdly tight pants.

He stretched luxuriously.

There was a zone of visibility that suggested what the hell everyone was on about.

You'd told him those pants were way, way too low-rise for an active stage show. This had been discussed. They were not offset by the shirt he insisted on wearing. It wasn't by any means long enough to meet the need.

Turns out just raising his arms over his head was enough to create a precarious dip in the waistline. To the point that, not only were you looking at a treasure trail, you were looking at the beginnings of what it led to.

"Did you seriously do that on stage? Is that what I'm seeing?"

He snickered. "Might've."

"Oh my god. Are you fucking serious right now? I told you what would happen if you insisted on wearing that, didn't I?"

"Calm yourself, angel. They loved it."

"Hmpf. That's no surprise. Somehow, though, I think you did too."

"Maybe." He flopped onto the bed. "I'll never tell. Anyway, I didn't do it on purpose. It was a fortuitous accident."

"Yeah, you don't have to tell me. I know what a show-off you are."

"You love it." Now he was actually smirking, the bastard.

"Satan only knows why. You, sir, are ten pounds of trouble in a five-pound bag. Give me one good reason why I should put up with you."

He'd already unbuttoned his shirt by this time. He was fiddling with the laces of his pants.

"I've got your reason right here---"

"Uh huh. Classy, V. Real classy."

"Come on, angel. No harm done, yes? A few overexcited fans, maybe. I don't mind."

You sighed. "I think you actively encourage it." You ran your fingers idly down his stomach, following the light trace of silky hair downwards. He purred at your touch.

"You know what I am, angel. I am what my House has made me."

"And no doubt Her Dark Majesty is very proud of Her handiwork."

"I like to think so."

"Hm. I don't see how it could be otherwise." By this time he's undone the lacings. Your touch slides downward. The hair there is very soft. Nothing else in the vicinity is, though, now that you're stroking him. This is why you wait for him after every show. He's usually lit up with post-ritual energy, and after teasing his audience for a couple of hours, he's fairly desperate to be touched himself.

He arches up into your touch, silently begging for more.

Just before you slide his cock into your mouth, the thought drifts through your mind that if a glimpse of pubic thatch could melt the brains of so many fans, only imagine what they'd think if they could see him now.

Any incipient giggles are cut short. You have better things to be doing with your lips and tongue just now. The soft, yearning sounds V's started making would suggest that he'd agree.

[hollycrowned]

cipherhunt log: some sunny day

It’s been a long time, hasn’t it?

On July 27th, I went to the Hillsboro Barnes & Noble signing event for The Book of Bill. I’ve decided to come back to this account at least for a moment to write a little bit about what it was like. At the end of this post, there’s some Cipher Hunt related news, so be sure to read all the way through.

The Q&A was a lot of fun. There was excitement in the air even before the event began, with eager fans wearing Dipper hats and flannel shirts hurrying to their seats. A few fans were in cosplay, too, which was heartwarming to see. While there were several kids with their parents in the audience, most of the fans there were younger adults—which really made it hit me that the series first aired over ten years ago.

By total accident I ended up next to the door Alex stepped through and caught his entrance:

Alex has the type of charm that can get anyone laughing, and his own laughter is contagious. I didn’t record much of the talk, wanting to simply experience it, but here’s a short video I took of him talking about how The Book of Bill came about:

Over the half hour, Alex talked about the the book itself, about the show, his characters, and about creating a television series. Fans, when the mic was turned over to the audience, said what they love most about the series and asked about intentionality and the possibility of crossovers (Alex’s immediate “yes” was a hit). Alex expressed after one question that while he never could have guessed that people would like Gravity Falls so much, he’s grateful for the enduring love fans have for the show.

The event coordinator, who schooled a few questions to Alex before mic was given over to the audience, asked what I think we all want to know: “What are you working on right now?” Alex gave the answer he’s given in the past: that as is typical in Hollywood, he can’t talk about the projects he’s currently involved in.

