#writing analysis

[princessofghosts-posts]

I'm going to put here half of one of the best scenes of HoO.

This is page 262 of HoH from XLVIII Percy's pov,basically a few seconds before Percy start to choke Akhlys to death because he couldn't take it anymore (we love him for that).

I'm not going to focus on the whole scene,because I already talked about that,but on a specific line:

He concentrated so hard that something inside of him cracked–as if a crystal ball had shattered in his stomach.

Now,on the surface it's just a phrase that make you understand how Percy is going against his limits to accomplish what he did next,straining himself in the maintime. And that's normal,after all he is going against a primordial,you can't win against someone older than the Earth itself if you don't put a great amount of efforts (even if realistically Akhlys would have their heads in not even a second).

But I think there is something more to it, especially in the "as if a crystal ball had shattered in his stomach" part. I think it's a symbolic way to make the readers understand that Percy is loosing it. The "crystal ball" in question is his moral code that got totally destroyed once they feel into Tartarus. So it rappresent,in a way,his sanity,and how he decided to ignore the logical part of himself and to go against those same morals he has,because he had enough. He was slowly going insane in this scene,and now that it got shattered? He is never going to recover from it,ever. Because Tartarus was too deep and left too much pain,he can't recover from it entirely but he has to learn to live and cope with it.

Another interpretation I also had about this,is the fact that the crystal ball could also rappresent his humanity. I already said that Percy is able to manipulate poison because there is still a bit of water in it,right? That's fine. But the Underworld's rivers? The jump he did from Nyx's maison that was too long to do even for a demigod? I think that is also a way to symbolize how Percy is slowly loosing the mortal part of himself,and is embracing more the godly side. And the boost of powers he has can be totally explained in this way in the narrative since he is slowly becoming more godly (we all know that Riordan favor him and make him do insane things but that's from a writing prospective,not from the plot).

Am I suggesting that with this he could probably ascend to godhood? Probably,but Percy refused that already. It's more of the fact that he is starting to disconnect more from the mortal world than before. Ever since HoO started he got totally cut off from his life,at least in PJO he had moments where he still went to school,stayed with his mom and Paul and actually lived his life like a normal teenager. In HoO we don't have those moments because they are fully immersed in the mythological part of their nature.

And only Percy had this type of reaction in Tartarus. Annabeth didn't felt something inside of her shattering,and I don't know for Nico (hopefully it happened to him too-) or even Will. It's only Percy that had this,and the chapter later we see him using his abilities (especially when they were going away from Nyx's territory) with a boost that wasn't never there before,since he was struggling at the start of HoH when they feel into the first river. I think it's connected to that. (Also,Nico had a boost of powers too,so,he probably had the same happening to him-).

You can totally say it's a narrative choice and I'm overanalyzing two lines that are there just to flavor the narrative more,but Riordan made sure to wrote that to make us understand how broken Percy was starting to be. Both power-wise and mentally. There is just something in that line that caught my attention and,to this days,is still one of my favorites too.

[chronicdelusionistsart]

So I have been watching Danny Phantom for the first time ever with my friends and I'd kind of previously known about its reputation as a show whose fanbase dives a lot more into the lore than the show is willing to. And I guess I hadn't really understood why until now (I just finished Season 2!). Here's my sort of rambling thoughts on it.

Danny Phantom isn't a show about the horror of ghosts and the dead coexisting in the human realm. It's a show about dropping the most out of pocket lore implications you can imagine on people who in turn say things that would kill a therapist dead equally out of pocket, and then neither are addressed but the watcher has to live with the ghost of the plot that is right behind them but they can't turn around.

DP is a little hit and miss in places, but the very thing that drives people nuts about it is actually I think maybe its greatest strength: it really pulls off show, don't tell effectively. How much of that is intentional is up for debate, but the best episodes kinda leave you wondering, or sputtering like "UH, HEY, BACK UP - HEY BACK UP AND UNPACK THAT -" Is Danny's human body technically alive somehow, or is he a walking corpse? Does Danny have a door in the Ghost Zone? Were Vlad's clones feeling and sentient as they melted into ectoplasm, despite Danny's guess that they weren't? What does it say about Danny that he still erased his parents' memories after finding out they'd accept him as he is?

I think the genius of not answering these questions directly is that it's both funnier AND scarier not to. We can laugh about how fucked up it is and kinda hold our heads like "bro.... did they really just imply that, holy shiiiiiit", and that's really consistent with the emotional core of the show as this knife's-edge dance between teen comedy and horror superhero. Fully explaining the lore or being more direct about how the information is conveyed by and to the characters tips that balance and changes the show into something else, for better or for worse. And I really earnestly like it as it is, even if it's very of its time (sexism.......)! It's a really fun show with some depth to it.

Anyway, I can't wait to watch season 3! I sure hope all these wonderful qualities I like about it hold up!

[appendingfic]

You ever think about the fact that good scifi is rarely about the dangers of particular technology and more about deeper social themes, so few books are actually "Don't Build the Torment Nexus" but rather "Only a Society that is in a Very Bad Place Would Build the Torment Nexus"?

[incorrectsmashbrosquotes]

It's actually funny, in a meta way, how people are salty about Miquella being a villain. Because, like, that's how it is in-game too.

The people of the Lands Between wanted Miquella to be the solution to their problems. To be the promised savior. The God who would get it all right and do what Marika tried to do and failed so resoundingly, bring an age of infinite prosperity.

But, no, it doesn't work like that. Gods can't solve their problems. The Gods want their own ends and then convince people that what they want is what's best for them. The fans are the same as the poor bastards in the Haligtree, waiting for their savior, only for it to turn out he's just another spoiled kid.

It's brilliant, from a writing perspective. They kept Miquella vague, letting the Soulsborne fandom do what it always does, theorize, investigate, and build up ideas. We built up an image of Miquella as a savior, a hero, one of the only truly heroic characters to understand and get it right.

But in the end, Miquella fooled us as well as he fooled his own people.

[shyjusticewarrior]

Jason is actually pretty kind about people's mental illness.

He refers to Two Face and Harvey Dent as separate people, same for Mr Scarface and Arnold Wesker. He decides to shoot the puppet instead of Wesker and doesn't go out of his way to be cruel like he does for others.

It's an aspect of him you might not expect from such an aggressive character.

[moetartart]

:*Trigger Warning for Abuse:** An analysis of the nuanced depiction of abuse dynamics in *Baldur's Gate 3*. Please skip if you’re uncomfortable with this topic or you hate long rants <3

**Cazador at the Head of the Table, and His Forced Family, with Astarion as the Scapegoat**

Cazador is one of the best-written abusers in fiction, and Astarion is one of the best depictions of a non perfect survivor. Showcasing how abusers systematically break down their victims in a way that is thoughtful and non-voyeuristic, and how this may effect the victim after.

Astarion often receives criticism for his behavior. Much if it valid. I don’t seek to excuse his actions or speak about him as if he were a real person, But to break down this amazingly written narrative and how his experiences shape his character and a depiction of a non perfect victim. It's great to see actions having consequences in the story and being the driving force in chatecter development and I think it was handled very respectfully

One of the most compelling aspects of Astarion's story is the depiction of the "scapegoat" abuse tactic. Where a caregiver selects one child as the primary target of ridicule and abuse. Astarion says, "He took a special pleasure in my pain. He said my screams sounded sweetest." Often, the scapegoat is the child who most reminds the abuser of themselves when they were most vulnerable, or has similarities to the abuser of the parent or even someone they witnessed being abused when they were a child. The abuser uses this child to demonstrate the consequences of disobedience, and as a way of bonding the other children against the scapegoat, often by forcing the other children to engage in abuse themselves. The parent will inflict the trauma they were exposed to when they were most vulnerable on their child in a twisted way to re-gain their own power and autonomy buy projecting it onto someone elses. Acting out scenarios where they felt weak but now they are the one with all the power.

