there is still not enough content. i need to make more content.

I N E E D T O

the way i think about my stories can be so annoying bc there will be a point when i reach a certain story beat after which i dont know how to continue, and the way i do find are usually ... not good .. or i imagine it is not so i think man i cant do that thats so dumb and annoying i gotta think of something better, but then i cant come up with anything better bc once i got a solution to soemthign i cant think of anything smarter- and then i get bored of it as a whole bc man, this really was stupid from the start wasnt it

(this is all some stupid rambling and does NOT represent anythign that will happen in destiny, i swear the actual story with a proper end makes much more sense)

listen to me rambling but this morning i thought about the essentialyl non-canon good "ending" of destiny, a kind of self indulgent dumb lil alternative where everyone lives blah blah, but then of course it cant just end there, bc the end goal of the both of them is to find out the gods plan and secrets and also kill the gods, as you do, then i got a certain point that i found cool (which initially came from the whole thoguht of what if zelda game but you could play demise and it took place after the alternative ending in which the goal is to get rid of the gods) where the fight one of the gods but are kinda losing and as the god is trying to devour demise, as gods do, he abandons his body and his spirit/core, who cant exist without his body so hes still connected through the spirits tail , and climbs through the gods interdimensional weird 'mouth' while its trying to rip him apart to reach the core of the god in a last attempt to take them down with him, while hylia is fighting to keep the god from severing the thin connection he still has to his body but fails just as he reaches the core so the god is killed but his core is immediatelly starting to dissolve and hylia manages to grab his core and put it back into his body and flee from whatever is happeing to that dead god back into hyrule

he survives but is incredibly weak as his spirit has lost half of itself (blade spirits are also forged throguh sacrificing part of their spirit/core permantently but this is besides the point, none of this makes sense anyway), something he obviously hates but cant do anything about really, once a part of their core is gone its gone (not like lost energy but gone gone) but the core is also slowly dissolving further which is a death sentence with no way to act against- then theres a whole quest to .. well, stop that, while hes falling back into self hatred and fear bc hes now so weak that hylia can break his bones without any effort if she were to treat him in any way similar to before and to a deity that all their life was never so fragile, one whos most defining feature IS his power and strength to keep going no matter what, thats gotta be pretty existentially dreadful (and also its a set back to know that they cant just go fight the gods together like that, theres still two more and he cant fight like that)

then i wondered ok what if then, even if the time doesnt quite line up but at this point the entire prophecy cant be done anymore either so everythings out of order, the cloud barrier weakens and zelda is abducted (not by ghirahim) and link goes and tries to find her, but since everythigns not as it should have been he meets hylia and demise (disguised tho) and they immediately know who he is and then go along and try to help link find his friend (hylia does it bc she got the idea to make him find the triforce and wish demises spirit to be restored, since only a mortal can do that and links the most likely candidate to be able to go through the trials of it since he was supposed to already, even if the circumstances are different- demise goes along with it bc hes still trying to deal with essentially slowly dying and not knowing what to do with himself since hes afraid to get into fights or similar, much to his disdain, so hes acting like a companion of sorts, a mentor figure in a way, not knowing what hylias plan is)

i found the idea kinda interesting to have them be like a lil group that goes on links adventured with him, but with strangely intricate knowledge of how the dungeons work, link still doing the heavy lifting but them being there like parents cheering on their kid in a competetion, all the while putting the whole puzzle and dungeon aspect in a way different light bc half of them were never completed (they wanted to escape the prophecy after all) so they all work completely differently, some bosses being maybe some of the gods creatures instead (like the skysw guardians)- the mid journey point being that they find zelda, and who kidnapped her, it being one of the shiekah having most closely worked with hylia before the whole -break the prophecy- thing started (idk if it would be impa .. idea is neat) and is hellbent on making the gods plan work out like it was supposed to, kinda like the inverse of the games plot, so they got ahold of zelda as part of making her into the new hylia (despite hylia being .. right there, but they dont believe it is her truly since the true tm hylia would never betray the gods- ALSO a paralel to how the downfall of demises world worked bc his mortals turned on him after he started destroying their version of the triforce in the belief destroying it would be the only way to save mortals from going to war agaisnt each other for it over and over, mortals believing that their true deity was gone and replaced by a demon despite demise being ..right there)

after link wins the fight and frees zelda from them they in a kind of last effort to do anything against their group they stab demise, normally that wouldnt do shit against him but in his already fading away situation it basically puts him from very slowly dying to actually dying, as a reaction to it hylia kills the mortal (maybe impa idk), which is the first time she does anything like that to a mortal but i like the idea of her being actually super ruthless when it comes to things she cares about

now with a much more dire time limit hylia sends demise back to essentialyl go hide in her temple and try to not die and to trust her having a plan to make this all still work out- he does and once he is away she reveals pretyt much the entire story around why and what is happenign to link and zelda, hylia herself cant go above the clouds as the barrier is still partially up and she cant do anything to reach the triforce either - so she sends link and zelda to go do that, and it works out in the end bc even knowing the truth know, demise was with them on half of their journey so they know and care, he WILL be mad about them wasting their wish on him (even if he is still happy to be alive- i imagined scene where hes watching himself fall apart and die, alone in hylias temple, having to come to terms with the fact that after everything they had went through hed still die alone- it made me cry while thinking about it, yes, yes you are allowed to laugh)

i didnt get that much further but his spirit was essentially reset to when he was in his prime back in the day through the triforces power- something he both likes and despises, it being the gods power of all things that lets him live again, but also lol to use it agaisnt them by giving another chance to the gods greatest enemy- the next plan is of course to kill the next one of the gods but much better prepared, as they cant just go and do the same thign again (neither wants that), one idea was that hylia goes on a secret quest to try and bring back courage (the third deity that demise killed when his world was still thriving) but it involves diving back into the realm of the gods so she doesnt tell him at first, i do think theyd go together in the end, not to fight but to release courage; the whole thing is also an elaborate revenge plot of hylia, how dare the gods do that to him!!

