yusiyomogi

[yusiyomogi]

Saturn seen by the space probe Voyager 2 (1981) , Voyager 1 (1980) , Cassini (2007) and Hubble (2021).

Credit: NASA

[yusiyomogi]

Storm at Saturn's north pole

Credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech/SSI/CICLOPS/Kevin M. Gill

[yusiyomogi]

"unlikable protagonist" and it's just a woman who's a regular human being with flaws

[yusiyomogi]

i do often think about louis's and claudia's enmeshed relationship, because it's written terrifyingly accurate to real life, and people are right to blame louis for it, because as a parent he should have recognized it and stopped it before it was too late.

at the same time, i think what people often miss in that conversation is that sometimes enmeshment happens because people find themselves in awful situations. like, really bad. in fact, it's the most common reason for enmeshment between parents and their children: abusive or neglectful spouses, clinical depression, being trapped or isolated in the household. it happens a lot more often than people think. and it's considered to be so dangerous because 1) it's hard to recognize right away 2) it's very difficult to get out of this situation when it's too late, for parents and children both.

and i think for louis and claudia that no-return point was the aftermath of the drop. it was when claudia decided to take "sister" role instead of "daughter" one (despite still seeing father in louis). claudia returned home, her mental and emotional state extremely fragile, and as a survivor of sexual assault what she saw at home was something she'd inevitably relate to. and after that she spent years caring for her father, fiercely protective of him and barely having any support on her own (louis tried to be supportive, but she already had built up her walls).

i think if that fight didn't happen, claudia at least had a chance to move on, even if it'd be difficult for her. but at that point their codependency only grew exponentially to a point where they most likely wouldn't be able to live away from each other (i feel strongly that claudia would return again even if she managed to get away on the train).

we saw extremely painful deterioration of this relationship in great details in season 2. and i think it misses the point to say that one of them drifted away or was acting selfishly in their own interest, when the actual reason their relationship turned so toxic and bitter was that codependency, which shouldn't have existed in the first place. they were doomed by circumstances and i think it's pretty damn tragic.

[yusiyomogi]

war time Claudia has to be my favorite

[yusiyomogi]

we need to invent a way to explain how deep running and pervasive and subliminal racism and antiblackness is without immediately sounding like an insane conspiracy theorist

[yusiyomogi]

it's really telling that so many iwtv viewers explain lestat or armand's behavior contextually and louis' behavior ontologically. like there are a large number of viewers who understand that lestat and armand's worst behavior is learned behavior that's rooted in their social context and upbringing- they're vicious murderers bc they're vampires, their abusive behavior is modeled on the men who abused them when they were vulnerable, they were lashing out bc of their abandonment issues or acting out of self-preservation etc etc- but when it comes to louis' worst behavior it's just bc he's a deadbeat dad or a pickme and there's no reason to unearth the roots of why he acts the way he does.

take louis, lestat and armand's respective relationships with claudia- all three of them harm claudia (to different levels and in different ways) and have unique relationships with her, but a lot of viewers who are receptive to contextual explanations of why lestat and armand harmed and ultimately killed her- often framing the harm they did to her as something inevitable and borderline romanticized bc of its cyclical nature- fall back on "ehh he's just a pickme who sold his daughter out for some dick lol" wrt louis even though louis' behavior has just as much social context and his motives and interiority are explored with the most depth out of all the characters in the first 2 seasons.

like louis catches a lot of flak for apparently taking armand's side over claudia's in s2 and not defending her fiercely enough when armand hurts her- a lot of people get mad at him for not taking armand to task in s2ep4, for gently expressing disapproval about claudia's treatment- "i didn't like seeing claudia being made a puppet, i don't like you parading her around in that babydoll dress either"- and never bringing it up again only to later defend armand in his argument with claudia- "doesn't sound like him". and this is usually framed as the result of louis' inherently negative personality traits- he's just the type of guy who'll ditch his daughter for his boyfriend and doesn't really care about her. why didn't louis beat armand's ass at the restaurant or grab claudia and flee town right way?? it's gotta be proof he's a flaky deadbeat, it's just who he is, he can't live without a man in his life etc.

but consider the context of louis' behavior esp after seeing the 2 seasons in full- bc in s2ep7 we clearly see that the last time louis threatened and challenged his stronger, older partner for harming claudia, lestat dropped louis out of the sky. louis was severely injured for several years and dependent on claudia's care until he healed, unable to defend or feed himself let alone protect claudia- and now he's dating armand, who's even older and stronger than lestat and is showing increasing signs of abusive behavior that louis clocks. so it makes total sense for a dv survivor with louis' history to try a "softer touch" with his new partner- bc he's still traumatized from the drop and we know that the last time he went full-on papa bear, his partner broke every bone in his body and he still couldn't really protect claudia longterm.