If you were around when I was active here, you might remember that by the time I left, my focus had become to follow Alex through his career. To recap: after Gravity Falls ended, Deadline reported in 2018 that Alex had signed a multi-year exclusive contract with Netflix. Not long after, Netflix announced the opening of its own animation studio, alongside a reel showcasing some of the artists they’d recruited. The reel highlighted that this group of artists included industry legends, young talent, and diverse voices; each artist in the reel talked how excited they were for what the studio itself meant the future of animation, and for the opportunity to work there. Alex was in this reel, too.

Although I’ve moved on to other fandoms and my own creative work, I’ve kept up with movements in the animation industry. If you have, too, you may know about the massive cuts and cancellations Netflix has made in the last several years, especially to its animation department. Alex has produced and consulted on a few projects at Netflix since his contract began—chief among them Inside Job, which was initially renewed by for a second season before Netflix reversed their decision six months later and cancelled the series altogether. Shion Takeuchi, the creator of Inside Job and previous writer on Gravity Falls, confirmed the cancellation, saying “I’m heartbroken.” Alex, in a reply, expressed the same, adding, “Grateful to have had the chance to help on one of my best friends shows, for however briefly”.

In the six years since Alex signed his contract with Netflix, there have been hints that he’s been working on a series with his name on the masthead. In late 2020, he tweeted about staffing his new show:

But if his project was among the cuts Netflix made a few years after that, he gave no sign of it in his answer.

It’s jarring, and saddening, to watch that reel from 2018 with the knowledge of what has happened since. Outside of Netflix, things seem just as dire, with the dragging of AI into animation giants like Disney and Dreamworks by their corporate executives—notably, as The Animation Guilds’ contract approached its expiration date. In 2023, Vulture published an article which included testimonies from four artists who worked on Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse about the unsustainable working conditions at Sony while the film was in production. Over the last few years, Warner Bros has shelved two animated films and one hybrid for multimillion-dollar tax write-offs. In addition, their subsidiary HBO Max purged multiple animated series from its catalogue, denying the artists who worked on them access to their own works—and for some of them, residuals as well.

The final question at the Q&A was from a fan who said that they’re currently in school for animation. They asked Alex if he had any advice for new animators trying to break into the industry. Immediately, my mind went to all of that news I linked in the paragraphs above. I listened intently…

Alex’s response did not have hopelessness in it. He did talk, foremost and with humor, about how risky it is to pursue art as a career, especially at this moment—laughed, as he ended a sentence with, “Don’t go into the arts.” But he moved on from that, and gave an even more honest reply: hone your skills, put your work out there, and don’t give up. Be persistent, share what you make, make what you love. Make sure it’s easy for people to contact you, explore feelings through your work even when it’s uncomfortable, and show your work to others, even though it’s scary. Alex also remarked on creating itself being hard work, from the raw process to putting your art out there to taking criticism to learning from what didn’t work and applying it to your drafts and future projects. Hard work, challenging in more ways than one, on top of an unforgiving cultural moment, yes—but keep going. Keep creating.

Keep making art.

Then the Q&A ended, and the signing began. I found myself at the end of the line, but I didn’t mind; neither did anyone else waiting with me. In the moments when I wasn’t chatting with other fans, I thought about that last question and Alex’s response.

There is little that is easy about being an artist these days. I have come to know this by having friends who are artists, by following the careers and accounts of other artists, by reading the news, and—since becoming an artist myself—finding out firsthand. But I have come to know, just as well, that the best remedy for these ills is community. Whether you create art as a hobby or you have a career in the arts, whether your medium is collaborative or solitary in nature: in the face of intolerable working conditions, cutthroat corporations and corner-cutting clients, the advantages they take, the instability and uncertainty, and what all artists can relate to: the challenges of the creative process itself—it’s the support of your fellow artists that helps you survive. It helps art survive. A community that creates alongside you can give trusted critique, celebrate with you, stand up for you, introduce you to other artists you can learn from, and give what is necessary for so many of us to create at all: encouragement. A voice that says, keep creating. This gives to the world what is necessary for us all: more art.