anyway thats most of what i got from that thinking session but its so frustrating bc none of this is even in the actual comic (since it ends in a way that leads into canon skysw, this is some brain fart nooo i want blorbo to live and succeed!!) and its also convoluted and kinda dumb, the idea to inverse the games plot in a way (instead of it being ghirahim trying to bring demise back its someones plan to make the gods prophecy happen no matter what) is neat but i cant have demise almost dying be the thing THREE TIMES, it kinda undercuts his character and is way too much centered around him, all three times also more or less involving it needing help from others to get him back, when his whole thing should be being unkillable bc he jsut keeps refusing to die, also hylia is, as of now in this spaghetti derailment of random thoughts, way too much of a side character, which i dont like, and it all would make people not like demise when im trying to do the exact opposite of that in the main actual comic

i know being super self indulgent and jsut doing what you want is good for the most part but theres a point where it becomes stale cringy fantasies about my blorbo tm and i wanna write at least decent stories- in the end none of this matters anyway as the actual REAL story of destiny is already pretty long and i got no plan to write that alternative 'good ending' anyway and i mostly just thought about it bc "i dont want blorbo to die :(" and "wouldnt it be fun if the entire plot of the game would get messed up and now demise link hylia and zelda etc can all just drink tea together and make plans to get rid of the gods that wanted them all to suffer needlessly"

i probably shouldnt post this as it was really only a vent to get out dumb thoughts from my brain before they poison me into losing interest of the biggest comic project i have worked on so far but i am unable to keep these things to myself so

if you read all of this, im sorry (´。＿。｀)

Interview from Sweden Rock Magazine 10/2023

Hi, hi. There is an interview with Tobias in SRM’s newest issue, but it’s in the subscribers only section, so I thought I’d translate/share since I guess not many people will be able to get their hands on it. It is about Prequelle and it’s part of SRM’s „200 best Swedish hard rock albums of all time” series. Prequelle placed #68. The other albums may have scored higher, but for now we don’t know the whole list. Either way, enjoy. Very insightful. 

„Do you think that "Prequelle" is Ghost's worst album?” Now that’s an unusual opening question. Especially when the interview is about an album that Sweden Rock Magazine's writers and qualified Swedish hard rock musicians (including Tobias Forge) have voted as one of the 200 best Swedish hard rock albums of all time. The question wasn’t planned, but comes spontaneously, as a reaction to the first thing Tobias Forge says when we sit down on opposite sofas in the record company office. I'm here for a two-part interview, partly about the EP "Phantomime" (published in #6 2023), partly about "Prequelle". Neither record companies, artists, voters, nor even our writers who conduct interviews for this series of articles have any idea what placement an album has received. Interviews are often done well in advance and we simply don't want placements to leak and become public long before publication.

No Ghost album has ever been on the list before. The idea is actually to end the day with the "Prequelle" talk, but when Tobias Forge suddenly starts with a funny little comment that this album is probably the one that those who have voted think is Ghost's worst or least popular album, I just have to take the opportunity to ask the question: Do you think that "Prequelle" is Ghost's worst album?

No, absolutely not, he says and laughs. If I'm going to be completely pragmatic, I'd say: "How many songs do we actually play from that record?" There are songs that work damn well live and sit where they should. So it's a pretty strong album.

But is this what you are basing it on? "Prequelle" was released after Ghost had become really big so it can't be compared to "Opus Eponymous" and "Infestissumam" which you don't play many songs from. I mean, no matter what kind of record you had released when "Prequelle" came out, you would still have played many songs from it and they would have worked precisely because Ghost's songs nowadays are moulded more to the arena format.

I don't know how to answer that, it's difficult. If the album had been different, it would have been. If I'm going to talk somehow both artistically and practically, I know that for every record we have become exponentially bigger. "Prequelle" was definitely no exception, but it also took us a big step forward and upwards and we became bigger and broader. To the extent that when we introduce old songs in the live set, you notice that there are elements on albums one and two that make some songs more difficult to play. Not technically, we can play the songs, but they don't work in quite the same way as the later songs, which means that there is a slight favouritism.

I asked the original question about whether you think it's Ghost's worst album only because you directly said that this means it's the least popular one.

I'm just so full of myself I assumed all the other albums are also in the top 200, which may actually be incorrect. This might be the best album and the others aren't even there, haha.

It wasn't long after "Prequelle" was released that you were self-critical of the album in interviews, saying that it was too ballad-heavy and a bit too soft. I haven't noticed that before, you being so self-critical shortly after the release.

Yes, but I still feel that way. If, as an artist, I am only going to look at the work with the criticism that one can feel towards one's own work, I think that if things had been different or if I had more time, I might have wished that I had managed to get maybe two more hard songs. Maybe one more hard song would have fit on the album and another harder song might have phased out one of the ballads. Now five years after the album came out, I know that the two ballads ("Pro Memoria" and "Life Eternal"), which I may not think are bad, are one too many. But I know that many of the people who like the band like both of them, so it's kind of a useless argument.

Who sets the length of an album? Have you set a limit, that it can't be longer than this and have no more songs than that?