or the fact that louis didn't leave town with claudia "even when armand warned them"- we clearly see in multiple s2ep2 and s2ep3 scenes that louis is aware of the danger in paris and wants to leave but claudia wants to stay and be with the coven- "claudia's happy i'm happy". he offers to leave town when he thinks armand's about to kill him in s2ep3 but changes his mind after hearing "she doesn't need looking after, she won't be here very long" (translation- "we're not gonna bother looking after her bc we see her as a lost cause") and by the end of s2ep4 louis knows claudia's unhappy but he doesn't actually think she wants to leave the coven until he meets madeleine in s2ep6. this doesn't mean the trial is "claudia's fault" either- the idea that louis or claudia could be to blame in any way for their own lynching is pure victim-blaming logic- but tryna prioritize claudia's happiness while resenting her for it- "you picked the coven, you left me!! sit in your choice sister, go sit in it!!"- explains why louis stayed in town instead of tryna drag her away as soon as he found out armand knew about lestat.

and there are many more examples like this going back to s1- the show depicts louis as a complex character whose choices make logical sense considering his identity, history and experiences, even when they're ugly or contradictory choices, but a lot of viewers respond to him like he only exists in relation to his love interests and he has no depth or trauma or context beyond his negative traits. this doesn't mean all of louis' choices are justified or that everyone has to like him and sympathize with him- but so many viewers refuse to scratch beyond the surface of his character or give him the same "well they're monsters it's in their nature" gothic genre pass that they give the nonblack characters they prefer.

[yusiyomogi]

and i mean. the older one should be more difficult, but not in that way. like, the best examples of this trope is when the older one is weary, guarded, afraid of vulnerability, maybe because they were betrayed in the past or heartbroken or find themself unlovable. the older one has social status and wisdom, the younger one has control over emotional part of the relationship to push it further. yes, it's incredibly overdone trope, but it works for a reason. approaching it from different direction immediately turn the story into something different, where you look at the page and think "oh this is why you couldn’t keep someone with similar social status huh"

there's this specific type of romance writing, where author tries to explore the age gap and power dynamic between "pushing 40" boss and their "early 20s" employee and for some reason they all end up writing the most insufferable fuckers around. and by that i mean, maybe if i were a teen, i'd enjoy that type of fantasy where the older one is allowed to act as an annoying resentful baby, but all i wanna do at my age is kill that character with hammers

[yusiyomogi]

there's this specific type of romance writing, where author tries to explore the age gap and power dynamic between "pushing 40" boss and their "early 20s" employee and for some reason they all end up writing the most insufferable fuckers around. and by that i mean, maybe if i were a teen, i'd enjoy that type of fantasy where the older one is allowed to act as an annoying resentful baby, but all i wanna do at my age is kill that character with hammers

[yusiyomogi]

i love hearing about the declining birth rate like yesss that is a major problem considering our dominant economic model. a problem i plan on contributing to 👍 joining the war on declining birth rates on the side of declining birth rates

[yusiyomogi]

the Tea values are still updating.......

[yusiyomogi]

The Cage Bruises the Fuck Outta Their Shins

[yusiyomogi]

it turns out a lot of people are actually on the same page about whether or not they'd work if they didn't have to earn money, we just all seem to have wildly different definitions of what counts as work. i'll see one person say "of course i would, i'd still want to create art and volunteer in my local community" and another say "hell no i wouldn't, i'd quit work and just create art and volunteer in my local community" and then they look at eachother like they said something incomprehensible.

[yusiyomogi]

Yeah, I get that there are other excellent performances on TV, but really, no one is better than and EXTREMELY few are as great as Jacob Anderson and Sam Reid in Interview with the Vampire.

exactly! the last few years at least. the more shows i watch that were praised this year, the saltier i become with this whole thing. there are a lot of talented actors for sure, but performance doesn't always depend fully on the actor. iwtv gave jacob and sam amazing environment to demonstrate their acting abilities and they worked their asses off. this type of performance will be remembered for years.

like, just looking at what they got at nominations this year, the only one i'm not salty about is sterling k. brown. i didn't watch the show, but i saw him in "this is us" years ago and he was phenomenal there, so i believe he's still doing great.

[yusiyomogi]

yes, it's pretty cool when actor plays two characters in one story with subtle differences between them! i mean, jacob anderson played like 4 versions of the same character who changes subtly through his life and uses two distinct perfectly-mastered accents (not even close to what jacob speaks like in real life), including a mix of those accents depending on his character's mental state. and then his scene partner sam raid also played 5 versions of the same character who changes through different points of view and has to keep the core of that character, while also showing how narrative biases affect him. both are loved by critics too! but i guess... since we have another much more popular show about this thing... i guess we need to praise those actors instead...

[yusiyomogi]

remember when they were saying that bisexuals couldn't be butch or femme and we had to be like. deer

[yusiyomogi]

This sort of thing.

[Image IDs in alt text}