Cazador's tactics of infantilization are particularly gut-wrenching. He calls Astarion a "stupid little boy" and forces him to call him "father," undermining his belief in his ability to make adult decisions on his own while simultaneously also forcing him into adult work and physical abuse. A way to break down his self esteem and take away his autonomy. This adds another level to Cazador's twisted, intimate abuse.

It's evident when you ask if Astarion called Cazador "master" in the bedroom, and he reacts negatively. It is also implied in the dialogue, "One final thrust... and I'll be rid of you..." as Astarion stands over Cazador, ready to stab him with a phalic symbol and Cazador in a submissive position.

In a Shadowheart playthrough, we see how Astarion seeks someone to follow because he doesn’t know how to think for himself. Auntie Ethel remarks that he misses his chains, and he admits he doesn't know how to make his own decisions. In Astarion's dream, you learn one of Cazador's rules is that Astarion must stay by his side unless told otherwise. We also see that Cazador regularly dined with Astarion, serving him putrid rats. He says "I have spent two centuries with You, and that should be punishment enough," which is quite an intimate insult. In non of these are the other spawn mentioned. He also mentions his sarcasm and jokes, something you wouldn't really think Cazador would permit. This suggesting an intense, twisted co-dependency. A lot of time spent alone together. As what? His child? His slave? His lover? It's sickening. Cazador seemed to want to fill every potential key roll in Astarions life. This is actually pretty common in adults relationships.

The extent of physical abuse is further revealed when Astarion sees the mad doctor in the House of Healing and remarks, "he's just like Cazador." The narrator says, "If you're late, he will flay you... again," and Astarion states, "Sometimes he would have us submit to torture. Other times he would have us torture ourselves."

So, why does Cazador do all this? Beyond sadistic pleasure and rituals off higher power, I believe it's driven by a fear of abandonment. His goal is to strip Astarion of any autonomy so he would return even if freed. When speaking to Cazador alone, he's convinced Astarion will come back because he cannot think for himself. Cazador wants to be the center of Astarion's life, and truly believes he is. A narcissist needing to see himself reflected in others, he required Astarion by his side to validate his awful existence. If Astarion leaves, Cazador feels he's losing an extension of himself. That Astarion is his and his alone to kill.

I also believe he genuinely wants to play house. That he wants a picture perfect family. We don't know much about Cazador before the game, only that he was from a vampire family. That his niece refused to partake. It's quite clear he felt like he was missing something in his family. We know his master committed acts of cruelty far beyond what he did to his own spawn, impaling him for ten years and draining his friend Infront of him. Surly a year of solitude is like being sent to your bedroom without supper compared to that? By Cazadors logic, he's far kinder than he was ever treated. He's been kinder and more loving than his own family. His children should be grateful that he protected them from what he went through. He believes his children are spoiled and if anything he has been to soft. After all, he gave thim his families birth right far above their station, eternal life. He gave them a family that will never abandon them. What more could they want?

And if course, we as plays see this cycle continues with AA, who says he will be a far kinder master he'd never make his dear lover eat rats. They wouldn't be his child, more a pampered pet. Compared to how Astarion was treated, what more could they want?

And how very true to live that an abuser will preach about how much worse they had things and how lucky their victims are. How soft they must be to complain.

This gives us a clear picture of Astarion at the start: someone with a fragile sense of self, preferring to see others tortured rather than be the one in the chair, and looking for someone to follow. He'll fake a smile to keep them around. While this doesn't excuse his cruelty, it explains it; Astarion is free for less than a day when you meet him. There are no perfect victims, and unlearning brainwashing takes time. Reducing Astarion to "evil" or "good" overlooks the complexity of a character who could become either an abuser or a liberator.

What I appreciate most is that Astarion's past doesn't vanish when Cazador dies; he still carries the scars, but in a positive playthrough, there is hope. Astarion has the chance to do better, starts making his own choices, and sometimes gets it wrong.

Crucially, the abuse is never voyeuristic. It is always shown from the survivor's perspective, focusing on its effects on their lives. It's always clear when a player choice disrespects his growth and autonomy. Cazador and Astarion are never framed to titillate or as a mind of grousome special to the viewer, unlike in shows like *13 Reasons Why* or Ramsey Bolton in *Game of Thrones*. The game handles the topic with a lot of care. Infact the only time we see Cazador in person is when we have the chance to stop him. We never see Astarion subjected to something we can alter in some way.

Also, we do hear of Astarions bravery in trying to defy his master and save people. Unfortunately as in the game and real life, people don't always have a choice. Still, in a good ending Astarion can choose to try and help others who have been hurt and use what he has learned to make real change.

The reasons why Cazador is the way he is are another rant entirely. But while I hate him as a person, I adore him as an antagonist. How can a character be written to be pathetic and terrifying at once?

**TL;DR:** *Baldur's Gate 3* presents a complex, nuanced abuse narrative, executed beautifully. Many people overlook or disregard Astarion as an excellent depiction of survival in my opinion.

[literaryvein-reblogs]

Themes in Jane Austen’s Writing

Though many of her works are centered in the rigid social scene of the 19th century, Jane Austen’s books continue to entertain, inspire, and challenge fans, filmmakers, and writers.

Characteristics of Jane Austen’s Writing

Jane Austen’s novels have a number of distinctive features that make her work stand out from other literature of the time. Some recognizable characteristics and themes of Austen’s works include:

Colloquial language: Austen’s dialogue is written in the colloquial speech style of the time, capturing the realism of the way that people communicated when navigating the nuances of society.

Satire: In books like Emma and Pride and Prejudice, Jane parodies the social culture of her time, offering a sometimes scathing commentary on the obligation of marriage.

Romantic comedy: Most of Jane’s writing is a blend of romance and comedy, with many of her stories—like Mansfield Park and Emma—ending in engagements or an assumption that the romantic leads get married and live happily ever after.

Examination of class: From Mansfield Park, to Sense and Sensibility, to Northanger Abbey, many of Jane’s stories begin with young, middle class or working-class women being sent to live with wealthy relatives or neighbors, opening up a whole new social and romantic world to these young heroines.

Morality: Jane’s characters—like the irreverent Elizabeth Bennet of Pride and Prejudice—struggle with acting in accordance with their social duty and following their hearts, reflecting a battle between the individual and the rest of society.

Gender: Many of Jane’s narratives center around gender constructs. Her novels focus specifically on what it means to be a woman living in a period of repression and rigid social expectations of “proper” female behavior.

Jane Austen’s Major Novels

From her short stories, to her selected “juvenilia” writings from her childhood, many of Jane Austen’s works are part of the Western literary canon. Her novels are often included in school syllabi from middle school into college because of their importance to literary history.

Sense and Sensibility (1811): This novel centers around the three Dashwood sisters—Elinor, Margaret, and Marianne—and their widowed mother, when their father dies and they’re displaced from their estate. The sisters are introduced to a new social circle of charming and intriguing people when they move away from their ancestral home. There are a number of screen adaptations of the story notably, the 1995 Ang Lee-directed adaptation starring Emma Thompson.

Pride and Prejudice (1813): Jane Austen’s 1813 romantic novel Pride and Prejudice (originally called “First Impressions”) follows Elizabeth Bennet, the second eldest of the five Bennet sisters, and the conflict following her and her sister’s quest to get married and produce a male heir to inherit her father’s estate. In 2013, nearly 100 literary adaptations and interpretations of this story had been published since the book was released, including the bestseller Bridget Jones’ Diary, which was adapted into a hit film starring René Zellweger and Colin Firth as Mark Darcy.

Mansfield Park (1814): Austen’s third published novel, this book focuses on Fanny Price, a young girl sent to live with her wealthy relatives. Growing up, her cousins mistreat her with the exception of her one cousin Edmund. As the novel continues, we see Fanny’s relationship with Edmund evolve. This story has been adapted numerous times, including a BBC limited series, and a 1999 film adaptation.