If tech companies develop their AI by stealing from artists, if the c-suites who own the studios see artists as disposable, with the way freelancing can throw water on creative fire, if popular opinion increasingly trends toward art only having as much value as money it makes, then we must support each other. Helpful, practical advice given by a successful artist on how to succeed in the arts in this particular moment is a gem to anyone who is reaching for that goal. But invaluable and eternal is example; not just of success, but of how to be good to your fellow artists—and in turn, to yourself.

And I just think that’s how an artist ought to be.

As the line moved, and I got close enough to see the signing table across the room, I watched Alex greet the fans ahead of me. I found that he was as sweet to people as I always have heard he is, as I remember from watching the Periscopes he appeared in during Cipher Hunt: generous with his time, genuine, and good-natured. One fan skipped away from the table with their book, and a big smile on their face.

And then it was my turn.

When you meet him, he looks you in the eye. I always forget, until I shake someone else’s hand, how small my own hands are. I told him my name is Holly. He asked, “Spelled how it sounds?” I spelled it for him, reflexively, before I could fully process the question and simply say yes. I said lightheartedly that he must be extra happy to see us, being that we were at the end of the line—it was over three hours after the event had begun—and he said, “I’m sorry you all had to wait for this long.” While he was signing my copy, I asked if he was enjoying Portland—though what I really meant to ask was if he was happy to be back in the PNW, in the summertime. He said yes, he loves it here.

It all happened so fast, with me completely forgetting that I’d passed my phone to a kind father of some fans waiting near me in line, and I almost walked away without getting a picture with him. When you meet a celebrity crush from your younger years, it has you reckon with how the part of you who crushed back then has walked with you through time—in what ways who you were back then is still a part of who you are now, and who you want to be. And, of course, it gets your heart beating a little faster, too.

There was much more I wanted to ask him (this has never stopped being the case), but there were other fans waiting for their turn, and he had given his time to just shy of 150 people already. So I smiled at him, and said thank you, and moved along.

I am, and always will be, excited to see anything Alex makes. Hearing him talk about his art, and artistry, and being an artist, was beyond wonderful; not only young Holly’s wish come true, but inspiring for Holly, today—as an artist in my own right. In the years since I retired this account, as I’ve read all this news about the industry, I’ve often wondered how Alex has been. I am very happy and grateful I was lucky enough to get a ticket to the signing, and meet him.

And finally…the Cipher Hunt news.

First: the fan waiting in front of me in the signing line (I’m so sorry I didn’t get your name, but if you’re reading this, I hope you had a safe and smooth flight back home!) said she had been to Confusion Hill recently, and that Bill and the treasure box are still there. I haven’t been to Confusion Hill since I last went in 2017–before COVID—but I think about Bill and the treasure box all the time. It made me so happy to hear that fans are still visiting and exchanging treasures. I hope I get to go again, someday soon.

The second announcement: by chance, I happened to meet a fan who is working on a documentary about Cipher Hunt. I introduced myself and said I’d be more than happy to help out with the project! The creator, Keyan Carlile, can be found on both Twitter and YouTube. I hope you’ll follow along!

I met so many other lovely fans while waiting in line, as well. There is still so much affection and excitement for this series, and it was so nice to step back into the fandom, if only or a moment. If we spoke with each other: it was so nice to meet you! Maybe our paths will cross again, someday. And to everyone, all of the fans who were there, and all of you out there with The Book of Bill:

happy reading!! ∆

[amalthea-13]

Stolas as a Privileged Character

Introduction

This is obviously not my Harvest Moon Essay, but I felt passionately enough on this topic to discuss Stolas so take it or leave it guys lol.

A mutual of mines reposted this post that lowkey had replies that ticked me off. One of the characters in the line up being Apple White from Ever After High who I cannot stand.

The main characters I will be discussing are Stolas, Pink Diamond, Zuko (ATLA), and Apple White because I know the source material of each of these characters.