No, but it must fit on an LP disc and there is a physical limit. I think the absolute pain threshold is 46 minutes and that's 23 minutes on each side. Now maybe Mikkey Dee (co-owner of Spinroad Vinyl Factory) will raise his hand here: "But I can make it longer!" And it's maybe 48 minutes, I don't know, but I do know that when a disc starts getting so full that you start getting close to the sticker, it starts to sound bad. Especially nowadays, because recordings today are so very maximalist in scope. It's one thing if you record 60s music with drums, a guitar and bass where the sound is cleaner and finer or if you play acoustic stuff with just vocals. Bob Dylan records could have eight songs on each side and it worked all the way through. But this kind of fairly compact music doesn't work well. Not only am I a militant vinyl advocate, I think we should respect the fact that most artists don't manage to create more than 45 minutes of good music on a regular basis. A lot of famous double records are not that good. I don't think the Rolling Stones "Exile On Main St" is very good. It might as well have been on one disc. And if I'm actually going to turn it into something completely mundane, I'd say that I think it's irresponsible to sit and make records with twelve songs if it results in the record being 63 minutes long and you automatically have to make a double record. It's pretty wasteful.

When you said that it's irresponsible, I thought you were going to say that it's irresponsible to print a double vinyl because of the environmental destruction that it entails.

Of course, if we're going to be completely straightforward and not do anything that harms nature, we shouldn't even release any records, so I say this with reservation. But with that in mind and for the sake of art, I think more people should embrace the actual given format that has been the most prevalent in rock history. There is a reason why a film is usually one hour and 30 minutes. You can’t take any more. There's a certain dramaturgical structure and there’s a certain comfort in it. Then the CDs came along they screwed that up, and suddenly there weren't two sides anymore but it started one way and ended another. Now that the CD is no longer important and we've gone back to vinyl, creators should follow suit and start embracing the physical rules.

Are there songs that have been rounded off just because you thought „I have to round off here, because if I continue, it won't fit on the vinyl disc"?

We actually had that problem on the last album. „Watcher In The Sky” ended the A-side and the outro is much longer on the CD and digitally. Two minutes longer I think. Much, much, much longer. It's long, noisy and has all these dives. It's a very chaotic soundscape. You get the feeling that it goes on and on, and on the vinyl it's just the beginning of an outro and then it drops almost immediately. I think that was a huge mistake.

So the overall sound quality was more important than vinyl buyers getting everything? Because you could have pressed the vinyl and it would have fit, but you would have had to compromise the sound quality.

Yes, exactly. You can get the song to just keep going until the vinyl simply runs out. Then it just starts spinning in the middle, depending on what kind of record player you have. But the problem then, if you want to anticipate events at a creative stage, is that people today buy and listen to vinyl records and are sensitive. It's quite common for people to complain that the record is broken. I don't just mean our records, but people complain a lot about the presses. If you make ten songs, it's therefore stupid to have a too thick soundscape towards the end of song number five and song number ten. If you want to be really good and old school, that's where you put a piano ballad because it's an easier sound to handle so far into the record. This is what I think about when I make records. But clearly sometimes I miscalculate.

This must cut right through the record collector Tobias Forge's whole body and soul, that "Watcher In The Sky” is shortened by two minutes on the vinyl of all versions.

Well... I don't toss and turn and wake up in the middle of the night thinking about it anymore. But when it happened, I was livid. Luckily it was just an outro. It would have been worse if it had continued with some kind of narrative into the next song. Now I can't remember in my head how long "Prequelle" is, but if I'd had to go back in time and just re-construct it, the re-construction wouldn't have had much to do with the existing material, I would have just wanted to add a scene. And it's not a scene that's missing, it's just for the sake of balance. It became asymmetrical in a way that bothers me a bit.

You've talked about this before, but it was before "Prequelle" that you really started to talk a lot about how you were thinking about what kind of new songs might suit the live show. Can you get stuck in that mindset, thinking more about what songs are needed live right now rather than creating an album that will last 30 years?

Hmm... (long pause)... The reason I'm sitting here thinking is because I'm trying to come up with examples of other bands that I think might have gone through something similar. I’m looking for examples to the answer I'm about to formulate and that is that: yes, I think there comes a point in the career when most bands make a record because they simply feel they need to… Because what we're talking about is that when you go from playing in small smoky clubs in front of an already inveterate audience that already understands the perhaps a little more chewy expression, that experience can change if you start playing in front of a larger and especially a different type of audience. When a different type of audience comes and you play in a different format, you discover that this song doesn't work very well, it doesn't sound very good and it's difficult to get the sound right. Then there's usually a record or two or three during your career when this transition happens where you start filling in with songs that work better live. Look at Piece of mind", "Powerslave" and "Somewhere in time". There's a reason why Iron Maiden didn't play a lot of the first two albums there and then, because it was easier to play the new songs. You get to that point somewhere in your career and it's very difficult to say when it is - there's no given rule and there are artists who continue to release relevant records and have an amazing ability to release new records and just play the whole new record. Well, now Iron Maiden does that and tests their audience a little bit in that way, but then they will always compensate by doing like a "best of" set the following year so everything is forgiven. Now we're in the middle of the "Impera" period here and have a very strong set, but I'm starting to feel that now that I'm about to start writing a new album, it feels like it's not really on my agenda to write three more albums that will change the live setlist ten years ahead. I think we already have the blueprint for what is Ghost's setlist, especially if you include the entire catalogue. After a while, each new record you make becomes a little less important. It's really hard to know when that point comes, but the truth is that new records don't matter in the same way. Slayer didn't have to release "Divine Intervention”. They definitely didn't have to release "Diabolus In Musica". I didn't care about it and I just wanted to hear the old stuff. If they had just come up and played "Reign In Blood" I would have been soooo happy. And that's the way it is with most bands. Nobody would be sad if the Rolling Stones came up and didn't play anything from "Emotional Rescue". And that's just the way it is. In the future, I can see a scenario where there is probably a basis to possibly build up an alternative setlist. There are so many songs that we do not play and that I have nothing against - I love them too! But it would almost be easier to build up a completely alternative setlist and run a show with only the odd songs. There are so many songs now. There's no reason not to build on that. But when I want to make a new record, it's irresponsible for me not to consider that there might have to be some songs that are a bit more direct. But it doesn't hurt me if we have more songs that we don't play live. I don't know if this answers your question...