Emma (1815): Written after Jane moved to the village of Chawton, Emma is a comedy of manners depicting the lives and challenges of society women living in Georgian–Regency England, centering on Emma Woodhouse. Emma makes matches between her friends and acquaintances for amusement but finds that busying herself in other peoples’ affairs is a frivolous distraction from the real growth she has to do. Two major film adaptations have been made of this story, including a 1996 version starring Gwyneth Paltrow. The 1995 film Clueless is a modernized version of this story.

Northanger Abbey (1817): This satirical novel follows a young clergyman’s daughter named Catherine Morland, who visits her wealthy neighbors to participate in a season of balls. This novel was published after Jane’s death in 1817. It has also been made into a number of TV and film adaptations, including a 1987 BBC miniseries.

Persuasion (1818): Persuasion was Austen’s last novel, published after her death in 1817. It follows the character Anne Elliot and her relationship with a navy captain which ends, then picks back up again after many years. The story was turned into a BBC miniseries in 1960, and a made-for-TV movie in 1995.

Jane Austen was a writer who wrote a series of popular novels, short stories, and poems in late 18th and early 19th century English literature.

She is best known for her romantic plots following bold and headstrong young female protagonists.

Austen’s novels often center around people in the middle or upper classes of British society, making sharp commentary about gender and the societal mores of the time.

Her literary work—including Emma and Pride and Prejudice—has served as the source material for numerous Hollywood films, literary modernizations, theater adaptations, and television miniseries over the years.

A Brief Biography of Jane Austen

Born in 1775 in Steventon, Hampshire, Jane was the seventh of eight children.

Jane was already writing during her childhood, and all of Jane’s works that were published during her lifetime were written under her pen name, “A Lady.”

She was considered a successful author during her lifetime, and the money she earned with her writing allowed her to be independent.

Though Jane’s books often centered around romantic stories, she never pursued marriage with any interested suitors.

Jane Austen died of unknown causes (speculated to likely be either Hodgkin’s lymphoma or Addison’s disease) in 1817 at the age of 41.

Source ⚜ More: Writing Notes & References ⚜ Writing Resources PDFs

[sevensoulmates]

9-1-1 Writer Patterns Analysis: Taylor Wong Edition

Hi guys! So...I ended up writing a 20 page, 13.1k word essay on 9-1-1 staff writer Taylor Wong's episodes! This contains (not-so) mini metas on all 8 of her aired episodes as well as a detailed speculation on what may happen in Holy Mother of God (8x11) airing this Thursday.

To read the entire thing, here is the PDF:

I hope you enjoy!

[plotthotrobin]

@medicallyfascinating Absolutely, I’d love to elaborate! ☺️ But I will take it over here to a new post since that one is very Hilda-centric and because this will be a long ramble.

Hilda is very out of place as Claude’s “retainer” as a whole. She doesn’t swear herself to him out of loyalty, she isn’t even really shown to have a bond with him that is any more notable than the rest of the GD. Hell, she’s the one ‘retainer’ character that can be recruited at all. She’s kind of just… there. The only argument that can really be made here is that she is a Goneril, and that house is the one that defends Fódlan’s Throat - and personally, I don’t think that requires her to be in the ‘retainer’ position to touch on.

Most people who play FE3H can tell that some routes got more time and attention in the writing room than others, and I think VW and CF are the biggest victims of this. VW is messy, awful in terms of pacing, and infamously a clone of SS (But, in my incredibly biased opinion, better because of Claude). If I had it my way, the story would focus heavily around relations between Fódlan and Almyra, the Leicester Roundtable, Claude’s background as an Almyran prince, etc etc etc. The biggest crime this route commits is having nothing to do with its lord - especially given how interesting the tidbits he drops really are. With that setup, Cyril may have actually made an interesting ‘retainer’ character considering the fresh perspective on these topics that he could bring to the table. Such as the ones expressed in his really interesting supports with Claude. (I know Cyril isn’t GD, but he’s an honorary one in my mind.)

Assuming we’re sticking to the current VW story as closely as possible, however, there’s one particular issue about VW that stands out: A lot of the TWSITD/Nabatean elements are out of place and completely irrelevant to the Golden Deer and Claude especially.

…With the exception of one character: Lysithea.

Lysithea already pops into the actual story sections post-timeskip to provide information on TWSITD… and then is just brushed aside again. Bringing her more into the spotlight as an unofficial ‘retainer’ for Claude could have made a lot of the unfolding events feel a little less out of place.

Imagine with me that, instead of TWSITD coming up at the last second story-wise, it instead came up during the ongoing fight against Adrestia and Edelgard. In this scenario, Lysithea slowly starts to put two and two together: Edelgard has white hair, purple eyes, has clear connections to terrifyingly familiar mages, and is rushing to accomplish her goal swiftly at the cost of many lives. She hesitantly approaches Claude and Byleth in private and explains not only what happened to her, but that she suspects that the same thing happened to Edelgard. Maybe Lysithea brings up the possibility of her being under the direct control of TWSITD.

Claude is, reasonably, riled up and horrified at finding out all of this and realizes that Fódlan’s issues run much deeper than he initially thought. He now sees:

- The Church of Serios and Rhea, who he knows has been hiding deep secrets that he has been trying to get to the bottom of. He’s been reluctantly working with Seteth and the knights because he needs the support, but doesn’t trust them and still has the understanding that they’re hiding shit.

- Emperor Edelgard of Adrestia and TWSITD, who could potentially be coercing her into fighting the Church of Serios for some unknown reason - or, alternatively, are simply helping Edelgard for an equally unknown reason. He doesn’t trust any of them either, pretty obviously.

Claude now knows that, in order to even potentially achieve his dream of equality and peace, he has to get to the root of the clusterfuck that is Fódlan - because Sothis knows it’s not happening in this state of affairs.

On a more personal level, I’m sure he looks at Lysithea and tries to imagine an even younger version of her being strapped down and experimented on - and frankly, he just can’t bring himself to. It wouldn’t surprise me if, as a secondary goal, he also gently promises to do his best to help her find a cure. In turn, a stunned Lysithea devotes herself fully to him as a leader and his cause.

Now, a lot of this is just a lot of speculation and hypotheticals, and a lot of it is opinionated, but I personally believe there is just inherently more overall story potential this way than with the current setup. ☺️

[licorice-and-rum]

Snape's Full Character Analysis

Okay, so I’ve already made this kind of post in my previous account (licorice-lips) but since it got deleted, here I go again because I think the world should hear more about this.

I do hate Severus Snape — and I have little to no patience for those who do and try to justify his actions with whatever. But unlike many people, my dislike for Snape doesn’t stem from “oh, he’s a child abuser” or “oh, he didn’t love Lily” but from a mix of many factors involving among other things, the way R*wling portrays supremacist ideology and its followers, the way the fandom often downplays supremacist ideology and its followers, and Snape as a character himself.

Now, I’m going to extend this essay into a full character analysis instead of just commenting on how Snape’s redemption arc sucks like I did previously because I’m feeling like it. To begin, I need you to understand how… biased R*wling’s portray of supremacist ideology really is:

J.K. Rowling is European and English (duh), which means she descends from a people who benefited (a lot and still do) from colonialism and imperialism, and both things are the basis for modern day fascism. As an author myself, it’s painfully clear to me how intrinsically close my characters and works are from myself and my own personal values. As such, it’s not such a hardship — especially if we remember how the elves and goblins are portrayed in HP — to understand how Rowling views political issues such as colonialism, imperialism and fascism.

She may not realize it but the way she does talk about the matter is such a right-wing way of tolerance to fascist thinking: as it’s very clear in Harry Potter just because of the story, the problem for the author isn’t a system of prejudice and bigotry, it’s those very few people who have become corrupted. Rowling does not identify the problem as the tree being bad when most apples — save one of two — have turn out bad. And that’s the core problem of so many things in Harry Potter but it also shows in the core problem I have with Snape’s portrayal: the way she absolutely downplays the fact that the man was a death eater for years of his life by pure and absolute conviction.

