From what you mention it sounds like a good story would have no heroes or villains, just weirdos living their lives and other weirdos who get in their way. Just circumnavigate that conflict completely and move on to something new and more interesting.

Ehh, that's not quite the takeaway from it I would have!

I think it's fine to have heroes and villains. Most of my favorite stories do have those distinctions. My point is that you have to accept those categories are wibbly, context-conditional, and aren't personality traits.

Let's pick an example: Muska from Castle In The Sky. Unambiguous villain. Does not have a secret nice side. Really, very nasty especially towards the finale.

I don't think the problem here is that Muska is a villain or that he lacks requisite moments of "well at least he is nice towards something" to create 'complexity'- if anything I think that could clutter up the narrative.

The thing that makes Muska good, to me, is that he feels like a real person. He has specific qualities. He has things he believes. We can speculate or extrapolate how he became that way.

He doesn't do anything "because it's evil". Even what could come close to an anvil-worthy moment when he tears through the undergrowth and roots trying to reach the giant etherium crystal, ranting about how filthy this natural beauty is, aligns with character traits we know he has. He's a controlling perfectionist who's ultimately only interested in his own vision of how things should be. He's also in an ecstatic frenzy of how his moment is at hand and he's won almost everything; tripping over a plant or having to brush some tree roots out of his way is agonizing when this is his victory and everything should be perfect- and this intolerance is a consistent pattern in him, brought to the surface by this moment of excitement.

That's interesting. I could write a much longer, denser post exclusively about Muska and how he ticks. That, to me, is the catch here: you have to act like your villains are complicated moving pieces.

The problem is when the assumption is that some people are just inherently evil and you don't have to ask why or how they got that way or in what way. The problem is when you just assemble everything you don't personally like together into one character, creating unfortunate associations (see: any media where the only characters who are fat or ugly are bad people, especially with the implication we're supposed to find them disgusting)

Likewise! It's very very important to keep a bead on why your heroes are heroes. Otherwise you basically have "it is okay when Link comes to town and essentially manipulates people by doing things until they give him the Sacred Stone but it is very not okay when Ganondorf does that exact same thing and conveniently the actions Link has to take to get the stone are nice while the implications are pretty good that if Ganondorf could have done favors and made nice to get what he wanted, he would have since in the same game he explicitly cozied his way into the royal family's favor so he's not incapable of doing that"

The part where "the hero" or "the villain" creates problems is when you stop there. That's when it can become a petri dish for prejudice or just a sneaky place for weak reading or writing to hide. Especially when, if you look at fandom posts, you can often see how people's personal hierarchy of who's the worst villain is, well, personal.

And that's not a bad thing! It's to be expected frankly. A hundred people might agree murder is wrong but why it's wrong and what about it is wrong is a minutiae that splits things. So whoever seems "the absolute worst" to us is always going to be personal. Some forms of evil are more intimate to us than others. And we shouldn't get rid of that... but it's important to separate "is objectively worse" from "feels worse to me personally"

[Wowee that's a lot. I'm flattered you're cool with sending this to me, though! I love seeing people's takes and discussing this kind of thing so I'm flattered.

I'm going to try to address all of this, and I'm going to start from the bottom and go up.

To start, yeah. The Buu saga in general is a mess. I like it okay, and would rather watch the Buu saga a million times in a row than sit through Super, but yeah. It's definitely not well done. Somehow, it is both rushed and moves too slowly and I agree that it's really lame that this looked like it was going to be the passing of the torch to either Vegeta and Piccolo or the younger generation with Gohan. Goten, and Trunks. However, instead out time gets wasted in Gohan getting his mystic form and Gotenks becoming a thing just for both of them to end up failing miserably and for Goku to have to clean up the mess as usual. Considering this was supposed to be the end of the series, I don't really understand why they went this route, but it never really worked for me either.

As you mentioned, even Vegeta and Piccolo were shafted in this Saga when it would have been nice to see one them protect the planet. I mean...they tried to make it seem like Vegeta came to care about saving the planet, so why not let him do it? Even at the end, it's Hercule that convinces the Earthlings to give energy, not Vegeta, so what the hell was the point (I have a lot of thoughts on Vegeta's "redemption" in that it's not one and his real "redemption" comes at the end of the saga, not when he blows himself up)?

Now, to focus on Gohan specifically from the end of the Cell Saga to the Buu Saga. I agree with some of what you said and other things I don't necessarily. I'll start with what I agree with: trauma. Toriyama not addressing trauma isn't a problem with just Gohan, though. Arguably, every character in this series is likely traumatized to some degree, whether it's just from dealing with being part of Earth's special forces and dying in the fight or seeing and experiencing horrific things. Another BIG example that the writers should have reckoned more with in the realm of trauma was Vegeta. Man was enslaved for a good portion of his life. Likely tortured at least mentally if not physically. But all of that gets swept under the rug, and it absolutely happens with Gohan throughout the series too. I wish there was more exploration of all of this as well, but I guess that's why people like me and other rpers are here.

That said, I propose another view of why Gohan took up the mantle of the Great Saiyaman: he has a hero complex. He saved the world. He was the only one that could beat Cell. He didn't believe his dad at first and thought Goku would be the one to do it as he always did. But that's not what happened. And then Goku died, and while Goku wasn't in the business of playing Superman, I think this did instill a complex in Gohan to feel like if he doesn't do it, if he doesn't help and save people, no one will. And once he gets to the city and sees the bank robbery up close and stops it, that sort of really takes hold in him. Yeah, maybe he wouldn't go with the costume if he could keep his identity secret with just SS, but he couldn't. And it makes sense he wouldn't want his classmates to view him as anything but average when he wouldn't even take due credit for killing Cell.

But yeah, I honestly can see Gohan doing this. He's always been willing and ready to jump in and help people. We see it against the Saiyans once he gets over his fear. We see it on Namek, and how he wants to help with the androids. He is shown saving people who cannot defend themselves quite a bit considering, so I don't think it's out of line for him to take on that role with that in mind along with me seeing a hero complex arising in him.

Does it feel out of place when you consider that this kid would be traumatized? Of course. And I wish we got to see more of him and his family grieving. Goten growing up only hearing stories about his father (what they do with this is actually pretty good I think; subtle in how Goten has put his dad on a pedestal thanks to Gohan and probably Chi Chi to some degree only to see him not be able to take care of the monster after all, but I like how they handle Goten and Goku meeting). I wish we got more of how Gohan's and everyone else's trauma affected them (I guess we get a little with Yamcha? But that's another convo probably). But, like I said, unfortunately they didn't want to write that. Which is lame.

But yeah. It sucks that after this we get a stagnation of characters in Super. Nobody grows or changes because they gave them no room to do so. Even Goten and Trunks haven't changed and they're meant to be growing up (Goten maybe seems a bit more mature from bits in the manga but it's debatable). Goku regresses, many would argue Vegeta is better, but he's also just been stagnant since the narrative they decided to hammer home was family man instead of him coming to terms with Goku being better than him and FINALLY dropping that old grudge so he CAN grow and become his own man. They've made the same joke about Gohan not training three times in Super, even though his failures against both Cell and Buu likely SHOULD have convinced him to at least try to keep up with his training AND his studies imo. But instead, because they want their funny hahas, they have him stagnate as well. Hell, they even make him the leader of U7 but that basically doesn't matter because, outside of a few blips, it's the Goku and Vegeta show (along with Frieza ew). Videl gets the DB Woman Treatment, arguably, like you mentioned in the Buu Saga (unless you count the last few movies). Piccolo is almost nonexistent in Super until the ToP. Bulma has regressed so much I hate everything when I think about it. Tien is basically forgotten until the ToP. Yamcha is just a joke flat out. I could go on and on but I think you get it.

So, to end before I really start rambling more, the Buu saga could have been really great and handled so much better. However, the thing is, this was meant to be the end. Even though I don't agree with a lot of what they did, they were just trying to wrap it up and call it good. And that shows. That aside, it was just a mess in general with a ton of pacing issues and just general, "but why" feels. I like it in its own way but it is very flawed as you've said.]

submission i got

“I mean if you mean the Joker for “did you want him to SHOOT the mentally ill?” then yes I guess I do? This is a false dichotomy let’s be honest.”

not what i meant. the og post said something about bruce punching mentally ill people and that he was a pussy for not killing like Jason-ergo did you want him to shoot the mentally ill? 

“Like I could say hey its good that the Allies killed Nazis in WWII, and at the same time say many Allied soldiers did awful things to civilians especially in Japan and that’s bad. Do you think I would want Allied soldiers to kill everyone?”

i feel reallly uncomfortable talking about real world issues in relation to fun time comic fictional lets have fun stuff. discussing the issues of how we should handle “justice” is fun but not some much when in relation to the real hardships experienced by actual real people. 

“Maybe what people are really trying to say is Batman is an imperfect person who needs to adjust his methods based on who he is facing. He far too often uses extreme excessive violence when it isn’t needed. At the same time there are stories where he rejects any kind of violence even when used as self defense by people who do need it to protect themselves. As was the case in the Batman story with the woman who used violence to kill a serial rapist murder  that was abducting her. “

theres also plenty of stories where he equates rapist to inhuman monsters and does nothing about the people (like the birds of prey) who do murder them

i think batman’s biggest error is his inconsistent writing and bad faith interpretations rather than his methods. 

“You and I both know its a bad faith argument to say people want Bruce to murder mentally ill individuals. Maybe you could try to actually meet people with compassion and understanding and try to talk to people about their issues with comics. You may find a compromise. For example I think a lot of people would not care about the whole killing not killing thing if DC let the heroes actually rehabilitate villains and have it stick or provided better safety for civilians so that it was more elaborate thefts and less mass murder when it came to Batman stories.” 

okay again this whole argument is about fun silly comic drawing about characters soooo 

anyways yea I agree- we’ve seen a lot of success with harley quinn in relation to this. I think dc should start writing actual interesting stories about bruce that doesn’t paint him as absolutely terrible person/father. cause its a disservice to his character and the legacy of that character. 

if i was writting for dc theres a couple of things i would do! the joker needs to be fixed- his character is all over the place and im tired of it being written off as him being a twitsed cycle path-its boring. We the audience shouldn’t want the joker to die, and we should feel the same weight and guilt bruce does when faced with jason’s anger. i think making harley quinn an anti-hero is a step in the right direction ESPECIALLY if she was a villian villian (just as bad/worse than the joker himself) before. if we see a person finally take the chance that the batman gives them. Rehabilitation over death-theres always a chance. if one bad day can turn you into a villian one good one turn you into a hero. etc etc etc

on a more philosophical note- this whole discussion is really about what justice IS. and what it ISNT.

contrapoints (i know she has had controversies but not to due with this particular topic and i find she does a good job articulating her point but pls keep any biases she might or might not have when watching) has a video about justice that i would really recommend. 

ANYWAYS WHAT PART ABPUT NOT STARTING DISCOURSE DID YOU NOT GET ANONNNN HUHHHHHH

Part 2 of my rambly post

Part 1 is here Now, you may have noticed I haven't talked about any characters other than the four main turtles we follow the story of. I think that in general, a show about four teenage mutant ninja turtles should at least have the best character designs physically and internally, which is why they're the main point of this post. I will briefly go over other characters real quick though, and I'm sorry if I don't remember the names of all of them. Splinter first, since he, with April, is probably the 5th and 6th most important/iconic character. Splinter's physical character design is genuinely so cool. They could have easily just made him a grey rat-like in Rise, but it does make me worry if the animators and 3D modelers spent more time on him than the main heroes, because his physical design is honestly incredible. I do think personality-wise, he's kinda similar to Rise, which I like, but I do agree that in Rise, the father figure is more like a grunkle stan insert. Which can be good or bad depending on how you look at it. I personally don't mind it, but he isn't gonna be my favorite character, I'll say that right off of the bat. April O Neil, I'll be honest, I kind of love Rise's interpretation. She seems a lot more wild-style crazy rebel of a character than in 2012. In 2012, she seems a lot more fire personality which is kind of understandable considering the plot has her lose her dad I guess. I dunno, just seems kind of flat though. Like, she seems mildly bothered by losing her dad and then goes straight to "I will have my revenge" which kinda sounds flat to me. I will be absolutely brutally true that this may just be because I didn't get much of her character yet, but I dunno, I love April from Rise a bit better. And design wise? Eh, she's okay. I kinda like that the TMNT franchise in general is going for a more black April, not just for 'getting to say they have a clear black character in their series now' but also because I think it fits April a bit better honestly. I dunno. I know this post in general may tick off a lot of people because there's a lot of nostalgia that plays into how much you like a show, especially when it's an older version, but just please note that this is my opinion. In the end, I just struggle to, and sadly probably won't be able to watch 2012 TMNT because it just kinda doesn't tick what I liked in Rise. I feel like the characters kinda aren't great, both in appearance and personality design, and I think the visual quality of the show is a bit lack-luster and kinda uncanny at times. I think it also doesn't help that as an ost enthusiast, I found Rise to have an absolute banger ost. The intro (I think a remix of the original from 2012, but it might have dated earlier), is an absolute banger! The fighting music and a lot of the tracks in specific situations are great and gosh I wish the soundtrack of Rise could be found somewhere, but I only found the movie track. If you want a clear ost example but don't want to watch the whole Rise show just to find some, I fell in love with the ost from the Baron Draxum fight in the literal first episode. There's also a motif I fell in love with that played a lot throughout the movie. I most remember it playing in the fight between Leo and Raph though. I notice I'm rambling again, and although this whole post was a ramble, I could go on and on about the ost of Rise, so we should probably conclude this (practically an) essay. Despite what it may sound like, I would actually love to hear your opinions on the shows too, if you'd like to repost this with your thoughts or leave a note I would enjoy reading them as long as they're decently respectful. I wish I could like 2012, but I guess it may just not be for me.