I would actually like to ask exactly the same question again, because I wonder if you yourself feel that you get stuck during the making of the record. You said that you would have liked to include another hard song because "Prequelle" doesn't have the balance that you would have liked to have in retrospect.

Exactly, but the explanation for that has more to do with my mental capacity there and then. I simply couldn't cope. I felt that I had probably maxed out… It was probably about as much as I could do that year. That's the simple explanation. To get another song that would have fit and that would have fulfilled this requirement that I now in retrospect would have wished I had, it would have required something that I did not have there and then. The only thing that could have made it easier is if I had more time. It is difficult to reason about it, you see.

I was in the studio for a few days during the recording and it's one of the few times in all these years that I've done interviews where someone has started crying during an interview. It was quite obvious that everything that had happened with the split of the band affected you.

Yes. Of course. It did.

Is "Prequelle" a difficult album to listen to for you? Can you sit and listen to it all the way through? 

Well, at the moment I have to do that from time to time, and listen to all the records, because we're just about to start rehearsing again and then I sometimes have to go back and just listen to the record to go: "Fuck, is that really how I sing?" Especially when we start rehearsing, I can be a bit like: "Damn, who changed this bit?” Then I usually sit down and it hits me: "Oh, it's me who has changed my song!" You simply do that over the years, you start singing it in a slightly different way. So sometimes I have to go back and listen, but it’s more practical. I don't think it's fun to listen them. I do it until they are finished. I listen over and over and over again and really try to listen with all the imaginary ears and all the imaginary perspectives you can have. "How would I have listened to this if I had heard it from this perspective?" Just to get as "objective" a perspective as I can until I'm satisfied, but then it's like „No, I don't want to hear this anymore". But I have to say that I think "Prequelle" is a very tolerable disc despite everything that interfered with the process. Therapeutically, it works quite well considering that we are still playing at least half of the album. For every artist there are songs that you want to play, and there are songs that you don’t want to play because they feel too personal. I don't feel that way about this one, it's more like: "Ah hell, they're part of the setlist and people like it and it sounds good. So that's what we're doing."

On a personal level, was Tom Dalgety the perfect producer for you, the way you were feeling at the time? Tom feels like the kindest, sweetest producer you can meet. He wasn't the kind of producer who pushed you very much, it was more of a nice atmosphere between you.

Yes, really, and it would have been different if Klas Åhlund, who is more confrontational, had been in the room. Now Klas and I are great mates, so it would certainly have been very therapeutic also, but it would have been a different process. If an artist comes in who is in such bad shape that they can't make a record, or a band where the main songwriter has just left them, then a Bob Ezrin goes in and says: "If you don't make the record, I'll make the record myself.” And he goes and makes Kiss "Destroyer" or Alice Cooper records. I'm not saying they didn't make them, just that you hear that Bob Ezrin made "Beth". It's a type of producer that's very different from a lot of other producers who maybe act a little bit more like buddies and cheerleaders and make the atmosphere good. Bob Ezrin doesn't care so much about the atmosphere in the room. Klas is somewhere in between, I would say. Given the condition I was in during "Prequelle", the result could probably have been different if Klas had come in. Ironically, there was actually talk of him doing it, but he didn't have the time and we'll never know how it would have turned out. I only know that it would have been different, but right there and then Tom was fantastic. I know that a lot of bands like to work with him because he is technically brilliant. He's really good at those typical sounds that people like: cool drums, guitar, bass, tone and clarity. He is also very "happy go lucky", a nice guy who sits and jokes all the time. Even if he has a bad day, it doesn't affect anyone else, which is convenient.

Let me compare it to when a writer contacts me after an interview and says "that was such a nice interview". For me, "nice" is not something positive in such a work situation and the result is often better when there is a little friction.

Mmm, and that is more Klas. There is more friction and more confrontation. And I was much better equipped for that at "Meliora" and later at "Impera". I felt better and was simply stronger. There wasn't the same survival instinct as on "Prequelle". If I think back, not about how the album turned out and how I have to live with it, but if I think back to the situation I was in, I was very anxious all the time. Even though I'm happy with the result, I wouldn't want to go through the recording again, even though Tom was great. Because it's hard to work when you're under attack. I realised that now when I made "Impera", when it was no longer like that. You are much more comfortable, it doesn't feel the same, you are more mature, you make better decisions, you are more controlled or dare to be uncontrolled. When things are this serious, you can end up in a freeze mode. Maybe that's also why there wasn't another song. The song that I miss doesn't exist because I simply squeezed out everything I had. If I had been in a different emotional state, I might have been more comfortable working out something at the last second from bits and pieces. But I felt that I really just wanted to get it done, deliver it, get back out on tour and start over again.

When you described being more mature during "Impera" you sounded like a 70-year-old, kind of like all the Aerosmith-like bands that have been fighting all their lives and now that they're in their 70s they say "we're soooo mature,” haha.

I think with all artists, especially when they're required to work in a group, there are many recordings that have been a collision with a wall because you're expected to function in a context all the time, whatever and whenever. But you do change and from one year to a few years down the line there can be a huge difference in a person's drive, hunger and priorities in life. Whether you have the same band structure as I do or whether you play in Metallica, people come in one state and they may end up in another, because you have different priorities at different times. It's unfortunately against the whole rock myth. I think that's the biggest problem for bands and businesses, that you always have this idea that if you just get to a certain stage - not just monetarily or career-wise, but you get to a certain stage of fun - then we've reached the status quo. But that is never the case! Never! There’s always something. Even in the best moments when everything is working, the band is awesome, everyone is working well, the crew is awesome, everyone is laughing, it's just a party all the time mentally, you have the world's best tour manager, everything is flowing and the tickets are selling, there will always be someone who doesn't like it and then has to break away and want to do their thing because it's no longer fun. It's usually somewhere in the lead-up to a stage where it's interesting and then once you've achieved it, it all becomes a bit boring. Just like in a relationship some people may eventually think, "well, that's a bit boring, I have to go out and do something else".