As someone who lived through a fascistic government, I’ll say it with all certainty: even the slightest support to fascistic views will propel further an agenda that will end up killing innocent people by the dozens. The truth is, even with all the undeniable good Snape did as he worked as a spy, he was a Death Eater for his conviction and at the end of the day it doesn’t matter why he chose to become one.

At the end of the day, it doesn’t matter that he was neglected and abused by his parents, or that he was bullied in school, or that his crush didn’t reciprocated his feelings: he still became a Death Eater, he chose to become one. And that is unforgivable. It unforgivable because it means he supported and actively worked for a system of thinking that ridiculed, persecuted, tortured and murdered hundreds, if not thousands, of innocent people. He advocated for a political view that has no regard for human life, that perpetuates the abuse he suffered firsthand — just in a slightly different direction. He didn’t just not break his cycle of abuse, he actively perpetuated it. Advocated for it.

And don’t get me wrong: I’m not saying here that the abuse Snape went through isn’t important at all: there is definitely something to be said about the preying of supremacist groups for young isolated men who feel left out and emasculated. But that doesn’t mean Snape gets to be absolved for his own choices because that’s what they were: his choices. He chose to become a Death Eater, he chose to uphold the cycles of abuse he had been a victim to not long before, he chose to protect it even in the face of people — good people — telling him that it wasn’t a good thing.

That’s my point, actually: Snape may have been preyed upon by the blood supremacy ideology as a teen but at some point, he chose to be influenced by it more than by millions of other influences around him. He wasn’t completely isolated or ignorant of the world to the point that the only influence he could possibly choose was the blood supremacy one, no: he had people telling him the contrary and still chose to follow blood supremacy. So, no, it’s not forgivable that he chose to become a Death Eater because he did know better than that, his very friendship with Lily proved it.

But because Rowling sees the system — a system whose very roots are prejudice and bigotry — as not actually the problem, we see these problems sliding down the hill of “oh, he was just a misguided boy” even if that’s not what she herself says: it’s what her work says.

The truth is, as much as some supremacist’s core reason for their beliefs are a deep feeling of inadequacy, that’s not enough simply because they’ll cause as much damage with their actions than any other supremacist that’ll become a supremacist for the hatred alone. Snape, who (for some) was propelled into supremacy for his isolation in his teenage years, persecuted and tortured and killed as many people as Lucius or Bellatrix did, the result is the same. And at the end of the day, the reason why you did something doesn’t matter as much as the fact that you did do something.

We can cry a river about how our intentions were good but that doesn’t mean that what we did was. Between our intentions and our actions, there’s an abyss, and it’s not until we crossed it that we can see whether or not they are alike. In Snape’s case, considering he genuinely believed the supremacist ideology he upheld would turn the wizarding world better, it doesn’t really matter: he still caused damage.

And he has never been redeemed because for a redemption arc to work properly, you need to

Acknowledge what happened — there’s not much Snape is liable to deny it happened because, of course, he’s always caught on the scenes we are privy to.

Take accountability for what you’ve done — which Snape doesn’t do, as it’s exemplified perfectly many times throughout The Prince’s Tale in Deathly Hollows. He deflects, he lies, he declares he had no intentions of doing what he did, but he never, not once, takes accountability for what he has done and what ended up hurting other people:

“There was a crack. A branch over Petunia’s head had fallen. Lily screamed. The branch caught Petunia on the shoulder, and she staggered backward and burst into tears.

“Tuney!” But Petunia was running away. Lily rounded on Snape. “Did you make that happen?” “No.” He looked both defiant and scared. “You did!” She was backing away from him. “You did! You hurt her!” “No – no, I didn’t!” But the lie did not convince Lily.”

““…thought we were supposed to be friends?” Snape was saying, “Best friends?” “We are, Sev, but I don’t like some of the people you’re hanging round with! I’m sorry, but I detest Avery and Mulciber! Mulciber! What do you see in him, Sev, he’s creepy! D’you know what he tried to do to Mary Macdonald the other day?” Lily had reached a pillar and leaned against it, looking up into the thin, sallow face. “That was nothing,” said Snape. “It was a laugh, that’s all –” “It was Dark Magic, and if you think that’s funny –” “What about the stuff Potter and his mates get up to?” demanded Snape.”

“It was nighttime. Lily, who was wearing a dressing gown, stood with her arms folded in front of the portrait of the Fat Lady, at the entrance to Gryffindor Tower. “I only came out because Mary told me you were threatening to sleep here.” “I was. I would have done. I never meant to call you Mudblood, it just –” “Slipped out?” There was no pity in Lily’s voice.”

To make amends for what you did — I’m not even going to deepen my argument on this one, it’s clear he didn’t. Not when he hurt Petunia, not when he hurt Lily, not when he hurt anyone really, the only exception being him protection Harry after telling Voldemort about the prophecy, but that’s not overcoming any patterns here, which brings me to my next point:

To accept the boundaries that you put in place as they’re on the path to earn forgiveness — which Snape also doesn’t, as exemplified in this excerpt of The Prince’s Tale:

The scene changed… “I’m sorry.” “I’m not interested.” “I’m sorry!” “Save your breath” It was nighttime. Lily, who was wearing a dressing gown, stood with her arms folded in front of the portrait of the Fat Lady, at the entrance to Gryffindor Tower. “I only came out because Mary told me you were threatening to sleep here.” “I was. I would have done. I never meant to call you Mudblood, it just –”

It’s very important to understand here that Snape doesn’t respect Lily’s boundaries of not wanting to talk to him after he called her a slur, which is also a sign of not being in a path to earn forgiveness. And forgiveness must be earned: no amount of trauma explaining our actions actually counts as an excuse for our behavior. It can explain it and thus, making forgiveness easier to achieve, but trauma doesn’t change the fact that we are responsible for our own choices and acts throughout our lives, and if we hurt someone, we have a responsibility to be accountable and make amends.

So okay, we’ve stablished that Snape has some heavy trauma to work through but that doesn’t mean he’s not liable for his own actions. Now, what we need to understand is his relationship with the Marauders. That’s a much more complicated theme, which will bring me back to Rowling and her point of view of things and how they impact her narrative and the way things are portrayed in the books.

The first thing we need to notice is that Rowling doesn’t seem much preoccupied with portraying bullying in a responsible way throughout the series. It’s clear that many of the comedic reliefs we have — especially in the form of Fred and George — are bullies in the modern, more “strict” way of seeing children’s behavior: their acts not only can be considered humiliating for some (such as Neville and other side characters in the books) but also downright cruel or dangerous. So it’s clear by her account on other similar relationships portrayed in the books that Rowling didn’t consider what Snape and the Marauders had as a bully/victim relationship.

That can be because of her age, or because of the character’s age even (they were in the 90s after all), or even a mix of both reasons, but the fact remains that she didn’t view it as bullying, so anything she writes about it will be a gross exaggeration of what she considers child rivalry. It’s one of the reasons I have the icks when anyone starts asking her for a book on the Marauders because I just know she’d butcher her way into their stories, to be completely honest.

Unfortunately, this also means it’s how Snape views it all — as something that happens between children (not saying that it didn’t cause trauma, just that he doesn’t see it as a trauma) which makes him even back up the people who do the same when he becomes a teacher, such as Malfoy and his friends. My point is that, in the building of Snape’s character, his problem with what the Marauders used to do to him wasn’t what they did but rather that they did it with him, someone Snape viewed as undeserving of it, as opposed to when someone who did deserve — such as muggleborns — were the target of said treatment:

“We are, Sev, but I don’t like some of the people you’re hanging round with! I’m sorry, but I detest Avery and Mulciber! Mulciber! What do you see in him, Sev, he’s creepy! D’you know what he tried to do to Mary Macdonald the other day?” Lily had reached a pillar and leaned against it, looking up into the thin, sallow face. “That was nothing,” said Snape. “It was a laugh, that’s all –” “It was Dark Magic, and if you think that’s funny –”

So the problem in the end wasn’t the Marauder’s behavior but their target — which, of course, was him.