The reason this essay is being written is purely to show the difference from Stolas to a character like Apple White.

Why is Stolas Successful at getting Sympathy as a Privileged Character and not Apple White?

The reason Stolas is successful at gaining the audience's love because he is not purely just an aristocrat or rich individual, but he is an individual who has been hurt by the same system that benefits him.

While Stolas is privileged as a Goetia, being a repressed gay man still puts him in an awful position. Stolas is also a victim of abuse who has developed much empathy for individuals like Blitz who have been hurt by the same system as him. Clearly in differing ways, but still harmed by the same system that doesn't allow them to simply live.

Stolas is as much of a victim of the system as much as he is a benefactor of that system. Yes it provides wealth and money, but it actively harms his life.

Think of Pink Diamond. Yes, she is a privileged character, but Pink was actively abused into submission by the same system that hurt gems just like her. Both her and Stolas make mistakes that cause accidental harm despite both being empathetic and kind individuals. Those choices had caused damage, but it was never their intent to hurt those they loved.

Zuko, while a spoiled prince, he is also an abused and hurt son who simply wants to gain back his father's favor. We know Zuko was kind like his mother and was taught gentleness and kindness by her, but he became callous and angry due to his father and sister. Zuko had no one in his corner to protect him. However, having a loving Uncle and an environment that was willing to be patient with him fostered a world that Zuko could grow to see the errors of his ways.

All three of these characters make mistakes due to their position and privilege, but they all work in their stories to right their wrongs and do BETTER. They actively choose to change when reality hits them.

Slight tangent here, but to ANYONE who says Stolas "neglected" Octavia, LEARN TO USE A FUCKING DICTIONARY, the literal DEFINITION of neglect is;

": to leave undone or unattended to especially through carelessness"

NEGLECT FUCKING IMPLIES THAT HE NEVER FUCKING CARED FOR OCTAVIA, AND THAT'S NOT WHAT HAPPENED, SO SHUT THE FUCK UP!

Moving on, why is it Apple White is the one in this line up I do not like?

Personally it is because Apple actively chooses to harm those around her for her own benefit and she does it knowingly.

Stolas never realized he was harming Blitz.

Pink didn't know she was hurting life instead of creating it.

Zuko didn't realize the harm he was causing others and himself for a long time.

All of these characters had to face reality at some point. However, when Apple White is slapped with reality, she actively does everything to maintain the status quo and what benefits her. She actively bullies and outright mistreats Raven while also ignoring how her friends will be harmed if they followed their "happy endings". Hence why many fans do not like Apple White. Her motivations actively harm the people around her and cause danger while actively deflecting the blame onto Raven for not signing the damn book.

When writing a privileged character that you want to be likable, you need to give us SOMETHING to empathize with beyond them "not getting their way". It actively sabotages the character from being likable.

Also the way Stolas is written.

The Stolas and Blitz Dichotomy and Why It Works so Well

Stolas and Blitz are purposely written in tandem with one another to give perspectives of Hell from varying views.

Both Stolas and Blitz have very similar backgrounds as I noted in the Stolas and Via v.s. Loona and Blitz essay. Both Stolas and Blitz are the respective disappointments to their groups or families. Both suffer due to that fact and are both immensely abused by not just family, but those around them

This dichotomy of how it doesn't matter who you are you can still be abused is heavily important to their dynamic and why people are rooting for Stolitz. They're so similar despite being WORLDS apart.

Why is it so many don't really root for Apple in the same regard with her friendship to Raven. While I could be- talkin a bit outta my ass since I haven't fully watched Ever After High, but the dichotomy between Raven and Apple isn't as clean cut. It makes it incredibly hard to relate to or understand Apple when she is actively doing things AGAINST Raven's best interests, needs or wants.

Hence why I didn't entirely like her being put in a lineup with Stolas. Stolas made unintentional harm, while Apple made active and knowing harm that she exacerbated purely for her benefit.

Even when reality hit her.