Since I was in the studio when you were laying down guitars on "Witch Image", my heart beats a little extra for that song and I thought it would be a great live song, but you've barely played it (at the time of writing it's Ghost's forty-fourth most played song live).

We did it during the "Prequelle" tour, or "A Pale Tour Named Death" as it was called. Then we did quite a few "an evening with" concerts, for better or worse. The advantage was that if you were a big fan of the band we actually played a lot of songs and actually a lot of the first albums, like "Idolatrine" - or "Witch Image". We did a set, a break and then a whole other set. That was a bit of a taste of what I was talking about earlier: doing a slightly larger set and then a slightly smaller one. You just shouldn't do it on the same night because it gets a bit stale. We played for two hours and 30 minutes or something and that wasn’t a good idea, haha. At least we did "Witch Image", but it has fallen behind a bit and it doesn't mean that we will never play it again, just that we don't do it right now. What I've been happy about is that there has been a feeling for the records that we've made recently, "Prequelle" and "Impera", that people still want to hear the new stuff. We haven't gotten to that stage that I talked about earlier when it doesn't matter anymore. Then it's very fun to try to find a new way to perform the songs, not technically, but suddenly a song like "Witch Image" might fulfill a very nice purpose between a completely new song and another song.

Let me speculate: in 30 years, I think "Rats" will be considered the great hard rock song, "Dance Macabre" the great hit and "Life Eternal" the great ballad. What do you think? Will this in the future be seen as the three big songs of the album?

Yes, that makes sense, I think. I understand that an instrumental song automatically ends up in the wake of a "best of" collection, in the sense that you do one in 30 years. I realise it's not a hit but the instrumental "Miasma" is a big part of our live show. It's strong and feels like such a keeper. Now we don't play "Life Eternal" very often actually, but it was very well received. For some reason people like to get married to it, I don’t know why, hehe. It's nice but it's also a bit like U2’s „I still haven't found what I'm looking for" and you don't use that one at a wedding. But people like it and I guess interpret it differently to me. It’s also a song that I don't think is fun to play live.

And why not?

Because I find it hard to play ballads. Physically, they don't feel the same as rock songs. I miss the "dunka dunka". Now everyone who plays music today knows what I mean - sorry, readers who don't play music - and it's that there's a small problem with having in-ear monitors. This means that you have to reach a certain frequency of beats in order to feel the music, unlike when you played at clubs with only a guitar amp behind you. You felt every single note you made and it just went through your body. Nowadays, I think it's sometimes hard when you play slow songs, because you have to trust that it sounds good, whereas when you play a rock song, you feel that it sounds good.

Does it also apply to "He Is” which is such a huge ballad, not least live?

Well, just the intro and then it gets going quite quickly and suddenly becomes a hard and rather fast-paced song. The classic ballad concept has always been that you play so-called edge beats to make it sound soft, while "He Is” is actually a rather hard-played song considering that it is a ballad. Once the drums come in – boom, boom – it's got AC/DC bite to it. It has a rock feel to it that "Life Eternal" doesn't really have. As I said, I don't think that "Life Eternal" is a lot of fun to perform, but that doesn't mean that it isn't quite good to listen to. It’s just that when I play "Dance Macabre" or "Mummy Dust" I feel that I can express myself physically more in line with what the text says and what it means.

Theme 15: Shilin

A project that I have been working on since 2022 and my latest and final gift to my fellow followers, featuring my all time favorite artist - @okolnir

I dedicate this theme to my respondents who requested for a RP theme. This theme is suitable for RPers, writers, comic artists (hopefully) and any other general bloggers. It's very versatile - you can make this as complex as you want or even as simple as you want.

[Static Preview 01] [Static Preview 02][Guideline] [Install]

Full Features

Responsive

Has Full-sized Header [optional]

Has a mun section

Has Affiliates Section - 6 slots [optional]

Has Muses Section - 5 slots [optional] which consists of Basics, Tags [Optional], Verses [optional], Connections [optional], extra [optional]

Unlimited links

To see its full features, click the first preview.

Notes

Terms and Conditions apply.

There’s no need for you to go through the code as everything that you need to key-in shall be provided via the Theme Options.

Please go through the guideline first.

I am neither affiliated with Shilin in any way nor obtaining any financial benefit out from this theme.

You can also consider answering this survey of mine relating to theme selection as a way of supporting me in my theme making.

This is my final theme and a gift for everyone.

Devlog #19: THE LAST DEVLOG BEFORE RELEASE.

Hello everyone! Welcome to this month’s devlog!

If you just stumbled upon this, I am Adrienne, also known as insertdisc5! I’m the developer, writer, artist, main programmer, etc of the game. The game being In Stars and Time, a timeloop RPG, which is also the next and final game in the START AGAIN series, following START AGAIN: a prologue (available here!).  You can find out more about In Stars and Time here!!! 

LET’S GET TO IT. This month is THE LAST DEVLOG BEFORE RELEASE?!??!??!?! URGHH?!??!!

My goodness. Can you believe In Stars and Time will finally be out THIS MONTH? NOVEMBER? TWENTIETH? TWO THOUSAND TWENTY THREE?!??!?!?!? Yeah turns out ME NEITHER so WE CAN FREAK OUT ABOUT IT TOGETHER.

So, as previously mentioned, In Stars and Time will be out on November 20th on Steam, itch.io, GOG, Nintendo Switch, and Playstation 4 and 5!!! We mentioned this previously, but we cannot guarantee they will come out at a specific time, nor guarantee they will all come out at the exact same time and hour and minute, but we will do our best! Hopefully “sometime in the morning for Canada” is the time. Don’t hold me to that though!