But the origin of the Marauder’s dislike for Snape at that point ran deep and very intricately: there was a lot of reason why we could attribute to their hatred for each other, such as house rivalry, Snape’s fixation on Remus’ secret, James’ jealousy for Lily and Snape’s friendship, Snape’s inclination for dark magic and supremacist views, Sirius overcompensation for being raised in such a prejudiced environment and as such becoming a little too aggressive about it, and many other reasons. The point is, there was a meddle of everything by the time we reach SWM.

So their relationship is just as intricate and difficult to entangle. I’m not saying here that any of my analysis exempts the Marauders from what they did — it was serious and bad and something that shouldn’t have happened at all regardless of how I feel about Snape. But as I try to analyze Snape’s character in the books, I need to be very careful on how to approach this: my morals and interpretations of what happened shouldn’t come first to what Snape’s viewed at the moment and what he took from this. So at last, what I’m saying is: as much as I know that was some hard bullying going on there, Snape didn’t see it that way, either because Rowling herself couldn’t see it that way and because the time and the time’s belief’s system wouldn’t allow him to.

Anyway, if we take any only the facts, we have — James attacked Snape sometime after Snape tried to catch Remus in the Shrieking Shack, Snape also instigated fights with James, Snape and his friends also bullied muggleborns and blood traitor — it becomes very clear that we need to balance power relations very carefully here:

On the very top, we have supremacist purebloods, which are the most privileged social group at the time, which would include people like Lucius, Bellatrix, the Lestrange brothers, most of the Blacks, and others. Then, right below, we’d have purebloods who didn’t believe in blood purity, such as Sirius, the Potters (James specially), the Weasleys, the Prewetts, the Longbottoms and others. Plus, the more I consider the wizarding world of that time, the more I realize how close halfbloods who adhered to the purist cause had a place in society that rivaled the same importance with purebloods who were considered blood traitors, sometimes ranking even higher depending on the environment or situation.

Just to be entirely clear: when I say halfbloods, I’m not only talking about those whose heritage are certain (children of muggleborns or muggles with purebloods) but also to those whose heritage couldn’t be drawn back. For example, the Sacred Twenty-Eight, the account of all pureblooded families in Great Britain, is admittedly an incomplete and slightly biased and unreliable source. They didn’t list the Potters as purebloods, for example, solely on the account of, whilst the family didn’t have any muggle relatives, there were enough muggles with the last name Potter that they weren’t sure about the family’s heritage. So it’s fair to assume a lot of people we’d been presented to as halfbloods could be pureblood familys whose heritage was slightly questioned. So yes, I’d put halfbloods who stood with blood supremacy as just as privileged as a pureblood who sided against it because of all this background. Then, we have halfbloods who didn’t approve of pureblood supremacy, muggleborns, then muggles.

It’s quite understandable by the books that, while in SWM, Snape was in a clear place of power imbalance in relation to the Marauders, the truth wasn’t always this. Mulciber and Avery are quoted as the closest to Snape (and we know very well what they’ve become after school), and although I found nothing in regards to the Mulciber family, the Averys were purebloods, so I have to place Snape as being just as privileged as the Marauders within normal (normal, not exceptional) school social dynamics in relation to blood. Of course that wasn’t truth to every power dynamic presented within the Harry Potter world, such as the Slytherin conundrum for example.

Okay, I’ll be honest with you guys here: I feel like the imbalance people accuse the adults of Harry Potter of having is grossly exaggerated sometimes. Yes, Slytherin was in disadvantage in relation to other houses, and it was looked upon by them, but the point is: ancient pureblooded families, especially the ones who were knee deep in supremacist ideology, often favored Slytherin, that is a fact.

Regardless of it been productive or not, the most blood supremacists within the house, the more we’d get comments and actions against muggleborns within school grounds that would inevitably be punished by the taking of points (and by the way, Snape was not helping congratulating Draco for his own bigotry instead of rewarding Slytherins who were actually interested in studying and working hard on their grades).

Plus, Gryffindor is the house of the protagonist — of course it’ll gain some privileges for that. If it was Ravenclawn, we’d be discussing this issue with Slytherin versus Ravenclawn points. It makes no sense accusing other of having biases like that because it’s obvious we’d have this kind of biases exactly for the plain reason it’s the protagonist’s house.

Anyway, I digress: because of the points I just made about it, the Slytherin versus Gryffindor rivalry is not enough to grant James and the others such a significative upper hand on their privilege in relation to Snape, although I would argue that Snape’s pre-existing bigotry did him no favors in the adults’ eyes on that matter, so it may have.

Now, why am I focusing on that? Because it’s clear to me that, while James and the others had a clear upper hand on their treatment of Snape in Snape’s Worst Memory, it’s not so clear as people seem to believe what the picture looked like the rest of the time. And of course, I do understand that it seems very much cemented on everyone’s minds that the configuration of the Marauders and Snape relationship was always the one we see in Snape’s Worst Memory, but that’s not completely truth and there are hints of it since the fifth book:

When Sirius said James wasn’t the only one to initiate fights, when he said Snape was always trying to sneak up on James, when we learn of the spells Snape had invented as a teenager (we can half-confidently say they were for the Marauders considering Snape’s trying to use Sectumsempra on James, but not limited to them, of course), when we get to know that Snape was “always trying” to prove that Remus was a werewolf to get him expelled, among other moments.  The truth is, as much as I would like to point out the Marauders were not so bad, I can’t say this with certainty, but Snape apologists can’t say for certain they know fully the dynamics of their relationship either because even when the Marauders weren’t good people, they can’t say Snape was only a victim as well.

Or at least, they can’t say that he was the kind of victim who didn’t victimized people just like he was victimized too. And that’s probably even more reason why I dislike him, but I’ll get there. What I do know is that Snape, for his supremacist views alone, was doing a lot worse than what the Marauders were doing as teens. I’m sorry, it’s true: as much as I despise bullying, I can’t get over the fact that Snape was the equivalent of a Hitler youth child soldier in the wizarding world when he was a teenager. I’d punch him myself if I was his classmate, to be honest. Hatred aside, however, I do understand that what the Marauders did had little to nothing to do with supremacist views and all to do with being idiots, so yeah, fuck them. I’m not here to defend the Marauders anyway, just to condemn Snape (which, surprise, surprise, it’s actually possible).

Now, I dread having to go there, to be honest, but I want to talk to you guys about Snapes’ feelings for Lily. I’ve read the most grotesque and misogynistic things I’ve ever read in my life scrolling through Snape stans posts and let’s be honest here: Lily and Snape’s relationship was so toxic I would come back healthier if I went to Chernobyl than going anywhere near them together — because of Severus — and it’s actually appalling that some people doesn’t seem to think so. I’m sorry, but all the signs of classical emotional abuse signs are right there, just in the Prince’s Tale:

Belittling and constant criticism — I’m sorry, but his behavior alone says everything: you can’t treat muggleborns like they’re trash and then try to convince your muggleborn best-friend they she’s not. The belittling is in his actions. And then there’s the fact that Snape brings up accusations of Lily liking James more than once as a form of criticism as well (because neither have a good opinion of James, which is fair, but it’s still veiled criticism of Lily). Plus, his belittling of Lily’s feeling over Petunia’s hatred of her is obvious:

“I don’t want to talk to you,” she said in a constricted voice. “Why not?” “Tuney h-hates me. Because we saw that letter from Dumbledore.” “So what?” She threw him a look of deep dislike. “So she’s my sister!” “She’s only a – ” He caught himself quickly; Lily, too busy trying to wipe her eyes without being noticed, did not hear him.”

Gaslighting and controlling tendencies — when he tries to convince Lily he didn’t use magic to hurt Petunia with the tree branch, or when he questions their friendship because she’s trying to make a constructive critic of his life choices (“I thought we’re supposed to be friends?... Best friends?”), or when he tries to dictate who she’ll be friends with (when they’re discussing his own friends by the way). Even if Lily doesn’t let him, doesn’t mean it’s not abusive.