You know I like the idea of Roy as an "Outlaw". One because every hero is an outlaw as what they do is illegal. And two a good writer could point out that a lot of truly heroic people were outlaws because the laws themselves were unjust like Harriet Tubman. I also don't like the idea that Roy is a light so he belongs in the light with the other heroes like Outsiders suggested. If Roy is a light shouldn't he be where people need light the most aka the darkest depths.

To each their own but I have...things to say about this.

Before I start: If you wrote this because you liked RHATO, just...leave. We aren't going to agree. It's bad. It's out of character for all of them. And some of the art...yikes. So if that's why you like Roy that way, go and enjoy yourself, don't let me stop you. But leave me alone because I don't want it.

Also know that I am Tired so I may seem like an asshole. More of one than usual. I'm very blunt.

First off, if you want to comment on a post I made, I'd prefer you reblog it. I know I sound like an asshole, but it feels almost cowardly to me to come to my ask box on anon when what you have to say is about another post I made. Maybe that's just me though.

Also, maybe use proper punctuation if you're going to argue with me.

Now to the actual content:

"One because every hero is an outlaw as what they do is illegal. And two a good writer could point out that a lot of truly heroic people were outlaws because the laws themselves were unjust like Harriet Tubman."

I was never good at history, but for someone bringing up what a "good writer" can do, you are not very good at comparison. Like, the shit she did is not comparable to comic book vigilantism, or real vigilantism. Comic book vigilantism is too big and dramatic and real vigilantism is too stupid. It feels like you're diminishing her accomplishments which...don't do that?

You also seem to not understand context. Every vigilante is an "outlaw" in that they act "outside the law", but not all of them call themselves that because it's redundant. The title of Outlaws the group has is because they have supposedly broken not just laws, but established "vigilante rules". Jason is specifically known for breaking Batman's One Rule. That's why they're "Outlaws"; because they aren't heroes, they're anti-heroes banding together.

Your thinking sounds very black and white with your whole "light" thing, but I can't really make heads or tails of what you're saying. I'm guessing you're saying that comics portrayed him as good and thus should be around "good" people, and you prefer him with...less good people? Like if that's the case why are you commenting?

Roy has never, ever been portrayed as unequivocally good or saintlike. He is the first to admit he's fucked up. And it's not just the drugs. He is an absolutely shameless flirt. Unlike Dick who wants to like someone before he gets in bed with them (and still ends up in a lot of them somehow), Roy will hop into bed and then catch feelings. And he has a track record of liking dangerous people. Cheshire is a prime example. He's often reckless in regards to himself and he's very stubborn. He told Dinah once that he thinks he's poison because it seemed like everyone he loved left him one way or another (probably part of the reason he has that tattoo, if there is an actual fucking reason). The one thing that changed him aside from dropping the drugs was Lian. Roy is messed up but he is a good father, and that is mostly consistent any time he shows up.

Idk if you noticed, but my whole post was about me wanting Jason and Roy together despite what's been written for them. Like, it wasn't about wanting Roy to be a "good boy" or anything like that. I want Roy to be a modernized version of who he was pre-Flashpoint, which was not someone without blood on his hands.

I will also remind you that in Red Hood and Arsenal, Jason is the one who says Roy is too good for him when he's "breaking up" with him. So like...Jason Todd, dark and moody murder Bat, former crime lord, doesn't want to taint Roy's goodness with his presence, or let him down when he doesn't measure up. Like, this is canonical???

I don't know what you want with this.

Hi ! Can you please do prompt for Sebastian Michaelis ( black butler)?!

157. "I don't want anyone else to have your love, kiss your lips or see them in your arms. That's only my place."

♥️😍i love your writing , it is always amazing. Thank you in advance.

It honestly has been too long since I've written anything for this fine man😩.

Tw: Yandere themes, unhealthy mindset, unhealthy relationship, possessiveness, obsessiveness, manipulation, clinginess, touchiness, mentions of kidnapping

Prompt 157: "I don't want anyone else to have your love, kiss your lips or see them in your arms. That's only my place."

"What a dream of a man he is." you sighed, face basically kissing the pages of the thick book you were reading right now. A somewhat embarrassed chuckle escaped your lips after those words registered in your mind because who would say something like this whilst reading a book? Had someone from your friends ever done this, daydreaming and gushing like this about a character who only existed in books? You wondered, there wasn't much else you could really do besides making assumptions.

You couldn't simply ask your friends or people around you, the old lady in your neighborhood who was a confirmed bookworm for example. Not anymore, with your freedom being "temporarily" restricted, as Sebastian had told you a couple of times before.

At the thought of the not so human butler you let out a frustrated noise. A true gentleman he was indeed, kidnapping you, mocking you and treating you like a child when you were rebelling against him and trying to justify his actions. He was a demon who had killed, so you could understand that his sense of moral wasn't exactly the most polished and you had your vast doubts that this would ever change.

Worst of it all was that you had bought his sweet and flirting behavior at first. There was no denial that Sebastian was incredibly attractive and knew how to woo someone and from what you had seen, he was aware of this fact as well.

Long gone were the times of sweet words and small presents though and you felt like an idiot for not having noticed the red flags sooner.

No, it was more like you had chosen to not look too deep into the case out of a certain thrill and excitement, maybe even because you had felt flattered and cajoled. All your problems had suddenly slowly vanished, annoying and mean people had started avoiding you and financial issues had been taken care of.

If you had to be honest, you had suspected that the butler of the young Earl was behind it all which was why you had agreed to meeting him more often and spending time with him. It had been so tantalizing, having a young, talented and handsome young man completely smitten with you, someone who seemed to be straight out of a fairy tail and could solve all of your struggles.

You had enjoyed it so much that you had gladly overlooked everything else, the way how so casually other people who you saw as loved ones or didn't even know started spending less and less time with you and how Sebastian became the daily part of your life.

You had even loved him.

Now you merely paid the consequences for your willful ignorance, together with the truth that Sebastian was nothing like the heroes from the books you had read throughout your life. He was no gentle and respectful prince, he only had the art of mind-blowing acting skills down to the absolute perfection.

In reality he was the demon himself though, a literal one on top of that.

"I should have known that someone like you can't exist. You're way too perfect and beautiful to be real." you continued to mumble silently, another wistful sigh tumbling from your lips as you got to one of your favorite parts.

Here the prince and his love were meeting each other for the first time and while letting your eyes take in each letter, you came to realize with a strange mix of amazement and unsettledness how similar your memories of meeting Sebastian for the first time had been.

Truly unsettling how smooth and informed he was, how he just knew what he had to do and say to blend in and steal the hearts of others.

"On the other hand you wouldn't strip my freedom away from me, would you? You're a true gentleman after all.", you mused, tipping your index finger on the opened page and taking a sip from the glass water you had prepared for yourself.

"I wonder if he even has a heart...Probably not, I doubt demons have any sort of heart inside of their chest that beats."

You were probably sounding a little bit crazy right now, but you thought you had earned the right to be a little bit peculiar after your abduction and the escape attempts that were treated like a game from Sebastian's side. You couldn't escape, a human apparently wasn't meant to outsmart a demon like him, at least not someone like you.

"Enough thinking about him. It just frustrates me." you huffed out, deciding to enjoy reading your book, one of the few things you were allowed to do anyways.

Focusing on the story and the characters would surely help you and after the next few pages you found yourself utterly invested in the story, your heart mourning lightly whenever the kind and selfless acts of the hero were mentioned.

Sebastian only acted on his own desires.

"If you would have found someone like this guy there before, what would you have done?"

"I would definitely marry and love him, he's a dream too good to come true after all." you answered without thinking much, not even bothering to look away from the book.

"Is that so?" the same voice answered with a tint of amusement inside of it in the same moment your brain was able to identify the far too smooth and familiar voice.

Your whole body went rigid, your fingers curling tightly around the book you were holding as your senses suddenly became hyper aware and you came to notice the presence looming right behind you and the couch you were sitting on.

Wasn't he supposed to work for his master until the early night?

Why was he already back?

"If you're currently wondering why I am already back, it's because I finished a bit earlier and convinced the master to let me go earlier. I missed you after all." he responed as if he had just heard your thoughts, entertained by the way you tried to get swallowed by the couch.

You did not dare to let your eyes dart besides you as you felt, sensed, him leaning forward so that his head was right next to yours, peering down at the story.

For a few seconds silence fell upon you two as he glanced back and forth between the book and you, his crimson eyes causing you to grow smaller and smaller as your heart picked up pace as if trying to run away as well.

"So you'd rather want to be together with this wannabe man there instead of living with me?"

It was not a question, more of a statement that hit you with a realization which ended in your cheeks heating up.

"How long have you been watching me?" you asked, the growing embarassment causing your voice to be more high-pitched than normally.

"Long enough to understand that you believe that a character from a book is better than me." he replied, pronouncing the last part with a half-entertained and yet firm tone before quickly snatching the book out of your hand.

That finally elicited the reaction out of you that he had wanted, your head swiftly turning around and looking at him with indignation, shock, the still visible embarrassment and the small emotion that you desperately tried to hide from his preying eyes.

"Aren't you going to greet me with the same adoration you just gushed about with your knight in shining armor?" he continued to mock lightly, watching your movements with attentive sharpness.

You felt your temper being tested, though your patience with Sebastian was very short to begin with yet you always hesitated when you felt his gaze on you. The knowledge of what he really was and what he was capable of always had invisible hands which held you back a bit.

"Good evening. Now please give me my book back." you spoke, collecting every ounce of politeness you could muster up to not get another scolding for your behavior, though your eyes weren't looking into his own.

Sebastian overlooked that though, instead flying over the next page of the book.

"Why? Because you want to read this scene and dream about how much you want to be kissed as well?"

You pulled your shoulders up as your eyes found themselves stuck at the floor. It was just a damn innocent kiss, nothing wild yet the man in front of you was an expert in teasing.

You did not answer, the floor suddenly looked much more interesting than you could remember. Red eyes were watching you with a warm glint inside of them before Sebastian closed the book quietly.

“Kitten~” he coaxed, his one hand brushing gently your cheek, hoping to get you to look at him. Part of you relished in his touch as memories flashed before your inner eyes which you forced down your darker corners as fast as possible yet your instincts took over you in your moment of weakness. (y/c) eyes finally met his own in a cautious, careful way that gave the demon a short-lived sense of nostalgia as he recalled how excited and joyful those eyes had used to look at him.

You were still lovely, Sebastian just missed the days where you had blindly trusted him, when you had started to show glimpses of the same feeling for him that was eating him on his inside out for you.

You were in danger of getting lost in those eyes that scared and adored you all at once, the demon enabled you to not even fall victim to this risk. Instead you had no time to react in any way as a pair of lips was pressed against your own, the scent of forest and remaining aromas from the Phantomhive mansion briefly penetrating your nose. The moment didn’t last long though before the butler pulled away, just before you could kick your mind to push him away.

“Why did you do that?!” you bellowed shocked, angry and surprised all at once, surprising yourself with how loud your voice really was. Your hand clamped protectively over your mouth and you turned your body completely away from him, wishing that you could ignore the excited and stinging tingle in your chest.

You rationalized somewhere in your mind that you didn’t have to act so offended, it only gave away your feelings more. You knew that Sebastian most likely knew himself and you had only tried to fool yourself so far as well. Feelings were an obstacle and everything but easy to erase, or maybe you were just a very attached person.

Pulling your knees closer to your body and curling yourself up in a sitting position, you just stared with thoughtful eyes into the air. Only absentmindedly noticing how Sebastian put the book away, only absentmindedly noticing how he sat down next to you.

You had projected your wishes into those stories, you were indeed mourning over something. It wasn’t just what you wanted it to be. Your sense of what was right and what was wrong was currently interfering with your emotions, something was stopping you, pulling you away for him.

The spark was still there though, you had never fully stopped loving him.

You hated debating against yourself to the point where your consciousness and your feelings were yelling at each other. When you suddenly felt one hand grabbing your chin gently and tilting your head, you felt fear dripping inside your core.

Sebastian was manipulative, his words and actions were like honey, sweet and alluring. He would take advantage of everything, including your wavering determination to not feel anything for him.

Why did he have to understand emotions so much better than you, who had been feeling for their entire lifetime emotions?

“You still love me, (y/n).” he said with a finality that you were unable to protest against, you would have had to lie anyways.

“You’re just a bit overwhelmed as of now, the existence of my kind had to be a shock for you.” he continued, skilled hands rubbing down your arms and shoulders and melting the tension inside of them away.