And for our announcement, we prepared a wonderful announcement trailer, animated by the lovely Mimi Chiu! Did you see it?!? Well, have it again.

In preparation for the release, we’ve been bringing our marketing A-game! I (insertdisc5) have appeared on The Completionist’s IndieLand Stream, and it was an absolute blast. I also reiterated my Big Hope for this game, which is that I hope ISAT makes you feel so many feelings. 

We’re also doing a Fanworks Contest on Twitter, with the prize being a key of the game on release!!! If you have something in mind, why not participate? We accept EVERY kind of art, from fanart to fanfics to cosplay to animatics to memes to even pictures of food! As long as it’s ISAT related, GO FOR IT!!!

And finally, every Monday until release we’ll be sharing some ISAT character playlists made by yours truly (along with some VERY MUCH NEEDED HELP from friends and family. Finding songs is hard!) You can check them out here on Spotify!

And, finally for real, mayhaps consider joining the Discord channel before all hell breaks loose. Make some friends. Show some memes. Post your last minute theories. Or maybe just lurk! Up to you and your delightful little brain.

How weird to know this is the last devlog before the release! I WILL be posting a couple more monthly devlogs after this month- I want to talk about how the release went! And even after the game comes out, there will be some fun little things in store! So please stay tuned even after the game comes out :) And as always, don’t forget to wishlist the game on Steam!!! Ok!!! Wishlist numbers this close to release are SO IMPORTANT!!!! SO PLEASE!!! I BEG!!! ON MY KNEES!!! PLEASE WISHLIST!!!! (someone does a neck cutting motion off screen) I’m told to tone it down. So PLEASE WISHLIST but like, um, only if you want, teehee <3

Thank you for following this devlog all this time. I hope you enjoy the game when it comes out later this month.

See you next time.

GeminiTay appreciation week speedrun!

@dronepikachu had this fantastic idea for a whole week of drawing Gem fanart... Unfortunately, two things: I am neither an artist nor a writer... And I'm terrible at planning things out... So here is the whole week of prompts in one post in the middle of the week made in Hero Forge... 1) Hermitcraft Gem (And her training with Etho)... 2) Gem with a hermit of my choice (BEHIND YOU GEM!) Impulse to the rescue! 3) Geminislay accepting Scott's sacrifice... 4-5-6) Green-Yellow-Red Life Gem! 7) Free space! Limited Life Gem in a Cleo disguise!

On "Meet the Grahams" and the Moral Turn That Happened During This Beef

I know that I am on hiatus right now, but there is a lot on my chest regarding the rap beef between Kendrick Lamar and Drake that is really making me feel uneasy.

I am a Kendrick Lamar fan, I have been a Kendrick Lamar fan since the 6th grade after hearing "Swimming Pools" so much on the radio that it just became a song stuck in my head. Kendrick is an excellent lyricist, performer, artist, and writer. And while Kendrick is all of these things, he is not the pinnacle of a moral high ground.

The moment that the rap beef between Drake and Kendrick turned into a battle of morals, it dawned on me that we absolutely missed the plot. The point is, neither Drake nor Kendrick are good people, and neither one of them are associated with upstanding people either. It gets incredibly weird to see specific arguments they make about each other when they have either done the thing they have criticized the other over or are affiliated with someone that has.

Neither one of them actually care about what they are accusing the other of doing because if they did, the authorities would have been called by now.

Drake in "Family Matters" alleged that Kendrick has put his hands on his wife, Dave Free fathered one of Whitney's children, Kendrick doesn't care for black women, etc.

Kendrick said in "Meet the Grahams" that Drake has hypersexualized black women, he is a deadbeat father, he is a sex trafficker only comparable to Harvey Weinstein and Diddy, he is a pervert, and he is a substance abuser.

Drake brings up Whitney being allegedly abused, but he has sex traffickers in his circle. An example is Baka, a member of his inner circle, who got shouted out ("I'll declare it a holiday as soon as Baka get back on the road") for sexual abuse crimes after forcing a 22 year old in prostitution and went to jail. Upon his release in 2017, he was signed onto OVO sound. Why bring up a woman's trauma when you are aligning yourself with someone who has also traumatized women?

Kendrick brings up the hypersexualization of black women but has also had women scantily clad in his "Loyalty" music video. Kendrick brings up Drake's substance abuse as if he has not also abused substances. Kendrick brings up being a deadbeat father as if he did not hop on a track that blew this beef up with Future, who is notorious for fathering a bunch of children and practically being a deadbeat. He also discusses Drake's perversion as if Kodak Black, who faced charges of sexual assault, was not featured on Mr. Morale, which Kendrick himself slated as his "therapy album."

I feel like all of these moral flaw arguments are incredibly disingenuous because none of this would have been brought up had they not beefed with each other in the first place.

It feels a little icky? Like yes we should protect women, children, and people in general, but that conversation doesn't get to start because you guys are fighting. If anything, it should have started awhile ago.

People being all "Ed is just an emo babygirl after a breakup, like, who wouldn't act like that???" and yeah I LOVE emo babygirl Ed, but I do not think cutting off someone's toe and feeding it to them is really a sad babygirl action (although you go girlies, he did deserve that)

Jokes aside, though: We are NOT being told anything in specific, and his actions can be interpreted in various ways. Did he go fucking feral, all kraken and shit? Sure, but he also cried when looking at the lighthouse painting later, which tells us he did not really, like, vow to not give in to his emotions again or something.

On the other hand, we ARE explicitly told in canon that Ed is *not* mentally well, and I do not mean it in a bad way. Maybe we, as a fandom, should stop acting like Ed's PTSD and his trauma responses are something bad that we can't work with? Ed has every right to be sad. Ed has every right to be angry. He has every right to be fucking traumatised. And by making him feel those feelings the fanfic writers or fan artists are not necessarily being racist, homophobic or mental-illness-hating. Ed is just human and he has human feelings. People react in all kinds of ways to heartbreak and trauma.