Isolation of loved ones — Constantly belittling Petunia, setting Lily and himself as above her because of their magic, convincing Lily to invade Petunia’s privacy thus isolating her further, causing rifts between Lily’s friends in Gryffindor and her because of his supremacist tendencies…

Jealousy and Possessiveness — I do think this one is self-explanatory.

Humiliation and Shaming — I also believe this one is also self-explanatory.

Unpredictable or Inconsistent Behavior — This is perfectly exemplified by their conversation when Lily is pointing out about his friends’ bad influence on him. We can see perfectly how inconsistent Snape’s behavior is, jumping from deflecting his accountability, downplaying his own bad deeds, to possessiveness and jealousy over absolutely nothing Lily has ever referenced to (try not to read what they’re saying but instead just concentrate at how abruptly Snape goes from one to the other):

“…thought we were supposed to be friends?” Snape was saying, “Best friends?” “We are, Sev, but I don’t like some of the people you’re hanging round with! I’m sorry, but I detest Avery and Mulciber! Mulciber! What do you see in him, Sev, ’s creepy! D’you know what he tried to do to Mary Macdonald the other day?” Lily had reached a pillar and leaned against it, looking up into the thin, sallow face. “That was nothing,” said Snape. “It was a laugh, that’s all – ” “It was Dark Magic, and if you think that’s funny – ” “What about the stuff Potter and his mates get up to?” demanded Snape. His color rose again as he said it, unable, it seemed, to hold in his resentment. “What’s Potter got to do with anything?” said Lily. “They sneak out at night. There’s something weird about that Lupin. Where does he keep going?” “He’s ill,” said Lily. “They say he’s ill – ” “Every month at the full moon?” said Snape. “I know your theory,” said Lily, and she sounded cold. “Why are you so obsessed with them anyway? Why do you care what they’re doing at night?” “I’m just trying to show you they’re not as wonderful as everyone seems to think they are.” The intensity of his gaze made her blush. “They don’t use Dark Magic, though.” She dropped her voice. “And you’re being really ungrateful. I heard what happened the other night. You went sneaking down that tunnel by the Whomping Willow, and James Potter saved you from whatever’s down there – ” Snape’s whole face contorted and he spluttered, “Saved? Saved? You think he was playing the hero? He was saving his neck and his friends’ too! You’re not going to – I won’t let you – ” “Let me? Let me?” Lily’s bright green eyes were slits. Snape backtracked at once. “I didn’t m ean – I just don’t want to see you made a fool of – He fancies you, James Potter fancies you!” The words seemed wrenched from him against his will. “And he’s not…everyone thinks…big Quidditch hero – ” Snape’s bitterness and dislike were rendering him incoherent, and Lily’s eyebrows were traveling farther and farther up her forehead. “I know James Potter’s an arrogant toerag,” she said, cutting across Snape. “I don’t need you to tell me that. But Mulciber’s and Avery’s idea of humor is just evil. Evil, Sev. I don’t understand how you can be friends with them.” Harry doubted that Snape had even heard her strictures on Mulciber and Avery. The moment she had insulted James Potter, his whole body had relaxed, and as they walked away there was a new spring in Snape’s step…

There’s also the fact that their friendship began in a relation of power that met its inevitable demise once those specific conditions tumbled down: when Snape met Lily, he was all the source she had about the wizarding world, he was her only link to that part of herself she felt was so different from anyone else. Once Lily arrived at Hogwarts, this dependance quickly came to an end with Lily spreading her wings, which probably also took a heavy tool on their relationship because its foundation was already fragile to begin with.

However, I’m not saying here that Snape was this evil mastermind at nine years old he managed to consciously ensnare Lily into this emotionally abusive relationship all by his astute manipulation. Snape was a child of abuse and neglect and, as such, he never learned how to properly bond and stablish healthy relationships. Much like the child starved by love he was, Snape probably saw every and any other relationship Lily had as a threat to their own relationship, because he doesn’t know love is not finite — he doesn’t know love stretches to accommodate other people with the time. It’s not unreasonable for me to read their relationship as such, although I’m sure that wasn’t JK Rowling’s intentions when she wrote HP, in fact it’s more than possible to admit their friendship sucked even when Snape remembered it so fondly.

As a person who actually went through an emotionally abusive relationship, I can tell how exhausting it is to carry this person along and make up excuses for everyone around you who can clearly see that this friendship sucks but doesn’t want to tell you because it might make things worse. Specially if I’m talking about someone who believes the way you were born makes you inferior in some way, that shit really hurts even when they say you’re different because deep down, you know you’re not. Deep down, you know that you’re the exception over some crooked perception you somehow beat the odds of an inferior condition and that’s what makes you “special”. And it’s gross just to think about it.

Okay, so now I think I analyzed everything about Snape I’ve wanted to analyze, so I’ll end here my enormous rant about him and if there’s anything else I want to talk about when this starts to get hate, I’ll probably post a part two.

Bye, guys!

[rynnthefangirl]

The show is honestly setting up Criston’s death scene SO WELL.

His whole character arc is centered around him running away from his shame and dishonor, in ways that destroy and hurt others.

He soiled his white cloak by sleeping with Rhaenyra? Well clearly she is a seductive spider and the bitch must pay.

He bullies and hurts children of the royal family? Well they are bastards born to a spoiled c*nt, clearly they deserve it.

He let Prince Jaehaerys be murdered because he was too busy sleeping with Alicent? Blame Erykk, project his anger onto him, send him on a suicide mission in a desperate attempt to DO something and feel better about his enormous failure.

Criston is constantly breaking oaths, constantly acting with dishonor, constantly putting himself and his emotions first, even at the expense of those he is supposed to defend. His is a completely disgrace to knighthood, and he knows this. He knows it, but he hides from it, lashes out at others, projects, hurts, hates, destroys.

He is going to struggle with his shame the whole series, and eventually will find himself in a situation where he cannot win. The winter wolves force will outmatch his own, it is a battle that they are doomed to lose, and his men are going to be massacred. And Criston, at long last, will step up. He will offer to fight and die on behalf of his men, to take on four enemies by himself in an epic duel worthy of a knight of the Kingsguard. This is his redemption, he may have lived a life without honor, but he can still die with it. He will make his grand declaration, challenging Roddy the Ruin, Criston stands tall as he feels a fierce sense of pride and determination—

Only to be struck down by an arrow, and die without another word. Because that’s not how honor works. You cannot spend your entire life being a selfish monster, and then wipe the slate clean with one grand gesture. Criston will die as he lived- a pathetic failure. There will be no songs sung about him.

[princessofghosts-posts]

Nico's Powers and Rick way of writing them.

Honestly,I've been wainting to write this.

We all know Nico powers:

Can manipulate the shadows and travel in them (Umbra-kinesis);

Can sense someone's death and soul;

Can summon ghosts and talk to them;

Can summon skeletons that obey to his orders and fight for him;

Can use dreams to send messages;

Can unconsciously split the ground and create cracks or Underworld's openings;

Can turn someone into a ghost and make them forgot their life and ability to speak;

Can turn someone into a skeleton;

Has influence on the dead and can evade them when he has to;

Can create earthquakes (not major ones like Percy);

Technically has Geo-kinesis powers too (like Hazel);

Can summon zombies to serve him;

Can conditionate the CJ's lares speaking ability by forcing them to shut up;

Can influence the dead ones with his mood;

Death-touch;

(If I missed some feel free to add)

Other than this,you need to remember that his title as Ghost King give him some more leverage,and his sword is an uniqueness in the world that give him the ability to suck someone's soul in it.

By only this list you can tell that Nico is extremely powerful,and he is still younger than Percy,with a weak physical body (depression and ED do some wonders to you-) and wasn't never "officially trained" like him since he wasn't around camp much. But he still pulled insane acts even without being 100% ok most of the time.