You didn’t have the mental strength to try to resist when he moved closer until he felt the warmth of your body right next to his, frankly enjoying how you let him do so, unable to deny his words and your own feelings.

“I’ve already told you that I took you away because I love you. I am aware of the way how humans express their love and you know that I tried it as well, but that wasn’t enough for me. I can’t seem to be able to court you the way a normal human does, my kind isn’t quite familiar with emotions such as love. I can assure you that if we do bound, it’s forever. Differently from humans whose emotions are fleeting, fragile and withering, a demon stays loyal, strong and devoted. I am able to provide you with everything you need in your life and I would do about everything to give my mate a happy life by my side.”

Part of you still attempted to push the blame that you enjoyed the attention of him just a little bit on the fact that he was the only person you could really interact with, that it was the only reason why you found comfort in his caressing and loving touches.

“So why are you fighting your emotions still? You won’t find anyone out there who can love you and protect you like I can do. Why be so silly and resist your own feelings? Are you perhaps hoping to have someone rescuing you who you can label as your hero just because you don’t think you can love a demon like me and accept what I did? Would you really prefer loving someone else that badly?”

The proximity between you two had long overstepped personal boundaries, his arms wrapped around yours and long legs entangled with your own. His silky hair was tickling your face a bit, his forehead almost pressed against yours which made it as good as impossible to avoid those red orbs of his.

Those eyes that gazed possessively over you yet managed to still give you a good thrill, enchanted you to the point where you were silently sobbing in your mind how unfair it was.

Despite some pleads to not give in, you found one of your hands stroking his head, letting the smooth, black strands of hair slipping through your fingers.

A content look softened his eyes, even if you thought that a flicker of smugness was somewhere in his eyes as well.

You took it as a sign of encouragement for you to continue when he laid his head on your chest and shifted both of you in a more comfortable position. You couldn’t deny the surge of warmth and peace that coursed through you when you saw how relaxed he became, eyes closing and listening to your steady and strong heartbeat.

“I don’t want anyone else to have your love, kiss your lips or see them in your arms. That’s only my place.”

10 Anti LO Asks

1. Maybe this is just me, but in every story where Hades is the bad guy, you actually end up seeing his POV and why he’s the way he is, maybe even siding with him over the good guys, yet something like LO, which is destined purely to “make him the good guy”/“redeem” him while tearing everyone else down for his benefit actually makes him look downright evil, worse than any villainous depiction. Sorry, no amount of having daddy issues (which conveniently neither Poseidon or Zeus have) excuses him owning countless slaves, thinking he’s above the law, violently oppressing and abusing his citizens over any little slight or want he has, his greed, and creepy love for controlling young, impressionable women who he throws away when they finally grow a personality, and many other issues. Rachel wants us to look at this greedy, violent capitalist and see a good guy? That’s laughable at best, insulting at worst.

2. I kept up with the fast pass episodes just to see the train wreck but it’s so bad I can’t even bother anymore. There’s another Webtoon I read with good representation, romance, colors, and character designs and reading that masterpiece to then painstakingly read through Lore Olympus was like my own personal hell.

Like imagine making the past 7 episodes or so telling the audience how stupid they are for criticizing Hades and Persephone, and not using the basic knowledge of how court systems work in the court scene. I’d love to see her go to court and try to tell the judge he’s stupid and she’s justified for killing a bunch of people because she feels bad.

3. Okay the ask about Thanatos cucking his foster father is gold.

4. ngl, kinda funny the post saying the FAN voted ringo awards (so its basically a kids choice award, not a legit award by actual people in the comics industry) voted lo persephone "best hero" and the comments were almost entirely people questioning why shed be called a "hero" when shes a mass murderer and a bunch of people agreeing she doesn't deserve the title. idk if the tides are turning but critique/dislike of the series certainly seems a bit more present than it has in the past.

5. i severely doubt RS is keeping track of the plot at this point. Not only does she not have character sheets to keep colors or designs consistent, she also openly writes the week of for episodes, meaning it's very likely that minus basic ideas (hxp end up together. minthe "dies", etc) that everything is almost entirely made up as she goes, and it shows. the fact even the dedicated readers often can't tell what the plot is or what time it is is a bad sign in how she presents this information.

6. i agree with that other anon. LO already had a lot of issues, but it seems especially obvious now Rachel insisting she be a part of the fandom has seeped heavily into the actual comic, and it's gotten worse for it. Don't get me wrong, there are real criticisms Rachel should hear and hopefully fix, but instead she sees the critique and uses her weekly episodes to make up any excuse she can to justify her writing choices instead of fixing what she can. It's not just a waste of time, it's annoying.

7. LO stans are the wildest, they'll say every fiction has its share of flaws and then turn around and harass people who make even the mildest (yet absolutely valid) criticisms. You can be a fan of something and still criticise it, y'all know that right?

Also it's just hilarious that they'll complain about us 'antis' apparently just blindly shitting on this series and going out of our way to do so when in actuality, taking your blog as an example, I've seen nothing but a wide variety of criticisms and sometimes discussions.

There are both fans and non-fans choosing to make their opinions known here because you can't make a criticism of LO anywhere else without being talked down to, called stupid or something along those lines, or harassed, all of which I've seen on the webtoon comments and reddit.

I've seen and been part of my fairshare of toxic fandoms and LO stans really make this fandom one of the worst with everything they've done. 

8. This is like the most mild of criticism but why does lo have so many goddamn typos??? I saw someone mention this on reddit and another person come in saying RS had dyslexia and like okay well if she were still on discover then that's excusable but she's not? She's being paid for this? She's got an editor? She apparently has a proof reader? They should be catching all these typos before the chapter goes live.

Like there really shouldn't be an excuse to this amount of typos especially when you consider the fact people pay money for this

9. Y'all I'm gonna lose it, someone posted an info graphic of LO's timeline in the reddit and it's literally only been 4 weeks in canon and some people are commenting how that can't be right and it's not accurate because 'there have been so many scenes implying the passage of time' or how we just don't see them on their off days but??? There are literally so many people rereading to accurately gauge out the timeline and all coming to the same conclusion that it's been only a month????? Hello????? I am so close to just losing it this is so funny oh my god

10. When comparing Persphone vs Thanatos I’m being qualified in their fields verse nepotism, Thanatos was clearly a young child who couldn’t make his own decisions for his next step of life, his mother literally just dropped him in Hades’ Lap and left. Hades gave him that job and has complained about his performance, but like it seems like that is what he is the god of like idk of hades can fire him.

Persphone was technically a teenager  who did have choices. Hera signed off on it giving her approval but did that approval have to go through? Isn’t hades the king of the dead? Couldn’t he call Hera and he like “this isn’t a good idea since I have feelings for her” (which should be his first green flag out of the ocean of red ones to show he’s got half a mind not to mix business and pleasure AGAIN). But not just there, she gets the job winning at chess, (according to the gods is fine) she doesn’t know how to use a computer. Sure her training wasn’t the best, but Hecate said she was expecting more done by the afternoon and then we haven’t seen her work until after she kissed Hades and asked Minthe for help. (So we only see Persphone needing help for a job or just talking to someone but never actually working efficiently). And then to add another layer, she gets to see hades whenever she wants, she gets paid (which other interns haven’t been paid) but the narrative still says it’s not special treatment. Hades hasn’t even checked her work, or even made her work in probably over a year in real time. She’s just there.

Thanatos (child servant who has a bad relationship with foster father not doing the best at work) vs Persphone (handed mostly everything to her)

Yeah these two “special treatments” are the same. 

Well, this is interesting! So, in that post yesterday, there was one line that really baffled me, a thing about people brushing off a character as an asshole “because he shows literally zero growth.” I kind of set that aside because it was such a weird non-sequitur, and guessed that it was just someone’s sentences not quite keeping up with their train of thought, which has happened to me many times. Apparently I was wrong! I already spent long enough on that one post, I’m tired of talking about that, but this is new and interesting. 

Okay. I kind of wanted to see if I could talk about this purely in terms of abstracts and not characters, but I don’t think it’ll work. It would be frustrating to write and confusing to read. It’s about Jiang Cheng. Right up front: This isn’t about whether or not he’s an abuser. Frankly, I don’t think it’s relevant. This also isn’t about telling people they should like him. I don't care whether anyone else likes him or not. But I do like him, and I am always fascinated by dissecting the reasons that people disagree with me. And the process of Telling Stories is my oldest hyperfixation I remember, which will become relevant in a minute.

I thought I had a good grasp on this one, you know? Jiang Cheng makes it pretty obvious why people would dislike Jiang Cheng. But then the posts I keep stumbling over were making weird points, culminating in that “literally zero growth” line.

So! What happened is that someone wrote up a post about how Jiang Cheng’s character arc isn’t an arc, it’s stagnation. It’s a pretty interesting read, and I broadly agree with the larger point! The points where I would quibble are like... the idea that it’s absolute stagnation, as opposed to very subtle shifts that still make a material difference. But still, cool! The post was also offered up as a reason why OP was uninterested in writing any more Jiang Cheng meta, which I totally get. I’m not tired of him yet, but I definitely understand why someone who isn’t a fan of his would get tired about writing about a character with a very static arc. Okay!

Now, internet forensics are hard. I desperately wish I had more information about this evolution, because I find this stuff fascinating, but I have no good way to find things said in untagged posts, reblogs, or private/external venues. But as far as I can tell, that “literally zero growth” wasn’t just a slip of the tongue, it’s become fashionable for people to say that Jiang Cheng is an abusive asshole (that it’s fucked up to like) because he doesn’t have a character arc.

Asshole? Yes. Abusive? This post still isn’t about that. This is about it being fucked up to like this character because he did bad things and had a static character arc.

At first, that point of view was still deeply confusing to me. But I think I figured out the idea at the core of it, and now I’m only baffled. I’m not super interested in confirming this directly, because the people making the most noise about this have not inspired confidence in their ability to hold a civil conversation and I’m a socially anxious binch, but I think the idea is: ‘This character did Bad Things, and then did not improve himself.’

Which is alarmingly adjacent to that old favorite standard of ‘This piece of fiction is glorifying Bad Thing.’ I haven’t seen anyone accusing mxtx of something something jiang cheng, only the people who read/watched/heard the story and became invested in the Jiang Cheng character, but things kind of add up, you know?

Like I said, I don’t want to arbitrate anyone’s right to like/dislike Jiang Cheng. That’s such a fucking waste of time. But this is fascinating to me, because it’s like..... so obviously new and sudden, with such a clear originating point. I can’t speak to the Chinese fans, obviously, but exiledrebels started translating in... what, 2017? And only now, in 2021, do people start putting forth Jiang Cheng’s flat character arc as a “reason” that he’s bad? I’m not going to argue if he pings you in the abuse place, I’m not a dick. I’m not going to argue if you just dislike his vibes. I’m just over here on my blog and in the tag enjoying myself, feel free to detour around me. But oh my god, it’s so silly to try to tell other people that they shouldn’t like him because he has a static character arc.

I want to talk about stories. I don’t know how much I’ll be able to say, because it’s impossible to make broad, sweeping statements, because there are stories about change, there are stories about lack of change, there are all kinds of media that can be used to tell stories, and standards for how stories are told and what they emphasize vary across cultures and over time. But I think that what I can say is that telling a story requires... compromise. It requires streamlining. Trying to capture all the detail of life would slow down most stories to an unbearable degree. Consider organically telling someone ‘I made a peanut butter and jelly sandwich’ versus the computer science exercise of having students describe, step by step, how to make one (spread peanut butter? but you never said you opened the lid)

Hell, I’ve got an example in mdzs itself. The largely-faceless masses of the common people. If someone asks you to think about it critically like, yes, obviously these are people, living their own lives, with their own desires, sometimes suffering and dying in the wake of the novel plot. But does the story give weight to those deaths? Or does it just gloss by? Yes, it references their suffering occasionally, but it is not the focus, and it would slow the story unbearably to give equal weight to each dead person mentioned. 

Does Wei Wuxian’s massacre get given the same slow, careful consideration as Su She’s, or Jin Guangyao’s? No, because taking the time to weigh our protagonist with ‘well, this one was a mother, and her youngest son had just started walking, but now he’s going to grow up without remembering her face. that one only became an adult a few months ago, he still hasn’t been on many night-hunts yet, but he finds it so rewarding to protect the common people. oh, and this one had just gotten engaged, but don’t worry, his fiancee won’t mourn him, because she died here as well.’ And continuing on that way to some large number under 3000? No! Unless your goal is to make the reader feel bad for cheering for a morally grey hero, that would be a bad authorial decision! The book doesn’t ignore the issue, it comes up, Wei Wuxian gets called out about all the deaths he’s responsible for, but that’s not the same as them being given equal emotional weight to one (1) secondary character, and I don’t love this new thing where people are pretending that’s equivalent.