A similar dichotomy is set up for Zuko and Aang in Season 1 Episode 12 of Avatar. They're two characters from differing backgrounds, but both struggled with the fact their lives were altered by things and choices they didn't realize would affect them. Aang ran away from being the Avatar due to the conflict and issues it caused. Everyone wanted Aang to be an Avatar when he was just a boy. His life- fundamentally being altered by adults around him who wanted to send him away. Zuko being permanently scarred and dishonored by his father, being banished he was fundamentally wronged by the people who were supposed to protect him. This dichotomy between Zuko and Aang in this episode allows us to humanize Zuko and empathize with his issues. The same can be said for Stolas via Blitz, allowing us to see him from a similar view we see Blitz.

Conclusion

Not sure if I'll keep this up, but this is more an "info dump" than a solid essay. Hope this all made sense.

[dreamings-free]

The former One Direction pop artist will perform at Lollapalooza India on Mar. 9, 2025

Anurag Tagat Mar 04, 2025

Later this week, U.K. pop singer-songwriter Louis Tomlinson makes his long-anticipated India debut at the third edition of Lollapalooza India in Mumbai on Mar. 9, 2025.

Why exactly can we say with conviction that this has been long-anticipated? According to Chartmetric stats from December 2024 provided by music company Outdustry, India is the “Two Of Us” hitmaker’s second biggest market on YouTube, where the country ranks sixth place in terms of views and second place in terms of comments from India.

On Spotify, India is 5th in monthly listeners, making up 7.2 percent of his total audience.

Tomlinson’s fan army – Louies – are a tight-knit and clearly altruistic bunch in India. In the run up to finally being announced as a headliner at Lollapalooza India, the former One Direction member’s fans flooded his show request page with over 4,000 entries to play in India.

Now that he’s coming down, they’ve even gone on to crowdfund tickets to help fellow fans make it to his set. The crowdfunding campaign also received financial support from international fanbases in London and Argentina, among others.

[ Fans are preparing for Louis Tomlinson’s India debut at Lollapalooza India 2025 in Mumbai. ]

If you thought it was just American punk rock favorites Green Day who helped sell out day 2 Lollapalooza India tickets, think again – Louies have done their bit.

Beyond this, the Louies of India fan group has been actively planning coordinated fan projects such as crowdsourcing synchronized chants, glowing light displays, and a special festival moment inspired by the concert traditions at Tomlinson’s shows everywhere else in the world. Concertgoers are also throwing back with a friendship bracelet exchange and outfit coordination.

Some fans are planning to arrive as early as 2 PM to secure the best spots, while others have even created a PowerPoint presentation (nerdy but always acceptable) requesting songs as part of Tomlinson’s Lollapalooza India set — a gesture that has quickly gained traction within the community.

At the end of January, Tomlinson specifically wrote about his Lollapalooza India show on X. He said, “Hope everyone’s doing alright! Had a good break, looking forward to getting back to it. India is going to be special, it’s somewhere I’ve dreamt of playing for a long time! Excited about the next few months of writing as well. Big year incoming!”

[lol-jackles]

Hello,

It’s nice to see you more active on here at the moment.

I was thinking about how you tend to say that the bi-bros who lean towards Sam are more in line with the GA.

But, I watch lots of reactors watch SPN for the first time, and they often lean towards Dean (I’d say 3/5), and I’ve heard a similar ratio say that they think Jensen is a noticeably better actor than Jared.

So, my questions are, are they letting fan expectations colour their reactions (hellers and Dean girls are very fast to pounce on new reactors), are they already Destiel curious from seeing edits in tumblr (I know of at least one who fits this), or do they acquaint “they make me feel emotional therefore they are the best actor”?

For me personally, on my first watch, Dean killed me with his love for family and Sammy and I empathized more with him usually, at least until Season 4/5 where he started pissing me off regularly. But, when I rewatch, I love episodes like Mystery Spot and Born Under a Bad Sign, or Souless Sam episodes because Jared is just so good when he gets something interesting to do. I find the Dean crying stuff less compelling on rewatches because it’s not as interesting to me (with a few expectations) after the first and second viewing. And acting at mirrors scenes gets old for me in particular very quickly.