Nico powers,differently from Percy and Thalia,are extremely versatile. While those two can use whatever source or form of water/lightning to fight,they can't do much outside of their fathers's domains. And then you have Nico. Nico that can use his powers to travel around the world and sending messages with a mental link,other than use them to fight. People always talks about Percy controll over all types of liquid (even poison or the Underworld's rivers),but there is still water in them,so it's normal for him to do so. Thalia can use lightnings because it's normal for her to do so since those are Zeus's main sources of power. But Nico's powers are more than just controlling the dead,he can manipulate dreams (something that only the Hypnos cabin can do if I remember correctly) and can use geo-kinesis too,even tho not as much good or frequent as Hazel (before she started to work with her mist affinity). He can do it all.

I'm not trying to pull the "Nico is more powerful than Percy" argument here,but more focusing on Nico's versatility usage of his powers. And Rick made a mistake here with him,that he realized later and tried to minimize.

You see,when you have a powerscaling system,you usually take the main character as the "default": it's from them that you start to build it so other people can understand where others characters stand,compared to the MC,on the scale. Most of the time,people want their MC to grow stronger after every fight,starting from the bottom,untill they are the most powerful character in the story. It's a format done everywhere (anime,movie,comics,fanfic,books,ecc...) and Rick Riordan also used it with Percy. And when you have as MC the "most powerful character ever" (in this case the most powerful demigod since Heracles times),you need to be careful with your side characters,especially when the author doesn't want them to outshine the MC. For this reason,most of the time,they are either weaker than them or have extremely excessive drowbacks. A good example of this is Jason: Rick introduced him to us as the roman counterpart for Percy,but made us understand that he wasn't never at Percy level of power. And when you have a "side" character as Nico,adding to the fact that he's most of the time the wild card for their victories and always know everything,you have a big problem.

Riordan made it clear that no one (for now) can surpass Percy in term of abilities. But he still went out of his way making Nico's powers more versatile than the others. Logically,he should have been stronger than Percy,especially because death cannot be stoped and it's part of everyone life,but canonically it wasn't going to happen since the MC is Percy. Riordan realized in a second moment that his powers were too much and decided to make sure Nico was always held back by something from going full out (like Jason).

Nico is the only child of the big 3 that,if he use so much of his powers,has extremely horrible drowbacks even when he shouldn't. I could understand during MoA-BoO events in HoO,he was either dying or disappearing into the shadows because of his kidnapping and Tartarus,and still had an extremely draining task to finish. But from HoO to ToA there is a big timeskip (I think 6 months or more but I'm not so sure) where he should had all the time in the world to heal and having back full controll over his powers. But he doesn't. Nico still faint after shadow-travelling,even tho after his trip with the statue he should have been stronger and not having problems for a normal trip. Which sucks,especially when Rick most of the time make him pull some jaw-dropping power-play that give you the full picture on how strong he really is.

I don't think Percy had so many downgrades with his powers,I never saw him almost fainting from controlling the waters. He get tired,yes,but that's it. Thalia has more restrictions because of her fear,but I also never saw her having so many problems after using her powers (after she went with the Hunters we never see her in general anymore). Neither did Hazel with her geo-kinesis powers (before Rick decided to make her learn mist manipulation). Jason is a whole mess because he faint every day when he gets hit by a brick,even when he isn't fighting or using his powers (Rick didn't do him justice either). It's only Nico that has so many negative effects.

And the fandom can explain it,in a canon logic,with: "He's s still young,he will have time to grow stronger." (I agree) ;"He wasn't never in a good physical condition so it's normal that he has this many negative effects." (Even dying he was still able to curse someone to literally becoming a ghost) ; "He was malnourished and depressed,since he didn't take care of himself before he still have problems,wait for him to be healthy." (Again,even in those conditions he still pulled insane stunts). But,outside of the narrative,Riordan totally nerfed him because he realized that he wrote his powers too powerful and useful compared to Percy's,and since he couldn't have his MC outshined,he made sure to slow Nico in any way possible.

In BotL and TLO there are 2 scenes that,for a long time,I thought I was the only one to ever have read them since no one talked about them.

In the end of BotL when Percy get out of the Labyrinth and went with Rachel to see the coffin,Nico created an earth barrier (or something closer to it) to help them escape form Kronos's attack. He never did that after it,and I never saw people acknowledge that scene so I legitimately thought that I was imaginating it. Which was strange since it came right after the famous "Did you just throw a blue brush in the eye of the Titan Lord?" scene,but no. It really happened and Nico did use the earth at his liking. After that Riordan decided to never bought it up and Nico never manipulated the earth in that way (he still split the ground a couple of times) again.

In TLO after Nico went to free Percy from the dungeons,they escaped the palace and went to the Styx. During their escaping Nico glared at the guards,while growing weaker and weaker with each one,and they ignored them. Again,since I never saw someone talk about it I genuinely thought I was remembering things wrong. Especially because it was part of the whole "Betrayal" plot that everyone know. But again,it wasn't the case,Rick just decided to never bring it up again. It was the only time Nico did something like that. Someone can say "Well,those are the royal guards and their boss is his dad they would never go against him." but the guards were against Nico,if he didn't do whatever the fuck he did,they were going to tell Hades about their escape. So,again,Rick realized he gave him a powerful trick and then hoped that one one would remember it after he used it one time.

All of this shows that,even if he is good at writing certain things,when it comes to others topics (like power-scaling,Tartarus's trauma and many more) he just can't write well and try to put patches on the holes,without having success. But that's for another post that I will do.

Rick lack of continuation in his work,and he needs to decide what the hell he is going to do with Nico,because the guy himself is a contradiction that needs to be solved. And if I see someone else say that he is weak because he continue to faint,I'm gonna crash out very very very bad since it's Rick's fault. Nico has grown enough in his power to stand tall and use them without having majors problems (if he abuse them,then of course he is in big troubles). He isn't anymore the 13 years old kid that was dying during a world-ending trip after days of being captive by the enemy,and Riordan needs to acknowledge it and move on from that.

[chronicdelusionistsart]

Bernard Dowd and the Art of Recontextualization

I'm what you might call a "fake Batman fan" - that is, I've only watched most of the Batman animated series', all of the live action movies, most of the animated ones, played some of the video games... so, you know, probably thousands of hours of my life in Batman related media. But not the comics! Fake fan!

Frankly, I find the comics medium the way DC and Marvel do it to be really hard to follow. There's the fact that you can't really follow an individual solo character without them getting caught up in massive crossover events that ruin their arc and pacing, there's the soap-opera-iness that encourages cheap and revolving conflicts inherent to the longform monthly release schedule, the writer roulette, and there's also just that going back to try and thread a particular continuity or character is an exercise in frustration. Oh and the retcons. Everyone hates those. They've (basically) never been good. Don't remember this part it will never come up aga

But, you know, despite this - or maybe because of this - comics is a breeding ground for ideas. Because of the quick turnaround and the demand for novel conflicts, comics just churn out idea after idea. Good ideas, bad ideas, doesn't matter. Get it to print. Retcon it later if we write ourselves into a corner. Comics are often soooooo first draft coded. This is why I personally prefer adaptations - they often reimagine ideas and retcon them into new narratives where they can serve a more coherent plot. But what happens when a character is picked up for a second draft ... without actually contradicting the earlier material? While enriching the earlier material, even?

(SPOILERS for Tim Drake: Robin and uh... 20 year old comics under the cut!)

So, uh, quick disclaimer - because I have very little overall knowledge of DC's Comics continuity, there may be more interesting examples of times that what I'm going to point out was done. But I love Bernard and from a writer's POV I'm impressed with the way they did it so we're talking about Bernard lmao

The Beginning (Robin 1993) - Reading comics from the 2000s hurts in a way I can't describe

Okay so I heard Tim Drake is dating a guy now? (Penny Sonic voice) Whoa he's bisexual I didn't know that! I'm sure people on the internet are being very normal about this. Cool let's find out more about his new bf. I like starting from the beginning... so like yeah hold on while I crack open the Robin comic and take down what this guy's deal is.