When Wei Wuxian brutally kills every person at the Wen supervisory office, are you like ‘holy shit... so many grieving families D:’ or are you somewhere between vindicated satisfaction and an ‘ooh, yikes’ wince? Odds are good you’re somewhere in the satisfaction/wince camp, because that’s what the story sets you up to feel, because the story has to emphasize its priorities (priorities vary, but ‘plot’ and ‘protagonist’ are common ones, especially for a casual novel read like this)

Now, characters. If you want to write a story with a sweeping, epic scale, or if you want to tightly constrain the number of people your story is about, I guess it’s possible to give everyone involved a meaningful character arc. Now.... is it always necessary? Is it always possible? Does it always make sense? No, of course not. If you want to do that, you have to devote real estate to it, and depending on the story you want to tell, it could very possibly be a distraction from your main point, like the idea of mxtx tenderly eulogizing every single character who dies even incidentally. Lan Qiren doesn’t get a loving examination of his feelings re: his nephews and wei wuxian and political turnover in the cultivation world because it’s not relevant, and also, because his position is pretty static until right near the end of the story. Lan Xichen is arguably one of the most static characters within the book, he seems like the same nice young between Gusu and the present, right up until... just before the end of the story.

You may see where I’m heading with this.

Like, just imagine trying to demand that every important character needs to go through a major life change before the end of your book or else it didn’t count. This just in, Granny Weatherwax and Nanny Ogg go through multiple novels without experiencing radical shifts in who they are, stop liking them immediately. I do get that the idea is that Jiang Cheng was a ~bad person~ who didn’t change, but asdgfsd I thought we were over the handwringing over people being allowed to like ““bad”” fictional characters. The man isn’t even a canonical serial killer, he’s not my most problematic fave even within this novel.

And here is where it’s a little more relevant that I would quibble with that original post about Jiang Cheng’s arc. He’s consistently a mean girl, but he goes from stressed, sharp-edged teenager, to grief-stricken, almost-destroyed teen, to grim, cold young adult (and then detours into grim, cold, and grief-stricken until grief dulls with time). He does become an attentive uncle tho. He..... doesn’t experience a radical change in his sense of self, which... it’s...... not all that strange for an adult. And bam, then he DOES experience a radical change, but the needs of the plot dictate that it’s right near the end. And he’s not the focus of the story, baby, wangxian is. He has the last few lines of the story, which nicely communicate his changes to me, but also asdfafas we’re out of story. He was never the main character, it’s not surprising we don’t linger! The extras aren’t beholden to the needs of plot, but they’re also about whatever mxtx wanted to write, and I guess she didn’t feel like writing about Jiang Cheng ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

But also. Taking a step backward. Stable characters can fill a perfectly logical place in a story. Like, look at Leia Organa. I’m not saying she has no arc, but I am saying that she’s a solid point of reference as Luke is becoming a jedi and Han is adjusting his perspective. I wouldn’t call her stagnant, the vibes are wrong, but she also isn’t miserable in her sadness swamp, the way Jiang Cheng is.

Or, hell, look at tgcf. The stagnant, frozen nature of the big bad is a central feature of the story. The bwx of now is the bwx of 800 years ago is the bwx of 1500+ years ago. This is not the place for a meta on how that was bad for those around him and for him himself, but I have Thoughts about how being defeated at the end is both a thing that hurts him and relieves him. Mei Nianqing is a sympathetic character who’s also pretty darn static. Does Ling Wen have a character arc, or do we just learn more about who she already is and what her priorities always were? I’m going to cut myself off here, but a character’s delta between the beginning of a story and the end of a story is a reasonable way to judge how interesting writing character meta is, and is a very silly metric to judge their worth, and even if I guessed at what the basic logic is, for this character, I am still baffled that it’s being put forth as a real talking point.

(also, has it jumped ship to any other characters yet? have people started applying it in other fandoms as well? please let me know if this is the case, I am wildly curious)

(no, but really, if anyone is arguing that bwx is gross specifically because he had centuries to self-reflect and didn’t fix himself, i am desperate to know)

And finally. The thing I thought was most self-evident. Did I post about this sometime recently? If a non-central character experiences a life-altering paradigm shift right near the end of the story (without it being lingered over, because non-central character), oh my god. As a fic writer? IT’S FREE REAL ESTATE. This is the most fertile possible ground. If I want to write post-canon canon-compliant material, adsgasfasd that’s where I’m going to be looking. Okay, yeah, the main couple is happy, that’s good. Who isn’t happy, and what can I do about that? Happy families are all alike, while every unhappy family is unhappy in its own way, etc.

It’s not everyone’s favorite playground, but come on, these are not uncommon feelings. And frankly, it’s starting to feel a little disingenuous when people act like fan authors pick out the most blameless angel from the cast and lavish good things upon them. I’m not the only one who goes looking for a good dumpster fire and says I Live Here Now. If I write post-canon tgcf fic, it’s very likely to focus on beef and/or leaf. I have written more than one au focusing on tianlang-jun.

And, hilariously. If the problem with Jiang Cheng. Is that he is a toxic man fictional character who failed to grow on his own, and is either unsafe or unhealthy to be around. If the problem is that he did not experience a character arc. If these people would be totally fine with other people liking him, if he improved himself as a person. And then, if authors want to put in the (free! time-consuming!) work of writing that character development themselves. You would think that they would be lauded for putting the character through healthier sorts of personal growth than he experienced in canon. Instead, I am still here writing this because first, I was bothered by these authors being named as “freaks” who are obsessed with their ‘uwu precious tsundere baby’ with a “love language of violence,” and then I was graciously informed that people hate Jiang Cheng because he experiences no character growth.

i was raised by authoritarian fascists who mentally and emotionally abused me, isolated me, and controlled what i was allowed to consume. it took years of continuing to be traumatized by interacting with fiction that affirmed their behavior and told me that i deserved my abuse before i learned it wasn't normal.

so maybe saying people should bring their own judgements "from home" when interacting with media "beyond disney's ducktales" isn't the morally superior take you think it is. you are essentially blaming people for not being you, or having the same advantages you do. there is no allowance for people with learning disabilities in your stance either.

your experience is not universal. your knowledge and the circumstances by which you came into your knowledge is not universal. your ability to form your own opinions and think critically about media is not universal. some of us were denied those privileges in our formative years. try jumping down from your high horse and exercise some empathy once in a while.

Okay so like... a few things, right off the bat:

First, I’m sorry that happened to you! You didn’t deserve that, nor should people, nor should those stories, have told you that you deserved it. It sounds like those works of fiction made a point to spell out where they stood on the actions they depicted, if they affirmed your parents’ behavior and told you that you deserved your abuse. 

Otherwise, and I’m sure you’ll agree on this, the problem with the development of your moral compass was what was your parents told you and did to you, not the fact that there is such a thing as works of fiction that depict bad things like Fascism and Abuse without having characters look into a camera and say “this is wrong, do not try this at home.” Sometimes, in fact, works of fiction have things to say that can’t be covered by a story where bad behavior is always punished, especially since many stories seek to make the point that bad people often do bad things and get away with it, even though they shouldn’t. 

Should a story about a pedophile being caught and arrested, only to be let free on a legal technicality be discounted just because it doesn’t end with the pedophile being adequately punished for his crimes? Even though having the story end that way would defeat the purpose of the story itself, which is to illustrate how unfair it is that a sexual predator can walk free just because protocol wasn’t followed to the letter, which happens all the time in real life? Is “this doesn’t happen because good always triumphs over evil” which is an outright lie, a better lesson than “this does happen and it’s bad?”

I completely stand by my belief that adults engaging with fiction intended for adults should be able to form their own opinions and use their own moral compass to navigate those works without said works holding their hands and walking them through it. If they can’t do that, it doesn’t mean the work shouldn’t exist, only that it’s a bit too advanced for them, and if they want to navigate it, they should work on developing that skill rather than blaming the writer for making a story that’s too hard for them to comprehend. 

If, using Breaking Bad as an example, you watch a show about a man who abuses his wife, deals drugs, murders people, and you think it’s about what a hero he is for doing those things? Whether you got that opinion just because you don’t see the problem with meth and murder OR you got that opinion because you had terrible parents who left you unequipped to tell right from wrong, you should absolutely be expected to improve your ability to parse media before complaining that the writers didn’t go out of their way to avoid every possible reason why someone with a warped moral compass might misinterpret it. The problem isn’t that Breaking Bad shouldn’t exist, or that Breaking Bad should have to clearly and explicitly condemn each immoral act Walter does, rather than expecting adults watching a prestige television drama to have covered “Murder Is Wrong” at some point in their lives. The problem is with your moral compass, and that’s yours to solve, it’s not the job of every writer whose work you might decide to pick up to compensate for your inability (whatever its cause might be) to tell the difference between right and wrong. 

When I say “from home,” I don’t mean from your parents. I mean from yourself. I have to assume, having been through what you’ve been through, that if you (as an adult) saw someone in a movie acting the way your parents acted and did not say “child abuse is okay,” you would know what they were doing was wrong, even if the movie didn’t say “child abuse is wrong.” I understand that wasn’t always the case! But now, as an adult, you understand that child abuse is wrong, right? If you see child abuse happening in a work of fiction that does not say “it’s good that they’re doing this,” you understand that what the abuser is doing is bad? If so, congratulations, you are already following my advice. 

What really bothers me about this message, though, is that you’re asking me to disrespect a lot of people, including you. Those people who didn’t learn critical thinking, reading comprehension, and media literacy? I believe in their ability to gain those skills, and if they’re going to engage in media analysis, I expect them to try! I don’t think, as you seem to, that “the difference between right and wrong, and the ability to identify them in fiction” is too advanced for people with learning disabilities. Incidentally, you don’t actually know jack shit about what my academic experience was like, or what disorders I might or might not have, so like... I’d thank you to not try to use people with learning disabilities as a cudgel to shut people up when they say “if you’re going to tell writers how to do their job, you should probably make an effort to know how to read at the level on which they write.”

But why do you ask me to believe you’re unable to do this? I’m not going to disrespect you like that. I know you don’t think people with learning disabilities and people who grew up in abusive backgrounds are capable of developing their media literacy skills, personal moral compass, and reading comprehension, but I don’t have any such contempt for them. Believe it or not, I actually don’t think I’m superior to those people, morally or in any other way. I believe they’re fully capable of everything I’m capable of. 

You should be able to form your own opinions and think critically about media. If you aren’t able to do that, you should learn, and I know you can. You might believe that people are simply too stupid to ride the bike without the training wheels, but I don’t, so don’t put your hang-ups on me. Unlearn that shit. 

Ok this became a whole damn book but please consider bearing with me lol.

I love Anakin Skywalker. He is possibly my favorite character in any story ever, I even relate to him a lot as someone who as bpd. People can make fun and use terms like "stanakin" and "uwukin" mockingly if they want - I AM a stanakin and I'm never gonna be ashamed of wholeheartedly loving my favorite characters. I don't always vibe with the greater Jedi fandom because of their condescending attitude towards Anakin fans - come on people, get excited about your faves and let people get excited about theirs! But I do love the Jedi themselves, all of them. The order, the council, the whole culture.

As an Anakin fan I think it kind of does his story a disservice to view the Jedi as hating him. Are there times when people in his life could have responded better to him? Yeah! No one is perfect. They could have been warmer in TPM and Yoda's advice in ROTS could have been better, and Anakin could have communicated more as an adult. But they undeniably cared about him and he about them. TCW gives us so much wonderful canon content to go on, but even if you look at just the movies though you can see that his relationship with the Jedi is mostly one of respect. Anakin doesn't always agree with the council, but he still respects them and looks up to them. The council recognizes that Anakin is reckless and emotional, but they also recognize that he's a skilled Jedi and general and they give him real responsibility because they trust he can handle it.

The only time not trusting him is ever discussed is in regards to Palpatine, who is he is close friends with. They can trust him as a person and still know it's best to not trust him in regards to this specific mission because it's too personal.

They didn't make him a Jedi Knight and give him a major responsibility as a leader in a galactic war because they hated him and didn't trust him. And this is still just the movies!

In TCW we see him using their first names and they let him which indicates closeness not formality, we see Anakin and Yoda banter and tease each other, we see freaking Mace Windu and Anakin banter! In one of my favorite early arcs of the show, the Holocron Heist/Children of the Force arc, we see Anakin meditating with Yoda, Mace, and ObiWan to find the children. Not another master or member of the council, but Anakin. Same for when Mace, ObiWan, and Anakin use a Jedi mind trick in unison shortly after that. They trust him for all of these things. They give him a padawan because they believe he's ready for it and that he and Ahsoka can learn from each other. Training another Jedi is a huge responsibility and one of the biggest indicators of how capable they view him. They compliment how Ahsoka grows under Anakin's teachings all the time.

Anakin loved being a Jedi and he loved the other Jedi. They loved him too. The problem was that he had so much rage and pain and trauma - and yeah, I think the Jedi could have helped more but I also know that to get help you have to open yourself which he couldn't do - and that Palpatine took advantage of it at every opportunity. He manipulated Anakin's insecurity and fears about not belonging or being good enough. He flat out lied to Anakin about the council multiple times (for example telling him they were furious about his rescue mission of Plo Koon when we literally saw that they were not). Palpatine fostered a resentment and divide between them that otherwise would not have been there.

I don't know if Anakin would have remained a Jedi or left to be with Padme openly, but without Palpatine's influence everything would have been different. Without Anakin Palpatine still would have had his plan for destroying the Jedi, but without Palpatine manipulations pushing him off the edge I don't think Anakin would have fallen.