In short, I think both are good, with different strengths, but I wonder why so many new viewers that I come across see Jensen as being stronger and Dean as being better. Do the just fail to see past the narrative bias? Or they just like Sean because he’s more fun?

Anyway, I appreciate any thoughts you want to share on this. And I’m also wondering if there is stats anywhere in GA favoring Sam?

First, because Sam girls commit “geek social fallacies” by also liking Dean because they love that Dean revolves around their Sammy. But Dean/Jensen stans don’t return the favor because they hate that Dean revolves around his Sammy so they hate on Sammy even though under their breath they’ve said if Jensen had been playing Sammy all along they wouldn’t change any of the writing.  That’s why there appears to be a Dean bias in the SPN fandom because Sam fans also likes Dean.  

It’s not a coincidence that Sam girls are the fandom’s official representative (all the meta fans on the show are Sam fans).   The show is mostly Sam-centric, if the bitter Sam girls won’t believe me then believe Jensen’s interviews when he said that SPN is Sam-centric and called season 10 a "rare Dean-centric storyline". (X)

Second, Dean is supposed to be a scene stealer, that's what support-protagonist do.  Often our favorite characters are not the protagonist but these scene stealers characters, they are usually cool or very funny. But it becomes a problem when producers try to capitalize on the character’s popularity, like creating a spin-off.   Like spices, which can not take the place of the main course, scene stealers often fail as leads because their “special-ness” evaporates when they have to carry the show. It's why WB canceled Supernatural when Jared told them he was leaving, because they knew a Dean-led Supernatural wouldn't work.

So while I'm watching an episode, I am more drawn to Dean because he’s more fun or interesting to watch. However the next day I remember the episode through Sam’s actions and interactions. Some of my readers tell me that they were surprised that they seem to “forget” Dean when they recall specific storylines, I said that’s supposed to happen with the support-protagonist.  We don't remember much of what John Watson did in the classic Sherlock Holmes or what was Nick Carraway's deal in The Great Gatsby.

It's the protagonist who mobilizes the story and stands out in readers’ or audiences’ minds.  Dean needs interaction with Sam in order for the audience to even remember him because he's part of the protagonist’s story. It’s why I keep saying Supernatural is Sam’s story, it's his Hero’s Journey.   Dean is at his best when he’s focused on Sam (which is why season 10 sucked and season 5 was kind of weak).

Third, Jensen is a personality actor and people are generally more drawn to them. Jared is a character actor who is trapped in a leading man role. Jensen has been Jensen “Dean Winchester” Ackles for the majority of his TV and movie roles since 1998.  It’s why Jensen initially made a bigger splash with Dean in the early Supernatural seasons because he’s already been playing Dean for years since Days of Our Lives.  In 2005 when SPN premiered, Jensen had a 7 years head start playing Dean compared to Jared who was just starting to play Sam and had to create Sam from scratch.  By season 3, audiences began to notice Jared's versatile acting skills and he would soon be tasked with playing different characters because that's what character actors do.

[starcurtain]

1/?

I use an automatic translator, I'm terribly sorry in advance for any possible mistakes!First of all, I want to wholeheartedly thank the author for the excellent analytics of phaedei! It's hard to overestimate how useful this turned out to be for me as a person who is also starting to look at peyring, but wants to find this line between queerbating and queercoding, between real chemistry and potential and just a pragmatic desire to attract an audience "at any cost."

I would like to leave comments on the entire text, but it seems that I need time for the material to settle in my head and I can draw objective conclusions. But for now, I can write my thoughts on the thesis that it is "atypical" for Hoyoverse to portray MLM dynamics outside the heteronormative framework, because I don't quite seem to agree with him.