I know we all love babygirl Ed, but keep in mind that woobifying his reaction to Stede leaving him, we are kind of writing off the whole mental health aspect of the character, which, I think, is super important in the show? Going as far as removing this aspect of Ed (and I have seen people who really believe Ed has absolutely zero issues) is kind of building the stupid "we shouldn't talk about mental illness" ableist taboo agenda.

(to read more about masculinity and rage in the context of POC experience, I recommend to dig into what @uselessheretic posts who is definitely better at writing in English than I am and likely more educated on the subject)

There is nothing wrong in wanting a character to be flawed. Flaws make us human

Another point: He is a PIRATE. Most people are not making him violent and angry because he's gay, nor because he's a POC. Most do it because he is a pirate, and if anything, the legendary pirates were generally known to be unhinged. Pirates stabbed people, keelhauled them, burnt whole villages down, traded slaves and r*ped. I know we all love OFMD and our blorbos, but let's not forget who the inspiration behind those characters were. No one does anything wrong by just by saying a pirate character HAS issues with his mental health, anger management or attitude. Some people just give Ed (or Izzy, or Stede, or any character honestly) more of the real-world pirate characteristics.

Yes, it is a comedy show, but in fan works it can become anything - a drama, a horror, a post-apocalyptic sci-fi slasher, whatever the author wants. So I think that people who do not interpret Ed's reaction to the breakup as basically a cutesy american teenager eating ice cream in bed listening to Evanescence are not necessarily wrong and neither do they have bad intentions.

I thought I had made a post about this before but upon looking back at my archive, I apparently didn't. So, uh, my bad. Here's a Google Drive link containing download links for BlazBlue Centralfiction's visual novel portraits+facial expressions, VN story backgrounds, and the in-gameplay character sprites (no VFX sprites though). In case you didn't want to download EVERY character's in-gameplay sprite all at once, I also separated them by character in folders. I unfortunately, did not do the same for the visual novel portraits due to laziness on my part. I might rework this Google Drive in the future to compartmentalize things differently. Put all of the individual sprite folders in .zip files rather than have loose .PNGs, remove the massive .ZIP files that contain every character's VN/sprite images, separate the VN portraits images by character and leave them in .ZIPs, etc. Edit: I have reworked how I compartmentalized the sprites and visual novel portraits. Every character's sprites is in their own .ZIPs instead of folders with loose PNGs and visual novel portraits & facial expressions are kept in character-separated .ZIPs in their own dedicated folder. Edit 2: I made this post because @kerta-the-53rd requested a Google Drive link for the story images. Not to mention, someone else asked about it before. I am hoping that having this resource available will make it easier for others to make fan edits and tell their own stories with these characters. I am neither a writer nor am I an artist at heart so I am hoping others can tell better stories than me lol.

Greetings

This blog is inspired from the perryshmirtz prophecy post by @adhdoofenshmirtz (thank you for dreaming) and I'm here because I too watched phineas and ferb when I was a kid and it holds a special place in my heart. I've always loved the dynamic between Perry the platypus and doofenshmirtz, and this blog is here to celebrate that love. Whether you ship them or just miss them... it doesn't matter cause this blog is for them.

Maybe this is just an excuse to inspire people to make more art, but maybe that's okay.

@ me if you find perryshmirtz art and I'll reblog.

@ me if you find perryshmirtz anything, and I'll reblog basically...... because I am neither a writer nor an artist, but I am a reader and ... an art viewer? and appreciative of the efforts and wonderful work

So the big day is on the 1st of February 2024. We could do something?? I really don't know man.

Tag the stuff with #perryshmirtz prophecy !!

This is just in time for the revival. We're coming back in style y'all!

Please, if you have any suggestions about what i should be doing, tell me cause I do not.

I just wanna have fun here😊

This also depends on the fact that people actually read and participate, so if you think this is a good idea, maybe spread the word?

literally how can u be in ur 30s with kids and STILL write x reader shit abt children???

I'm cracking up because I feel like as a writer here on Tumblr, I've finally "arrived." I've "made it" so to speak. I managed to be left alone for literally years, here in my corner just doin' my thing while you and/or others like you went around harassing other writers over things that have zero bearing or impact on the real world and the problems in it.

Normally, I would block and delete this cowardly anonymous ask, but I'm feeling charitable this fine morning on three hours of sleep, so I will gladly go into a discussion about this.

I hope you're prepared, anon. I have a lot to say about this subject since I've thought about this before back in the 2020 days of Tumblr.

First thing's first, I'm curious what spurred this...? Most of my writings DO focus on "adult" characters (Dabi, Chisaki, Nighteye, Aizawa, Gojo...). I've written for the "younger" characters a handful of times, usually small romance bits that others have requested or that I felt inspired to write because I felt it would make a good story. However, that's neither here nor there, since I have no problem writing the "younger" characters as aged-up adults engaging in adult situations and experiences (and yes that includes *gasp* sex!).

Why all the quotations around "adult" and "younger" you might ask? Because the simple fact is this: it's all fictional. None of these characters are real. So, in that sense, their age (physical, mental, emotional) is flexible, particularly when it comes to creative/artistic interpretations that expand beyond canon (friendly reminder, ALL fanmade material deviates from canon no matter how well drawn or how well written).

This means I'm able to look at a character and age them up in my mind utilizing my imagination. Why would I even want to do that in the first place, you might ask? If I'm willing to "age them up" then it means I'm attracted to them as they are portrayed in canon first, as teenagers, correct? Wrong. First off, if I were attracted to them as teenagers, then I would WRITE them as teenagers. See how I'm not doing that? Let's use Bakugou as my example for this. When I think of writing Bakugou, I'm not writing 15 year old Bakugou who's constantly loud and shouting at everyone aggressively to the point of comedic relief. I'm writing a 20- or 30-something Bakugou, who's still got that undercurrent of aggression, but he's learned to temper it over time; I'm writing a Bakugou who's been forced to grow up a bit through having failures, and or dealing with the loneliness of his single-mindedness around being "the best."