Anakin is still responsible for the choices he made, terrible choices that destroyed himself and everything he ever loved. The Jedi were part of what he loved.

That's why he's such a tragic and wonderful character. He was a hero and a victim and villain. Diminishing his relationship with the Jedi, as a Jedi himself, diminishes that story.

I agree with your point, absolutely (I do disagree on a couple of your examples, but not the point you were trying to make so I'll leave them alone).

I think fandom as a whole could be better to one another, I know for myself I never even ever remotely thought of separating Anakin from the Jedi, I always thought the tragedy of his story was that they were a team/family - it wasn't until I started getting attacked by rabid Anakin fans on ANY post that I labeled as "pro Jedi" (even if Anakin wasn't a part of the post).

I think both sides are becoming needlessly defensive against the other. I do feel like I'm a broken record, but even though I'm pro Jedi Council I still love Anakin Skywalker (it is possible to love both) - he's an amazing character. He's also an amazing Jedi and friend and that's what makes his fall so tragic!! If he killed the Jedi simply because the Jedi were "mean" to him and he never really loved them, well that just robs Anakin of his redemption arc. I 100% agree with you on that point. I feel like SW fandom has bought into this Jedi were bad narrative based on a couple of terrible YouTube videos who did it just for clicks and it's really sad. It's like somehow Palpatine has driven a wedge between fans of Anakin and fans of the Jedi, when we all should be on the same team. We all need to remember:

Ok so actually my biggest problem with the whole “Daenerys will burn KL” theory—not even the Mad Queen Dany theory, which is of course very sexist for obvious reasons, but just like, the idea that Dany will ~accidentally~ ignite the wildfire in the city, burning it all to the ground. That, at first, doesn’t sound that bad, but the longer I think about it the more I hate it because tbh it doesn’t do anything for her character? And also… that fate for her is just down right cruel.

Like, the most frequent argument I see on why this would be at all satisfactory for Dany’s arc is basically that it would be a sort of lesson for her about the dangers of unchecked power and the real threat the Dragons can pose on humans and that she shouldn’t use them to fight against other people. And that’s all well and good, excellent message… except that’s not something Dany’s ever really needed to learn? Not anymore that her fellow rulers, which I will touch on more detail later, but in general Dany has seen what the abuse of power can do. Starting with her conflicting feelings regarding Viserys and how she recognizes that even though he was her brother and she loved him, he also abused his power over her as her older brother, her only family and her king; she feels guilt about the atrocities Drogo committed to the lhazarene and tries to help them; she feels so much guilt about not handling things correctly in Astapor that she decides to throw away all her plans to go to Westeros and instead stays in Meereen.

And about not knowing the true danger that her dragons can pose? I mean, this is the same girl that literally agonizes across several of her ADWD chapters because Drogon killed a child, and then takes the extreme measure of caging Rhaegal and Viserion to prevent that from ever happening again. I think she’s at least a little bit aware that the dragons can be dangerous, thank you very much.

Ok so this got long...

Anyways, the only time Dany legit uses Drogon to harm someone and not just as bluff was at the house of the Undying, where she was being attacked, and in Astapor… and like, lmao, that asshole Kraznys mo Nakloz and the rest of his slaver buddies deserved it. Don’t at me. Also, Dany’s hardly the only one with a big magical and deadly beast at her disposal, why didn’t Robb had to go through some horrifying traumatic incident to learn he shouldn’t use Grey Wind in battle to tear his enemies’ throats. Bran will be learning about the dangers of abusing power, but that’s linked to his magic powers and an actual reprehensible thing he’s doing, not the use of his glorified prehistoric dog to kill, which he’s done, just like Robb. By all means let the narrative hold Dany accountable for her mistakes… but her actual mistakes and not shit she has no control over, because she doesn’t have much control over Drogon or the other dragons even though she’s trying to, and that’s very obvious in her last ADWD chapter where she’s delirious and Drogon could kill her at any moment, and she knows that.

The other big argument people make for Dany burning KL (even if it’s by accident!) is that it will teach her about the price of war, that someone as young as her shouldn’t be leading armies and conquering kingdoms, and that fighting for the Iron Throne is not a worthy cause, and I feel like that misses the actual point of her story by a mile. First of all because a) Dany is hardly the only teenage ruler in the story and b) this is a fantasy medieval story, a lot of the characters shouldn’t be doing the things they do, aaaand yet. Also speaking of other teenage rulers with far more power that they should have—Robb and Jon, being the biggest examples.

Granted, Robb and Jon aren’t exactly successful during their time as rulers, they’re literally betrayed and killed by their own men (even if Jon will technically come back for round 2 of bullshit he’s too tired for). But the moral of their stories is not that they lost because theirs was an unworthy cause and they were stupid kids wholly unprepared for their roles. And I actually partially agree! They are just kids, including Dany, and they shouldn’t be responsible for looking after so many others and going to battle, but their cause is still just and worthy, even with all the mistakes they make along the way. Robb didn’t loose because he was wrong in demanding justice for his family or trying to protect the riverlands from the Lannisters and their minions, he lost because Tywin Lannister was a giant coward who couldn’t take him out in a fair fight.

Likewise, it isn’t wrong of Jon to try to incorporate refugees from beyond the Wall into Westeros. He’s not too stupid and honorable to do politics like his father (how I hate when people insult Jon and Ned like that), and while he did some very obvious mistakes that inevitably ended in a coup and in him dying, this is more connected to his inability to let go of his ties with his family (mainly Arya or who he believes to be her), and in isolating himself from his friends and the people he could actually trust.

I’ve always thought that Dany and Jon share a parallel narrative within the story, so while Jon is struggling with that Dany is faced with similar problems. She cages her dragons, that to her represent the only family she has left, and she tries to compromise with the slavers, marry a man she doesn’t love, pretend she’s ok with reopening the fighting pit. While she tries her best to rule wisely in Meereen, it all comes at the cost of betraying herself and her beliefs, so it’s no surprise when it all crashes around her and she’s betrayed and nearly killed. Ironically, it is Drogon who comes to rescue her.

If they are monsters, so am I.—Daenerys II, ADWD.

This is hands down one of my favorite Dany quotes from the whole series, and I hate that it’s been given such a negative connotation in the fandom, when for me it represents Dany’s humanity and compassion at the fullest.

GRRM has a knack for humanizing the ‘monsters’ of his story, for showing the good in the outcasts and the ugly and the scary. He embraces their ‘otherness’ and makes them the heroes of his stories; Arya, Bran, Brienne, Dany, Tyrion, Jon, Theon and many others are all compared to monsters or beasts at one point or another in the books.

Dany sees herself in her dragons, literal monsters in every sense of the word. Later on she faces Drogon inside the pit, and in that moment you could say that she accepts that ‘monstrous’ part of her, and in doing so she’s saved from her fate of dying at the hands of the men who would crucify innocent children and gleefully profit off of the suffering of their fellow human beings while watching them fight each other to the death for their own amusement. Now tell me who’s the real monster in this situation.

But shortly before that happens, Dany is able to see the humanity in Tyrion, an outcast who has been branded as monstrous and unlovable due to his disability all his life, a man who has come to believe in his abusers’ rhetoric about him so strongly that he’s started to act cruel and detached. She saves his life. She sees value in his life when few others would, because she cares.

I’ve always find it funny that the “dragons plant no trees” is—another—example fans use to argue in favor of Dany’s descent into Darkness™ because the actual scene goes like this:

You are a queen, her bear said. In Westeros.

"It is such a long way," she complained. "I was tired, Jorah. I was weary of war. I wanted to rest, to laugh, to plant trees and see them grow. I am only a young girl."

No. You are the blood of the dragon. The whispering was growing fainter, as if Ser Jorah were falling farther behind. Dragons plant no trees. Remember that. Remember who you are, what you were made to be. Remember your words.—Daenerys X, ADWD.

Now am I the only one who finds it at least a bit relevant that it’s freaking Jorah Mormont aka Jorah the Enslaver whom Dany’s subconscious, at her literal lowest moment, utilizes to represent this particular thought, which btw I’ve always interpreted as Dany’s own self-loathing manifesting in her, and this is something she’s actually always struggled with—the idea that she’s not enough and she’s failing. Because above all things, even Westeros or the Iron Throne, what Dany wants is peace, she wants to plant trees.

When Dany made her descent, Reznak and Skahaz dropped to their knees. "Your Worship shines so brightly, you will blind every man who dares to look upon you," said Reznak. […] This match will save our city, you will see."

"So we pray. I want to plant my olive trees and see them fruit." Does it matter that Hizdahr's kisses do not please me? Peace will please me. Am I a queen or just a woman?—Daenerys VII, ADWD.

But of course the world doesn’t work like that, and so long as there’s Jorahs and Tywins and Eurons out there, men who would take the freedom of humans and submit them to their will, Dany can’t have the luxury of peace, just like Jon can’t have the luxury of belonging and family so long as there’s people still beyond the Wall who need his protection.

And I think that’s fine. It’s fine that Dany failed, it will help her develop as a character and realize that there’s no room to compromise with slavers, the metaphorical monsters of the story who do far more harm than the other more literal ‘monsters’ of the story. So that when she has to face down Euron Greyjoy—who btw, there’s a high chance he will end up stealing one of Dany’s dragons via Victarion using Dragonbinder… y’know, as in enslaving one of her children and using said dragon to inflict god knows what horrors, yet not many people ever consider this for some reason?—she will know. When she has to face down the Others, the magical ice fairies with no regard for human life, she will know.

That’s why I believe that it would make absolutely no sense for Dany to have to go through such a tragic and traumatic experience like burning a whole city even by pure accident, over something that’s either never been a problem with her character or she’s well into her way of learning anyways, so it would just feel repetitive. As I have pointed out, she’s already reached one of the lowest moments of her arc. Not saying there will be no other blows for her, and probably the destruction of KL will be one of them, and knowing Dany she will feel responsibility over it no matter what, but that doesn’t mean she has to be the culprit, intentional or otherwise.

I've read that article about the romanticization of the Darkling and while I absolutely understand people who are pissed off/sad and I agree that it's shitty, I find LB's attitude towards Darkles stans very funny in a "girl what are you doing" sort of way because it's so petty like I've never heard of a bestselling author writing a portion of their fans into their books as a crazy cult before, it clearly hit a nerve

I'm new to the fandom but the feeling I get is she wrote something problematic ten years ago and became very embarrassed about it afterwards so she turned on the fans that liked it as a way to absolve herself. Especially since fandoms in general have become a lot more focused on discussion of what constitutes healthy/acceptable relationships to write about. And in a way I get it I had a huge Twilight phase in high school and afterwards I was super embarassed about it because of how problematic and cringe it was. But now with distance and more maturity I'm able to both still see why it was problematic and also why I was drawn to it (mostly the very unhinged representation of female desire) and like...it's really not the end of the world and no it never made me believe that breaking into somebody's room at night to watch them sleep was actually ok in real life lmao. This feels so obvious to me but apparently it needs to be said.

(More under the break this is turning into an essay, I've been thinking of this a lot recently)

And of course it's good to have these discussions about how historically romance tropes have echoed social dynamics of men's shitty behavior being romanticized and excused. But these days they often are so simplistic and focused on chasing clout that they become this weird new puritanism and moral panic about oh now women are reading novels it's going to make them hysterical or something

So you have these weird assumptions that you can't like a character and also be critical of their actions, or enjoy certain parts of a character and not others, or wish they were written differently and like them more for their potential (which I'm sure stings a bit for an author lol) - it assumes that if you like a character it means you would approve of their actions in real life, or that people just stupidly reproduce whatever they see on TV. That tendency to treat fictional characters like real people is the thing that actually worries me, to be honest, because it indicates a lack of distance and critical capacities regarding how stories are used and received. But people - fans and authors - are so scared of being called out as problematic and harassed for it that they're going to shy away from any nuance.

And yeah I think that it's good that standards of what constitutes an ideal relationship are evolving and becoming more feminist and communicative and all that and we definitely need more of that. But not all fiction has to be aspirational! Sometimes you just want to read about fucked up shit, because it's cathartic or fascinating, even healing at times because with fiction you are absolutely in control and can choose when to close the book. Toxic relationships in fiction can have an appeal specifically because they go to extremes of feeling that we don't want to go to in reality, in exactly the same way as horror movies or very violent action movies - which I don't see a lot of people besides fundamentalist Christians argue that they turn you into violent psychopaths (and that feels very obviously sexist). And for women, who are often taught growing up that love is the purpose of life, the "saving someone with your ability to love" can be a power fantasy in the same way that being a buff superhero who saves the day with their capacity for incredible violence can be a power fantasy for men. Still doesn't mean those women are going to fall in love with actual murderers or that those men are going to start beating up people at night. And love is scary, and weird, and weirdly close to horror at times, with all the potential for loss of self and being vulnerable and overwhelming feelings and potential for being horribly hurt and it should be possible for stories to explore that without anybody screaming about how this is going to Corrupt the Youth or something

And I mean I get it LB wanted to write a cautionary tale for teenagers, but it just did not work for reasons a lot of people have already written about - the fact that the Darkling is the leader of an oppressed minority and is the only one with a real political agenda to end that oppression in the first trilogy, the fact that he helps Alina come into her own power while her endgame LI is someone she keeps herself small for, that she's shamed for wanting power after growing up without any, a generally very wonky conception of privilege, and a lot of other stuff with yucky regressive implications to the point where stanning the villain actually feels liberating and empowering which is a surefire sign that the narrative is broken (unless it's a villain focused story lmao). But of course that Fanside article makes almost no mention of the political dynamics, it's all about interpersonal stuff which is an annoying trend in YA, there are those massive events happening in the background but it's made all about the feelings of the hero(ine) ; war as a self-development quest (which is kind of gross). Helnik is kind of an example of this too - I like them, I think they're fun ! But Matthias spends a big part of the story wanting to brutally murder Nina and her kind, and he mostly changes his mind because he finds her hot. Like you don't feel there is some sort of big revelation that his entire moral system and political framework is completely rotten ; it's all better because of feelings now.