I can't say that ship with characters who don't have a clear imbalance of canonical feminine/masculine traits is something new and unusual for Hoyo games.The desire to reduce one character to a feminine image and the other to a masculine one is often more a product of fandom activity. In the canon, these qualities could be distributed much more heterogeneously and ambiguously.

Ayato and Thoma have an imbalance of power, but not femininity and masculinity, and many, on the contrary, interpret Ayato as more refined and aristocratic, "with delicate marble skin" and all that, and Thoma as a more down-to-earth person accustomed to rough and dirty physical work (he is not only a "housewife", but also a mercenary and a "problem solver").

Aventurine and Ratio have a size difference, which fandom can interpret as a classic "yaoi" pattern, but at the same time, Aventurine is not canonically more feminine, shows many traits associated in society with masculine and even toxically masculine behavior, and Ratio is more sexualized, wears makeup, monitors hygiene, contains in his lore and name, references to goddesses (the words "veritas" and "ratio" themselves are linguistically feminine) and does not show bright masculine features. Even the way the characters sit in the materials with them is an example that they did not try to position Ratio as a "big rude man", but Aventurine as an elegant twink.

Thank you for such a detailed response to the post! I really appreciate you taking the time to share your thoughts, and I read all the parts of the ask you sent in!

Regarding this point, I'm not sure if it was unfortunately lost in the translations, but I did actually mention this in the original post:

"I don't want to say that Hoyo's track record on this front is bad, because honestly it's not. Their male characters often have surprisingly complex expressions of gender identity, with interesting blends of masculine and feminine traits."

But in the long run... I'm just less concerned with how Hoyo conceived of their characters in totality and more concerned with how audiences are encouraged to perceive those characters, as ultimately, the "gain" Hoyo sees from creating queer characters comes from audiences' interest. I believe the developers are very conscious of how players perceive characters and what consumers want to see from male characters. I think no one knows better how audiences will reduce characters (both male and female) to one dimension than the devs themselves lol.

And so, I just don't think it's accidental that a massive majority of Hoyo's MLM ships can be easily crammed into heteronormative patterns by audiences. Hoyo knows what sells and what fandoms love to do with ship-baited characters, and they provide just enough fuel for the fire to achieve the sales they want. Even while developing decent three-dimensional characters of their own, they invoke the fandom tropes on purpose to sell to their specific target audiences.

Characters like Aventurine and Thoma have masculine traits, yes--but then Hoyo deliberately uses feminine traits to market them, so that fans can apply their stereotypical heteronormativity. There's no reason for Thoma to be a housekeeper as well as a mercenary, right? He could just be employed by the Kamisatos as a "problem-solver" alone, but Hoyo added the housekeeper bit for... what reason? He's only a housekeeper because that allows fans to imagine him in a specific heteronormative role. Almost his entire hangout focused on "feminine" aspects (like knitting sweaters, a cleaning challenge, literal housekeeping classes, etc.) intentionally to make him appeal to fans, who Hoyo knew would then feminize him even further. And Aventurine does have masculine traits, I agree, but one of the core traits Hoyo used to sell him is being "in need of rescue," so that the players can feel like white knights for him and generate entire narratives of Aventurine being "healed" by the love of a big strong man (lol), a stereotypical plot that Hoyo deliberately helped along by making Ratio one of his "saviors."

And even though I said Mydei and Phainon was an exception visually, I think they follow the exact same pattern in terms of personality. The reason there's so much bottom!Mydei in fandom is because the devs have intentionally marketed him to take that role. They didn't have to make him a sweet tooth, have characters in-game call him cute for drinking pink milk juice, have him play house, or make him the one who makes food for everyone. Hoyo invoked the trope of the housewife on purpose to sell him (largely to women, but also deliberately to yaoi fans), and the fandom responds by exacerbating that portrayal even further.

I do applaud Hoyo for creating characters that have depth and can play with gender-related concepts in interesting ways, but I'm not willing to say they're oblivious to how fandoms will perceive, adapt, and reduce those characters to stereotypes.

They know exactly what they're doing when they put out another twink next to a big buff man, I promise. 😂