😬

So basically the TL;DR of Bernard in his original appearances is that he seems to be an attempt to introduce some normal stakes teen drama into Tim's life. He has all the Funny Guy Friend Classics - he's got an inflated sense of his proficiency at pulling girls, he's inexplicably drawn towards the protagonist (who is cooler than him), he wants to date the most popular girl in school, and he wants to get down with older women!

This might just be me but while I was going through this I thought like, he almost reads a little uncanny, like he's been filtered through a Disney Teen Special. In practice he mostly serves to introduce Tim to the Real Plot, Darla Aquista, and be one of his ties to civilian life, which is, like, fine. He's ultimately just a background character and he's so unimportant that he only has one appearance after their school gets shot up(!!!), which is, again, to be more of an accessory to the Darla plot.

After this display of "wow this guy's kind of lowkey insane for offering to his resurrected bestie supervillainess to be her manager actually", he's dropped forever. Comics! We're not gonna unpack that.

The Sequel (Batman: Urban Legends) - We're Gonna Unpack That

Until almost two decades later when he calls Tim up for a date. And while I'm trying to skim over a lot to get to the point here and I don't really know the FULL context, it is notable that Tim is in the middle of an identity crisis / the cusp of adulthood when this happens (I think he just lost a spleen or something. That sucks dude). It's pretty implicit that part of the reason he's going to see Bernard is because he's someone familiar in a time when he's facing a lot of new and scary stuff.

And at first blush, he really does seem like the same dude. The familiar arm over the shoulder, the banter, it's all very casual and similar to the ribbing from high school -

- and I guess nothing has happened to Bernard in the interim haha he's just the funny friend guy right?

I really like the way they did this. I'm just unambiguously going to praise how good this is if you just came off the 2000s stuff. Comics have kind of breakneck pacing by nature but they really manage to condense down and then pull off a neat sleight of hand over the course of like four pages here. They re-establish Bernard as a silly guy and then wham you with the fact that yeah actually we ARE gonna unpack that. Fuck you Tim Drake life is ever changing and nothing stays the same

So the TL;DR on the rest of the Urban Legends storyline is that stuff like, HAPPENED to this guy while our focus was elsewhere. He learned martial arts, presumably so that he wouldn't be so helpless in the next school shooting level event, he got into a pain cult, he's just Not Doing Well. We find out, reading between the lines, that calling Tim on a date was probably one of his last attempts to reach out to someone when the cult stuff was getting really bad.

I've heard people complain that Bernard is uninteresting or not a character or entirely focused on his relationship with Tim, and I think that criticism is really weird considering that his entire re-debut focuses on the point that he's been having his own life and making his own (often wild) decisions - ones that really changed the course of his life - while Tim was gone. And it's also notable that this story is about how the fact that he's his own person and has changed and has made the nerve-wracking decision to take action and call Tim inspires Tim himself to take a leap and fling himself into the uncertain waters of young adulthood.

Me when I have my bi awakening and call to get out of a rut simultaneously because Cute Insane Guy Inspired Me. iconic

So that's how Bernard has changed. But that's not recontextualization, that's just the writers taking a guy and making him do another, cooler thing. Well hold the fuck on because we're not goddamn done.

What did he mean by th-

The Recontextualizerrrrr (Tim Drake: Robin) - Bernard is the funniest person in Gotham City. I'll not be taking constructive criticism on this

Tim Drake: Robin is the followup to the Urban Legends story and Tim is the main character fr. Obviously. but Bernard is also a major character. Later, he even gets to be a POV character. But they don't do that for several issues, instead treating us to his shenanigans from Tim's point of view as he solves a bizarre serial murder case and like, they're cute! And neither of them are normal in the slightest. I love that for them.

Again, TL;DR, there are a lot of interactions where Bernard talks to Tim both in and out of costume, but we don't get to see his POV until they go out to a restaurant and meet Bernard's parents there by accident and Tim has to run off to do Robin stuff. And like... a lot of stuff happens in this one bois. Whammy after whammy

We're suddenly introduced explicitly to a lot that was only implied or just completely unavailable before. Bernard's parents are ragingly homophobic. Probably were never great even before that. He suffers from depression. All that is a lot to. wait. hold on a second

he knows?????

HE KNOWS????

Okay so if you stop at this point and reread the entire run so far you find out that Bernard is in fact the biggest troll in the entire universe. This is the moment that cemented him as my favourite, by the way. Like I had a feeling that he knew and I was just laughing my ass off when my suspicions were confirmed.

But this is really interesting on top of that because Bernard has been revealed to be, at this point, a guy who you should look deeper than the surface to understand. Someone who masks his true self and whose true motivations you can only uncover if you're really looking past the facade. Even with Tim, he sort of offers Tim and Robin half the story each, taking advantage of Robin's "distance" to give out information he wants Tim to think about but that he's reluctant to talk about frankly while at the same time almost daring Tim to open up about his identity.

Absolutely most normal way to tell your bf about your cult trauma. You'll always be famous to me Bernard Dowd

This is a really neat trick by the writers. It makes Bernard a multifaceted character who got to quietly develop while we were mostly focused on Tim, and there's some clever clever foreshadowing they set up in this run to achieve this. If it were just this, I would call it good writing.

But it actually goes one level deeper than that and becomes something really really special. because as we all know, Bernard was not conceived to be this way, he was a one-off guy who was kind of annoying and he was essentially retconned to be, like. Gay? Have depth? Be funny? All of those things?

The Seamless Retcon (Robin 1993 Again) - We took your guy and we gave him gay subtext and it worked astoundingly well

This is not a new observation btw, I've seen a ton of posts to this effect. But oh my god. Some of these panels really hit different with the new Bernard lore. Like holy fuck just read this back to back

There are tons of moments like this. There's SO MUCH that the revelation that Bernard is queer adds to his initially extremely underwhelming tenure in the Robin comics. A reread almost begs the question of what Bernard must have been thinking at any given moment! BRO YOU SAID YOU WANTED TO FUCK HIS STEPMOM. That's completely believable as a next-level closeting move and goes from kind of annoying to turbofunny.

Like yeah of course he's acting like a douche. His father is a status-chasing asshole and he's five racks deep in the closet. Of course he gravitates towards Tim - his gaydar is pinging and he thinks Tim is cute. And it's also pinging that Tim is like. You know

None of this would hit as hard if the writers had not set up Bernard as someone who masks so much. They worked it in that character trait to mean that you could always glean information deeper than the surface from his top level interactions.

Because of this, Bernard is really fucking interesting and he's a good character and he's one that gets better on reread. Like I said, that's a set of observations that are not new to me. But something that really gets to me is how seamless and intentional it is. It really feels like the writer sat down and took their time devising a guy that is believable as that other guy, but only if you read back with certain context.

The conclusion - Comics. Man.

So is this just about how Bernard is really fucking interesting and he's a good character and he's one that gets better on reread and that he can exist independent of Tim and all the haters are wrong. Yeah of course. 💖

But also like, I have thoroughly proven to myself that I was kinda wrong to just reject the published comics medium out of hand. I see now that there's room for the writer's roulette to hit the jackpot and that something I mistook as an outright flaw, the winding and unfocused and often improvised nature of it, can be ridden like a wave if you're skilled enough to do it. Meghan Fitzmarten is a goddamned genius.

I guess I have to read comics now. Fuck

[cilibi]

Fuck- it just hit me that the reason Silco and Jinx’s relationship is so touchy is because of Vander. We see that’s how Vander shows affection to the people he’s close too, and that had to include Silco at some point. And Silco hasn’t gotten to express that kind of affection in a long time, so it’s completely reserved for Jinx.

It’s another mirror to how Vander treated Vi, but corrupted by trauma and codependence.

[shyjusticewarrior]

Zdarsky's Bruce about Jason: "This is one depressed fucker"

Also me about Jason to be fair