As a teenager that kind of sanctimonious bullshit would have annoyed the hell out of me ; I read those books in my early twenties and I found the ending so stupid I wouldn't have trusted any message or life lessons coming from them. And I liked reading/watching dark stuff as a teenager, as a way to deal with the very intense inner turmoil I was dealing with - and I turned out fine ! Meanwhile I've seen several times women in very shitty relationships being obsessed with positive energies and stories ; they were so terrified of their life not being perfectly wholesome they ended up being delusional about their own situations.

Like personally I think the Darkling is a compelling, interesting, alluring character and also a manipulative, murderous piece of shit and that Alina should get to punish him (like in a sexy way) - but he's also the end result of centuries of war, oppression and trauma and reducing that to "toxic wounded boy" feels kind of offensive ngl ESPECIALLY since the books don't offer any kind of systemic analysis or response to oppression beyond "the bad guy should die" and "now the king/queen is a good guy our problems are solved!!!!"

In Lives of the Saints, we see how Yuri is abused extremely badly and almost killed by his father, and so when his father dies when the Fold swallows Novokribirsk, he thinks the Starless Saint has saved him. Later in KoS/RoW he's turned into this fanatic who explains away all the Darkling's crimes. The other followers talk about how the Starless Saint will bring equality for all men. Then the Darkling comes back and actually thinks his followers are pathetic, which feels again like a very pointed message to his IRL stans. Which is absolutely hilarious to me. Like oh no, if he was real he would not like you and think you're pathetic ! Yeah ...but he's not. Real. Damn right he would not like the fics where Alina puts him on a leash. I'm still going to read them. What is he going to do about it, jump out of the page ? Jfjfjjdhfgfjfj

Anyway I think the intended message is "assholes will use noble political causes for their own gain and to manipulate people" and "being abused/oppressed is not an excuse to behave badly." Which. Sure. But that's kind of like...a tired take, honestly ? A big number of villains nowadays are like this ; either they've been bullied as kids, or they're part of an oppressed group, or they have "good ideals but too extreme". This is not surprising because a lot of mainstream heroic narratives present clinging to the status quo as Good and change as chaotic and dangerous. And like sure in real life people often do bad shit because they're wounded and in danger. But if you want to do a story like that, you have to do it with nuance, talk about cycles of violence, about how society creates vulnerable people to be exploited, about how privilege gives you more choices and the luxury of morals, etc. The Grishaverse does not have this level of nuance (maybe in SoC a little bit but definitely not in TGT). So it kind of comes off as "trauma makes you evil" and "egalitarianism is dangerous" and "if you're abused/oppressed you're not allowed to fight back". And ignores the fact that historically, evil generally comes from unchecked privilege.

I guess my point is that there are many things I like about LB's writing, she knows how to create these really exciting character dynamics, and the world she has created is fascinating. But these stories are not a great starting point for imparting moral lessons. And her best characters tend to be, at least in canon, the morally grey ones. I hope one day she'll be at peace with the fact that she wrote the Darkling the way she did and leave his fans alone but in the meantime I'm just not going to take this whole thing seriously I'm sorry

A Deconstruction of The Flame Keeper’s Circle & The Audience’s Common Complaints | Catgirl

As the title states, I’ve been reminded of a couple complaints made about this episode that stem from a large portion of the audience’s general disliking of the way both Ben and Julie were handled during the run of Ultimate Alien. In fact, I recently read a "review" of “The Flame Keeper's Circle,” or, more of a parody, actually, since a review would actually have some kind of substance to it and not just...a slew of insults thrown at a show you claim to like. It's almost like you're looking for something to be mad at, but anyway.

One of those was the OP actually asking someone to (probably joking, but anyway) explain "how Ben's mind works" to them.

And I was like, gladly!

According to the comments under the review, it seems like the general audience didn't really like this episode all that much when it first aired. Which, I bring up because, I on the other hand, actually did. And for a reason: because it proves my previous defence points right.

There's a lot of talk about Ben coming off as a “jerk” or a “douchebag”...but, in a situation such as the one presented within “The Flame Keeper’s Circle,” I would argue he did exactly what he should have done. So that's where I beg to differ.

This episode puts Ben in a position where he, once again, needs to deal with the overlap of a romantic relationship and his priorities as a superhero. The only reason there is conflict here is because they are both important to him.

A bad boyfriend would only care about himself, but Ben clearly cares about not only the safety of his (clearly, quite naive) girlfriend, but also the safety of the rest of the earth. Which, as I’m going to be stating several times, should be something expected of him considering everything else within the series that establishes who he is as a character.

So, on the topic of things that are important, ask yourselves, why would Ben prioritize going along with Julie's idea of joining a cult more than keeping her, and the rest of the world, safe when he realizes the trouble she could potentially be getting herself into?

Throughout the episode, and the fandom’s discussions from what I’ve seen, there is so much focus on "oh, he laughed at her idea so he's a douchebag and therefore a bad boyfriend" and not enough focus on the fact that he's not blindly following an alleged “good cause” because he isn't naive and that's in character based on everything we know about him as a character.

Context matters. And this kind of thing only further makes me question the people who want to cry "inconsistent" writing or characterization because he's acting the way he's been conditioned to.

Arguably from the age of ten, Ben's been dealing with situations where he needed to fight to survive and decide who to trust. Sometimes he trusted the wrong person, which wasn't done out of any other reason besides wanting to help and do the "right thing."

For example, Michael Morningstar in the episode “All That Glitters,” who fooled Ben and his team into thinking he was innocent all while abusing school girls for their life energy and almost killing Ben's cousin.

Or, Simian in “Birds of a Feather," who fooled Ben into thinking he was royalty and into helping him steal something that would aid the Highbreed in their mass murder plot.

In that way, Ben and Julie could have related in this situation because they were both trusting people in the interest of doing something “good.” Both Michael and Simian made Ben believe that they had something in common, or a common goal they could work together to reach. But, he trusted them blinded by his ambition and drive to save the world. Much like Julie is blinded by the promise of being a part of a group trying to make the world a better place.

As such, Ben has made the mistake before, so he's extra weary of how things could go very wrong. He's not against his girlfriend just to be a “jerk” - he's been through things like this before, and we’ve seen him go through those things.

Furthermore, the situation in which Julie is trusting The Flame Keeper’s Circle involves her indirectly agreeing to work with Vilgax. Who, as anyone familiar with Ben should know, is one of if not Ben’s biggest, and more importantly, most dangerous enemy.

Again, she, at the beginning didn’t know that he was involved, or what Ben had gone through already to make him act the way he does in this situation, but she does know what his job entails at this point in the series. She should probably infer that he’s suspicious for a good reason, as should the audience.

Not trusting people blindly is something he learned from being the leader of his team, while trying to protect the earth, namely from the Highbreed invasion back in Alien Force when he was putting together a stronger team. It would only make sense for him to then apply that to a situation in which his significant other gets roped into that which he fights against.

Speaking of fighting against, that brings me to another odd criticism of the writing of this episode. It’s no surprise that the flawed belief of Ben coming off as an alleged “sociopath” is brought up again, considering this episode takes place after The Ultimate Kevin arc. And yes, I realize the problematic connotations of using that term as a borderline insult as part of the issue here. But that aside, in this episode, the fact that he begins to fight Vilgax in his apparent “weakened” state is what is being attributed to that description.

Besides the fact that defending Vilgax is questionable in itself, he’s never needed water to survive for the many times he actually tried to kill Ben. I can’t find a solid answer from a writer that knows for certain if his need for water is genuine except for one who is only assuming that is the case when he’s in this state.

But regardless, (since he clearly survived long enough to morph with Dagon and become a bigger threat to the earth later on) we are still defending Vilgax the LITERAL INTERGALACTIC WARLORD.

Y’know, the guy who’s only in this position because of his own immoral actions? Who absolutely would not hesitate to take advantage of his opponent's weakened state in order to further get away with his immoral actions? Such as he is in this very episode, taking advantage of the people wrongfully worshiping him?

If we are trying to imply that Ben is “just as bad as Vilgax,” then I would assume you’d easily find the flaw in that being Ben’s motivation for incapacitating a dangerous offender who is, at the moment, manipulating naive humans to work for him and help him continue get away with his immoral actions. Which is, needless to say, not the same as Vilgax, at all.

Again, you’d think that’d be obvious.

The Flame Keeper’s Circle’s mission is to end human suffering and find a solution to certain issues happening across the globe with the help of alien technology that is much more advanced than what everyday people are used to. And, while the end goal seems like a good cause, even something Ben as a superhero would be all for, the means through which they attempt to get there aren’t a good idea, at all.

A lot of people find it hard to navigate the use of technology considered advanced by human standards in the real world, so you can only imagine the various things that could go wrong if those kinds of people were suddenly exposed to something much more powerful. In short, a lot could go wrong.

Again, Ben has been in that exact position as soon as he was armed with the Omnitrix. Which is exactly why he’d see the flaw in what these people are trying to do, and therefore not be convinced that it’s such a good idea to allow them to continue, much less endorse it.

This is why I love when the writers actually allow Ben to speak for himself instead of cutting him off for drama or plot. Once he actually gets a word in, or more accurately, has his moment of heroic monologue, he makes himself very clear and, I think, only further proves what I’m trying to say about him.

Here he is, explaining exactly what I’ve been trying to highlight throughout this body of work:

Ben: “Even if Dagon was real, using alien technology to accelerate a planet’s natural development won’t bring utopia, it’ll bring disaster. It’s happened before. Why do you think the Plumbers have those laws? But even that’s not the point, because that isn’t Dagon! His name is Vilgax. He’s not a hero, he’s a selfish, evil warlord who’s using you. And if you let him get in his ship, he’s going to fly off and start an interstellar civil war.”

It’s not that only he can use alien technology to save the world, it’s that his status as a hero proves that he knows what he’s doing, unlike these businessmen in fancy robes leading a cult for profit.

That is not what I would have assumed reasonable people would consider “douchebag behaviour.” That’s actually smart, and going back to my first point, exactly what he should be doing in a situation like this.

The actual episode does end off on a positive note for both Ben and Julie, which is omitted from the review and most of the comments I have read from others on the topic. And, I bring it up because it’s actually vital to wrap up everything brought up within this episode that I have just expanded on. Not only because they make up and seem to understand each other’s perspective after all is said and done, but because they both agree to be open to further discussion on the topic, as Ben offers to go out for dinner.

Which, needless to point out I hope, but once again, is not “douchebag behaviour.”

I am sincerely so confused as to why the Gods are not portrayed as the absolute hypocritical monsters they are? Light God punishes Salem for wanting Ozma back, yet bring him back anyway to unite humanity - which is exactly what Salem did, she just united humanity against them. And what's worse is that we know the Light God is coded as good because his power is the same as our main protagonist.

While I absolutely agree that the Gods'... well, everything should be acknowledged by the show, I think the current problem is that they're not portrayed as anything at all post-"The Lost Fable." It's not really a case of the show providing a depiction of the Gods I'm not inclined to agree with given what we saw in the flashback, there is no depiction, period. They don't exist as something that's driving the story right now which, at this point, amounts to near three whole volumes of lost content. The only time I can recall them coming up is during Maria's talk with Ruby, which is really just re-stating facts to lead Ruby to her epiphany: one Brother created the grimm, the other Brother destroyed the grimm, he did so with a magical light... and then Ruby has her aha! moment — "The God of Light... His eyes! Okay, where do we start?" Has the group mentioned them at all outside of this? Have they mentioned the vision? Nora brings up the possibility that someone other than Ozpin could defeat Salem, but that's it (and that was less a discussion and more a theory spoken half to herself that an angry Ren ignored). The characters, along with the audience, were given 20 minutes of non-stop backstory and none of it has had a single bit of impact on the group, outside of breaking their relationship with Ozpin, that is. It has provided no new insight into how to fight this war. No reflection on their lives or deaths. Not even a change in regards to whether they'll fight at all because despite the dejected atmosphere post-vision, no one actually grappled with walking away. The closest they got was at the farm and that negativity was, canonically, due to the Apathy, not any knowledge outside of the Salem immortality secret. That vision was treated like filler, despite nothing in those 20 minutes being insignificant. Where's Weiss' sympathy for Ozpin as a family abuse survivor? Where's Blake's horror at the Gods' oppression and genocide? Where's Jaune's hope at seeing Pyrrha again in some afterlife? Where's Ren's fear that they're fighting a hopeless battle? Even when he does express some of those views in Volume 8, none of it is explicitly connected to the supernatural movie they watched. He's concerned with Jaune's transcript from Volume 1, not the revelation that bringing these Relics together will summon beings who wiped out the first version of humanity. There's not even an acknowledgement that the Gods' choices are what led to Salem's creation, the current antagonist they're concerned with. (When they're not, of course, concerned with Ironwood instead — which just highlights the issue here.) It's not that RWBY is taking clearly horrible entities and trying to pass them off as good guys... it's that RWBY isn't engaging with those entities at all. The Gods showed up for one episode, Maria referenced them for a pep talk, and they've had no impact on the story since.

As for the God of Light yeah, that coding is there, but in another series I would expect that to be the point. Meaning, you set up this binary view of the world for your protagonists — there are Good Guys, there are Bad Guys, and we know who is who because one is all scary black and summons grimm whereas the other is pretty white and bestows gifts! — only to slowly, over the course of the series, have them realize that real life doesn't work that way. That this binary doesn't exist. That Ruby's eyes are important because of how she chooses to use them, not because a being of seeming benevolence gave them to her. Problem is, that revelation should have started in Volume 6, with the characters realizing that Ozpin really is cursed and the nice looking God isn't actually any better than his brother. Now what do they do? Is Ruby comfortable using that power? Are they out to try and lift Ozpin's curse the way Light intended? Are the Gods their new enemies? A tool they'll use to stop Salem? Someone they're willing to forgive? There's the foundation here for a story about heroes not just getting the shock that Gods created them and their enemy, but that they're not necessarily a good thing to embrace either. They thought they were fighting a war where a Purely Evil Creature was attacking humanity. Now they realize it's a war where Salem was, in part, driven to this by creators who abandoned them and might, if the fancy strikes them, enslave or eradicate humanity 2.0 if they ever return. Well shit. How do we tackle that war? But, of course, that kind of story would require them thinking about, discussing, and planning around the Gods. Not ignoring their existence for three seasons.

Given RWBY's anime inspirations and the common theme of, "This being appears benevolent and I fight on their behalf but whoops they're actually awful haha now what?" in other stories, I don't think aligning Ruby's power with the God of Light is intrinsically a bad thing. It is, in fact, good setup for a later conflict. Problem is, absolutely nothing came of that revelation and now it's far too late. After focusing on Ozpin's secret instead, spending an undetermined amount of time doing basic Huntsmen stuff in Atlas, and now being fully immersed in a battle with Salem, having them suddenly go, "Oh yeah. There are Gods. What do we think about that?" is going to be... well, not great. Even if this island is precisely the God world that most fans expect, the group will only be tackling their existence because the plot is forcing them to, literally by "killing" them and trapping them so there's nothing else for them to focus on. The fandom has discussed at length the problem with making the cast almost purely reactive and this is just one more example. We established across Volumes 6-8 that they didn't actively care about the Gods. At all. Not what happened in the past, not what they might do in the future, not how they might impact this war. They were dismissed along with the rest of the vision, taking with it any opportunity to explore that revelation, or try to (mistakenly imo) paint the Gods as better than they were. It's just a non-starter atm. Trying to tackle that story now might still lead to some interesting ideas, but it can't patch the three Volume hole where that story should have started.

Thoughts on Jack and His Borderline Personality Disorder and How It Shows Through His Behaviour - Because I Cannot Stop Analysing Things That Ultimately Aren’t Important

Symptoms/behaviours under the cut because holy hell this guy has a lot of them. Like, honey, are you okay?

Okay, so I’m pretty sure I can trace Jack’s BPD (Borderline Personality Disorder) back to his grandmother. His mum abandoned him, which shows a reckless/irresponsible behaviour and her mum had fits of rage that didn’t correlate at all with the trigger (ie; drowning Jack’s cat because he didn’t make his bed). So I think he has a family history of it, with both his mother and grandmother having BPD and passing it down to him.

Either way, Jack definitely has it. In fact, he’s a textbook case of it.

Impulsivity

Spending sprees: he bought a pony made of diamonds because he was bored and throws money at all kinds of ventures to keep him occupied and because he wants to. I really don’t know how else to describe this one lol. He bought a pony. Made of diamonds. Because he could.

Gambling: won some of the things on his trophy shelf through poker and owns an entire casino. Hunting the Vaults themselves were a huge gamble too, especially the first two, since he wasn’t truly sure that they existed. He was prepared to sacrifice a lot in order to come out on top in both his career and his social standing. All in all, he’s reckless.

Binge eating: he doesn’t even like pretzels, but still eats them because he’s either bored or stressed. Talks about food quite a bit in conversation, too, especially his cravings.

Substance abuse: admits to being high on uppers for the duration of the pre sequel (and his time on Elpis as a whole) and tells further anecdotes about drugs and getting high in tftbl.

Promiscuity/unsafe sex: nothing about having sex with Nisha is safe lol. But in all seriousness, there’s no way to prove this one. He does strike me as the reckless sex sort though. No proof, just 7 years of knowing him as a character.

Emotional instability

Inappropriate trigger response: he strangles a man to death for simply mentioning his wife, stabs Lilith for talking about Angel, and tries to kill Rhys for not being sure about his grand plan (more on this later). His response to triggers is disproportionate, often resulting in extreme anger over small things that don’t warrant that intense of a reaction. He gets big angry about almost everything; there’s no middle ground. His reaction is never really “you’re annoying me a lot” or “don’t talk about that, I don’t like it.” His reaction to almost everything is “oh my god I will murder your first born child how dare you-”

Quickly changing mood: aside from being prone to fits of rage at the flick of a switch, Jack also flicks back to “normal” pretty quickly, too. He flips between telling you to kill yourself after surviving the train and then talks casually about his day. He’ll be filled with rage after Angel’s death and then suddenly he’s laughing about you jumping into lava and having fun tricking you into visiting his grandmother. He can be intensely angry or sorrowful one moment and then nonchalant and sociable the next. His moods don’t last very long.

Idolisation/devaluation

Jack does this with numerous people across the games, but the two shining examples are Moxxi and Rhys; Rhys being the most notable. He idolises Moxxi, complimenting her on how attractive she is and how smart she is and including her in his circle of close friends/teammates. Then the inevitable happens and she lets him down and he instantly changes his opinion on her as if he’d never thought she was good to begin with. The same happens with Rhys. Throughout tftbl, Jack is best friends with Rhys and seems to form a one-sided connection with him where he idolises him and thinks they’re going to be best friends for ever and that they’re the perfect team. You cannot make him mad at you in tftbl (trust me, I’ve tried). He’s encouraging to Rhys the whole way through, like they’re brothers. Then the second Rhys displays doubts about something Jack is passionate about, Jack reacts violently and completely devalues Rhys, claiming him to be his mortal enemy and trying to kill him. People with BPD do this often. They have strong convictions and have a tendency to feel betrayed by people who go against those convictions. Jack does this regularly and it leads to the breakup of a lot of his relationships.

Paranoia

He vented a room full of scientists into space, just in case. I mean, that pretty much sums it up, really. Jack is under a lot of stress at this point in the game and stress-induced paranoia is a particularly difficult symptom of BPD. With him already feeling the pressure, the mention of a possible mole is a huge trigger for Jack. Especially since he’s reeling from the recent betrayal from a friend. His brain is already working over time, planting uneasy feelings of distrust and being unsafe. So when he’s presented with the idea from an outside source, he runs with it. Betrayal goes on to become a big button to push in Jack’s life to the extent that he actively betrays people before they get a chance to betray him (ie; killing Wilhelm). Paranoia feeds into a lot of Jack’s bad decisions, particularly in the pre sequel era.

Delusion

Jack wasn’t lying when he told us that he’s the hero. He absolutely was not the hero at all, but he wasn’t lying about it. Because lying about something implies that you know it’s not true, and Jack genuinely believes he’s a good person. The best person, in fact. It’s not a lie because in his mind, it’s the god given truth. He’s massively delusional, even before the events of the pre sequel. He’ll spout all the cheesy 80s movie lines about saving the moon and being the hero and he thinks he’s the protagonist of his own big adventure. We know that’s not what’s happening, but Jack doesn’t see it that way. Another delusion is the idea he has about how much everyone loves him. He thinks Moxxi is obsessed with him and he thinks Angel is being forced to work against him. He cannot conceive of a world in which people don’t like him or agree with him. Because why wouldn’t they agree with him? He’s the hero. Everybody loves the hero...

Intense but unstable relationships

Moxxi, Angel, Lilith, the Vault Hunter; I could go on. Jack’s relationships with people are volatile and rocky, even when they’re seemingly on the same side like with Moxxi or even Nisha (who he forms a tight bond with very quickly). People with BPD feel all emotions intensely, which causes a roller coaster. Jack really likes Moxxi, but then he doesn’t want to talk to her, but then he wants her on the team, but then he gets mad at her for calling him a pet name and beign friendly, and then he’s telling her she’s sexy, and then he’s cursing her, and then he’s hanging pictures of her in his casino. It’s the same with Angel - he subjects her to physical torture, then he loves her, then he’s mad at her for helping the Vault Hunter, then he’s doting on her, then he’s manipulating her, then he’s grieving for her. Everything is a whirlwind.

Distorted self-image

Oh boy. Jack has this physically and mentally. Mentally in the sense that he thinks he’s a good person when he actions are abhorrent and also because he’s massively insecure. BPD often comes with a lack of identity, which causes insecurity to begin with. Throw that in a pot alongside some childhood abuse, betrayal, work place bullying, and grief, and you got yourself a big pot of insecurity soup. Put plainly, Jack doesn’t really know who he is at his baseline. His personality and interests and ideas and needs all change on an hourly basis. He morphs to suit his circumstances. He can be open, honest and down to earth when he’s trying to trick Rhys. He can be full of worry and desperation when he needs you to head to grandma’s house. He can be cunning and clever when he’s tricking you into killing Wilhelm. He can be fatherly, he can be nasty, he can be torturous, he can be laid back, he can be clever, he can be ignorant, he can be sheepish, he can be cocky. He’s everyone and no one all at once and this probably leaves him feeling very hollow and empty; which is another symptom of BPD. In the physical sense, Jack issues with self image are pretty clear. He wears a face over his face to hide his face. Yup. And he does this because he thinks he’s disgracefully ugly. This scar he’s so vehemently protective of is something that defines his whole persona going forward. He literally claims himself as Handsome Jack, forcing people to adhere to the idea that he’s so attractive that it should be his title. Even though he doesn’t feel that way and does everything he can to hide the real him. He thinks he’s hideous and he struggles between loving himself and hating himself because of it.

Fear of abandonment

Aaaand here we are at the crux of the problem. BPD boils down to the intense fear of abandonment and this is probably what guides Jack for most of his life. His father died, his mother literally abandoned him, his grandmother neglected him, his first wife died, second wife left, girlfriend and friends betrayed him, and daughter killed herself to get away from him. Abandonment is practically coded into Jack’s DNA at this point and every time it happens, it confirms his fears more. He clings to Moxxi after she betrays him - taking her ideas to try and rile her up and even going as far as to recreate her entire bar in his casino because he wants to keep her presence around. He fights tooth and claw against Angel’s rebellion, begging both her and you to stop what you’re doing and leave. The only time he begs you is when he’s facing perceived abandonment, that’s how strong the fear is. His final words to Angel are “I’ll still forgive you.” Jack isn’t a forgiving man by any stretch, but he’ll say anything he has to in order to prevent her from leaving him. He’ll stalk people, he’ll manipulate them, he’ll lie to them or keep them physically locked up - all to prevent them from abandoning him. The worst possible thing that could happen to Jack is that, and we see the spiral he slips into after Angel. After Moxxi. After the Meriff. After his wife. He can’t bare the thought of someone leaving him and he’ll do anything and everything to prevent his fears becoming a reality.

So yeah! There it is, I finally got around to posting it lol. There’s probably a lot more little details that I’ve forgotten, but I cannot think of them right now. I’ll probably update if I think of any more! The tl;dr is that almost all of Jack’s behaviour can be linked to massively untreated BPD. He needed meds and therapy, but he didn’t get them and he spiralled as a result.

hello, ily metas! thank you for taking the time for them. i hope you dont mind an ask with two follow up questions to your metas i'm curious about: 1) has mxtx rly been sentenced? i have seen others also share this news but other fans have quickly dismissed and gotten pissed at these reports for being fake news that are bad for mxtx, and as fearmongering. 2) for those who want to support yizhan but not the ccp, do you have advice how to navigate fan support and interaction with their media?

Hello! I apologise for the late reply!  You’ve brought up some interesting points, so please forgive me for responding with an essay.

First, about MXTX — This is a follow-up to this post.

Unfortunately, this is all we got—all everyone has got about MXTX’s current situation: on 2020/11/10, she was sentenced in Hangzhou Shang Cheng District’s People’s Court (杭州市上城區人民法院). No details were given on her verdict, due to “人民法院認為不宜在互聯網公布的其它情形”  (“The People’s Court decided it inappropriate to announce further details on the internet”). Here’s a link with the screenshot that showed all the information released about the case that day.

There are enough copies of similar screenshots to this one online, with the differences dependent on where the publisher pulled the information from the same website: 中國裁判文書網, an online archive of verdicts run by China Supreme People’s Court. There’re few reasons, therefore, to believe the information on the screenshot was fake. The link I used was Sina’s Financial News, which I believe is trustworthy enough for China’s standard.

It is also important to note, of course, that two scenarios may still render this screenshot irrelevant. 1) The verdict, which was not mentioned in the screenshot, was “not guilty” and 2) the name listed in the case, 袁依楣, was not MXTX at all.

Few have seemed to suspect 2) to be a possibility. Her real name might have been prior knowledge among some fans, or the combination of her surname and city of residence. 1) has been the where the concern / debate is.

I included China’s rate of conviction in the original post for this reason: acquittal is exceedingly rare (<0.1%) for the arrested in China. This short article discussed some reasons.

So, is it possible that MXTX is now a free woman? Yes. Is it likely? Not at all.

Still, since the probability that MXTX is imprisoned isn’t 100%, is spreading this news smearing her name? Fear-mongering?

I can only answer for myself, Anon, but my answer is no for both questions, which is why I’ve felt comfortable posting about her case. MXTX’s alleged “crimes” are things we already knew she did, or common practices among Chinese IP writers. We know she penned MDZS and other BL works; we know MDZS, in particular, has an 18+ element. She was said to have sold merch based on her works, but that wasn’t unusual at all for writers in Jinjiang, where she published her writing. Even those who don’t like her have seemed to agree that it was her writing that got her into trouble, not some other crimes she could’ve committed.

IMO, a guilty verdict doesn’t tell us as much about her as it does about the judicial system, the business practices of her country. It’s worth re-mentioning that media giants such as Tencent are closely tied to the government; Tencent’s WeChat, for example, is part of China’s Great Firewall and is used for surveillance, for censorship and removal of political dissidents. What MXTX’s case hints at is this: the government has (very likely) convicted her, while its close allies are continuing to use her works—works that got her into legal trouble in the first place—to make money. Some fans of MXTX have questioned if the courts have censored the details of the case to save the embarrassment of the rich and powerful, calling what has happened to MXTX 人血饅頭 (“human blood steamed buns”), an idiom used to describe the act of profiting out of someone elses’ life.

As for fear-mongering, here are my thoughts ~ it would’ve been fear-mongering if the public has access to the facts, and not years after they happen. Specifically, it would’ve been fear-mongering to leak the rumours of MXTX’s sentencing, when the judicial system is transparent and the case details will soon be published for all to see. Why? Because “fear” comes from the unknown, and “-monger” is the unnecessary promotion, stirring-up of this fear.

To promote, stir up anything, one needs a reference level. The reference level in this scenario is this: what is the level of fear if the facts about MXTX’s (and other BL writers’) situation are known? Of course, this knowledge doesn’t make MXTX’s experience any easier or more just; it doesn’t cause her less fear. However, she isn’t the target audience of this likely-to-be-true rumour. The target audience is the public and in particular, those who consume and/or generate BL material online.

What is the level of fear among this population if the facts about MXTX’s (and other BL writers’) situation are known? It’s the (relative) comfort in knowing the government’s stance on what they do: how the administration feels about BL, 18+ BL, and their distribution methods. The comfort comes from having the right information to decide how to act accordingly. For example, if I’m a BL writer based in China and I know the court has found MXTX guilty of bypassing publishing houses but not of writing M/M romance, then I’ll know to not produce paper versions of my writing, but I can keep writing.

This reference level of fear is unavailable here, however, since the government has decided to withhold all details about the case. Without this reference level, fear-mongering becomes a ... difficult to define concept.

Are these likely-to-be-true rumours agents of fear, or are they hints on how to survive in a country that lacks transparency?

Continuing with the example of I being a Chinese BL writer, since I cannot expect to hear more facts about MXTX, this rumour is all I’ve got in choosing what to do with my hobby, in deciding whether it is safe to continue. As I’m aware that a rumour isn’t a fact, I first research on the rumour’s likelihood of truth (similar to what I’ve done for MXTX’s case), and cross my fingers that I don’t get it wrong.

By doing so, I’m turning these rumours into my survival guide.

Is it risky? Yes. Is it exhausting? Absolutely. But this is the way of life for people who live under secretive, authoritarian governments—the authoritarian element making it impossible to demand more facts. It may take people outside such regimes some time to get used to—to the lifestyle, and to the idea that, in a place where news is often synonymous with propaganda, rumours are breadcrumbs of truth that should be sieved through with equal care as one would sieve through the news. Heeding, considering the probable truth of what the authority has deemed to be fear-mongering rumours can be a matter of literal life and death. 

Take...COVID. (I apologize for bringing up this unpleasant topic!)

I shall link to an article about the early spread of COVID in Wuhan here and ask: were Dr. Li Wenliang and the seven other doctors fear-mongering? Wuhanese chose to believe in the government, but at what cost to them? What would the world be like today if they took the early COVID rumours as true and masked up like Hong Kongers—Hong Kongers who weren’t any smarter or better, but had simply learned their painful lessons from the 2003 SARS epidemic? 

(Why hadn’t the Wuhanese learned? Because the government has long changed the narrative of SARS, taught their people that the illness originated in Hong Kong.) 

(How can one learn from past mistakes if one pretends those mistakes never existed?)

You must be wondering, Anon, why I’m talking about COVID when your next question is about YiZhan. The death of Dr Li Wenliang on February 7th, 2020, sparked a demand for freedom of speech rarely seen in internet-age China. Its fury, its ferocity forced the government to change its stance on Dr Li, again an unusual move. Since January 2020, Weibo had been censoring COVID news and opinion pieces that shedded a negative light to the central government; after the death of Dr Li, the censorship apparatus stepped up, making way for the propaganda machine to kick in later and change the narrative of the pandemic.

Here are some questions without definite answers, but may be food for thought for YiZhan fans:

1) While the Chinese government’s censorship apparatus (including Weibo) might have silenced the voices of dissent, of mourning on the surface, was it more likely to pacify, or fuel the anger of netizens, many of whom had lost loved ones, many of whom were still under quarantine?

2) Less than three weeks after the death of Dr Li, a group of fans demanded even *more* censorship from the government—the closing of an internet website that had been seen as a relatively free space to express oneself. How would these netizens react, even though they knew little about these fans or their idol?  

(It was, in the context of the massive silencing of COVID discussions in China, that I learned about the ban of AO3. There had been rumours that the government would censor more websites on 2020/03/01. When I read about AO3′s ban on 2/27, my thoughts were 1) Hmm. This came two days early. 2) AO3? Really?)

(I wouldn’t watch The Untamed or know who Gg was until several months later.)

Now, Anon, this is a good time to get to your CCP (Chinese Communist Party) question.

The very short answer is no. There’s no way to support YiZhan without, to a certain level, supporting the CCP. As mentioned above, the media companies are all part of China’s surveillance system. Weibo is where freedom of speech is curbed. Our two boys have been part of the propaganda machine; the BBC article linked above had a tiny picture of Gg on it, as he was a performer in the Hero in Harm’s Way (最美逆行者), a “real-life based” drama on COVID. DD just did a show glorying the Chinese police force (and here’s a video of the same force welding doors to lock in COVID-stricken residents).

Nonetheless, here’s my first advice: please do not beat yourself up for supporting YiZhan!

Gg and Dd are people who live within the system, inside the Great Firewall. They understand the world the way their government has taught them to—not only in school, but also in the news and media. Like most youths in every country, they’re patriotic—and to expect them to be otherwise, especially because of information they don’t have, is both unrealistic and unfair. Even if they do know about certain things impermissible within the Firewall, in China (as in many Communists countries), openly expressing / performing one’s proper political leanings (ie. loyalty towards CCP) is among the most important pre-requisites for any job. This has been especially true for c-ent in recent years .

They, like most of their countrymen, are doing what they have to do.

In this case, it comes to us, our decisions on how to interact with their works. How should we deal with them, their propaganda elements?

The answer, of course, varies from person to person. Personally, I’ve chosen the approaches of “immunisation” and “restriction”. By “immunisation”, I mean learning about as much historical and sociopolitical facts from non-CCP sponsored sources; this is understandably difficult for someone who doesn’t already have some familiarity with the culture and politics of the region, and/or cannot read the language. 

Restriction means limiting my consumption of media produced by China. I avoid shows (dramas, documentaries, variety etc) featuring topics that are likely to contain heavy propaganda, such as the military, the police, Hong Kong/Macao/Taiwan, and of course, anything pertaining to the CCP, from its rise to its governance of the country.

In general, I’m wary of all information presented about the post-monarchy years (post 1911), even though CCP wouldn’t begin its reign until after WWII (1949). Why so early? 1) Because CCP was formed in 1921 and so its glorification requires a change of narrative since then; 2) because the Nationalist Party (Kuomintang, KMT), which governed China between 1912 and 1949 (the so-called Republican Era 民國), would end up exiling to and setting up a new government in Taiwan.

How much propaganda should one expect in shows depicting the country post-1911? The current TV and webdrama directives (previously discussed in this post) offer some hints. Here are my translations of the relevant items:

D7) Dramas about the Republican era: Glorification of the Republican Era, the Beiyang Government, and Warlord Era requires strict control.

D10) Crime drama: crime drama is the focus of content auditing. The Ministry of Public Security (Pie note: in charge of law enforcement, ie, police) will be involved in the audit. The process of crime solving cannot be exposed; criminal psychology and motivations can however be depicted in detail. Undercover police cannot use drugs or kill, or damage the image of the police force. Criminals must be punished by law.

D12) Dramas featuring realistic topics: realistic topics must adhere to the correct world view, philosophy of life and moral values. They cannot place too strong an emphasis on social conflicts, must showcase the beautiful lives of the commoners. Regular folks should display larger-than-life sentiments and aspirations; they can pursue wealth, but must use proper means to do so; they cannot damage the public image of specific employment types, groups and social organisations. Do not preach negative or decadent world view, philosophy of life and moral values. Do not exaggerate, amplify social issues; do not over showcase, display the darker sides of society; do not preach affluence, avoid things that have no basis in real life.

D16) Dramas featuring the Revolution (Pie note: CCP’s coming to power): 2019 is the publicity period of the 70th Anniversary of the People’s Republic of China. Although the “Three Importances” (important revolution, important people, important events) are still encouraged, the  National Radio and Television Administration requires all departments, at all levels, to strengthen the control of content and the overall management of the industry, and focus on the auditing of content pertaining to the Sino-Japanese war and espionage dramas.

These directives (as those translated in the other post) are as vague as they are restrictive, and to err on the side of caution, production companies tend to “overachieve” to avoid going against headwinds at the censorship board. This means their products have a tendency to malign the Republican Era (D7). It means they will likely twist history in trying to depict the CCP as faultless heroes (D16). It means they'll probably present a utopian-like society and call it reality-based (D12), a society in which the good guys share the same values as the CCP and always win (D10).

Yes, my “restriction” means I skipped Hero in Harm’s Way. It means I’ve never listened to Gg’s version of 我和我的祖國 despite my absolute adoration of his voice. It means I just missed Dd’s performance in the law enforcement celebration event. It means I don’t plan on watching Being A Hero and Ace Troops.

So here’s where I’ve drawn the line, Anon, but it doesn’t mean that’s what anyone should do. Only you alone can decide where your own comfort zone is. I write these metas in the hopes that it can offer a … gateway for those who’d like to understand, with a more telescopic lens, Gg and Dd’s country—a country that holds a particularly strong hold over its citizens’ fate including, yes, their romantic fate. It’s not my wish to impose my opinions on anyone.

If I have other hopes… It’s this. Please, as long as it’s safe for you to talk, do not self-censor—especially about facts, especially on sites like Tumblr or Twitter that have long been banned by the Chinese government. I don’t mean one should go about and confront those who insist on a different version of reality. To undo opinions rooted in years of education, IMO, the process has to be voluntary, and the information is already at the fingertips of those who’re surfing these sites and wish to learn more. More importantly, open discussions of these topics may be risky for those who still have close ties to China, and keeping them safe should always be the top priority. 

What I mean is simply this ~ please do not feel obliged to agree with every perspective presented in YiZhan’s work just because you support the leads. Please do not feel you must remain silent about the CCP—its good, bad and ugly—just because your favourite stars happen to come from the country it’s ruling. And please remember: “Chinese”, as a term, has always included people who live outside CCP’s control, many of whom still fully embrace the culture, traditions and values of Historical China, a 5000-years long string of dynasties with shifting borders, ethnic makeup and customs. The Untamed is a mainland Chinese production, yes, but its genre, its manner of presenting certain traditions, wouldn’t have been developed, or flourished, without the diaspora. The CCP has only been the ruling party of one country, the People’s Republic of China, for 71 years, and as a party with foreign (soviet) roots and a record of destroying the pillar of the country’s tradition, Confucianism, it doesn’t own a monopolistic say on how every Chinese should think and act—no matter how much it insists it does—or how everyone should think and speak about China and its people.

It isn’t qualified.