What I AM attracted to is the character "type." This includes their design (i.e., how they look), their personality/archetype (e.g., cocky asshole, aggressive pomeranian, aloof silent type), and their backstory/circumstance (e.g., daddy issues, self-esteem issues, past traumas, etc.). I'm basically borrowing all of these things when I write a character into my own fanon universes.

There's this little not-so-secret 'secret' within the fanfiction community: the canon version of a character and a fanon version of the character are NOT the same character. They look nearly identical (i.e., same appearance but aged up, so broader shoulders, taller, etc.); they share the same backstory/experiences (i.e., what makes them who they are); and similar mannerisms. We like to PRETEND they're the same, but in reality they're not. The character stops being a canon version of himself when I, a writer, get my hands on him. He's no longer a teenager when I write him; he's an adult, and he has new experiences that have transformed him into a new characterization that I'm utilizing for my own benefit. The canon still exists of course, but my rendition is a little bit removed from that just by the nature of creative license.

That is what, I as the writer, am attracted to. I'm attracted to that character "template" and the personal modifications I've made to it. It allows me to play with character concepts in way that I'm comfortable, including changing a canonically teenage character to an adult so that it aligns with my personal morals and comfort levels.

So for me, I have no interest in writing NSFW stuff/adult themes for characters as teenagers because I'm not attracted to teenagers. I've written some soft romance short stories (e.g., my very first BNHA fic was a prom-night first kiss with Kirishima) because it makes for a good romance story; and quite frankly, there's nothing wrong with writing that. Love is something you can write about no matter the age; writing about teenagers finding love does not equal perversion/pedophilia; and if you think it does, then never read a YA book again, since those are, well, all written by adults (you're welcome).

What I DO have interest in is exploring characters in non-canon situations. What would Pro Hero Bakugou be like? How would he approach a villain that he's attracted to? Or how would he handle almost losing someone he fell in love with that he was supposed to protect on his watch? And yes, that includes exploring sexual themes as well, such as what kind of a lover would he be like? What kind of kinks would a character of his archetype and backstory enjoy?

"But why utilize canonically under-age characters?" you might ask. "Why not use one of the canonically adult characters to explore these things?" And the answer is likely because maybe that character archetype that I'm drawn too for this particular idea/story isn't available in an adult form within the canon story. Stories that have a large cast, and particularly a large number of adolescent characters, have a wide variety of character archetypes to choose from that may not be as available with the adult characters. In short, it's because that particular character type fits that particular creative idea/thought. It's all about imagination and play.

So, long story short, if you have difficulty with extending your imagination beyond canon, then please, by all means, don't read or write aged-up fics because you won't be able to suspend your disbelief, and all it's going to do is gross you out. That's a you problem, not a me problem. I have no moral concerns with myself at all. I know for for a fact I have no romantic or sexual interest in teenagers either in fiction (thus why I age up) or in real life when they cross my path.

The TL;DR: You can "age-up"/imagine a canonically teenage character as an adult simply because the character is just that - a character. It's not real. You're taking an archetype, a template, and you're modifying it so you can use it to tell your own stories, stories which are important to the creator for a variety of reasons - sometimes the writing is therapeutic to process/explore sexuality and/or trauma; sometimes the writing is simply because it's fun, because we enjoy the stories we imagine and we want to share them. There is a refreshing flexibility and freedom in it that allows us creative folk to modify and play to our liking without having to create characters and worlds from scratch.

This is NOT the same as someone looking at a real-life teenager and "imagining" them as an adult or thinking they are sexually available because "they're so mature" or "they'll turn 18 soon" and treating them inappropriately for their own personal gain. Real grooming, real pedophilia, impacts a real, flesh and blood person. That person will STILL be a teenager, despite what an actual groomer might like to think or pretend. No amount of sugar coating or grooming talk will change that fact, and it will be the teenager that gets hurt.

Hey, coming to you anonymously because I’m nervous about the account seeing who I am but there’s a blog who is allegedly “exposing” racist and homophobic writers/artists and they made a post accusing you of racism.

The blog is @/problematicwriters

I don’t believe it’s true but I wanted to put it on your radar it’s being said and people love to hop on the hate bandwagon.

hello anon! thank you for letting me know :) I’ll probably address it in a separate post rather than an ask.

and I hope that neither you nor anyone else here will harass them for this. I’ve gone to their blog and they’re enduring a slew of racist and misogynistic messages, which I earnestly wouldn’t wish on anyone.

ART ISN'T SUPPOSED TO MAKE YOU COMFORTABLE

By Jen Silverman (NY Times)

(Mx. Silverman is a playwright and the author, most recently, of the novel “There’s Going to Be Trouble.”)

When I was in college, I came across “The Sea and Poison,” a 1950s novel by Shusaku Endo. It tells the story of a doctor in postwar Japan who, as an intern years earlier, participated in a vivisection experiment on an American prisoner. Endo’s lens on the story is not the easiest one, ethically speaking; he doesn’t dwell on the suffering of the victim. Instead, he chooses to explore a more unsettling element: the humanity of the perpetrators.

When I say “humanity” I mean their confusion, self-justifications and willingness to lie to themselves. Atrocity doesn’t just come out of evil, Endo was saying, it emerges from self-interest, timidity, apathy and the desire for status. His novel showed me how, in the right crucible of social pressures, I, too, might delude myself into making a choice from which an atrocity results. Perhaps this is why the book has haunted me for nearly two decades, such that I’ve read it multiple times.

I was reminded of that novel at 2 o’clock in the morning recently as I scrolled through a social media account dedicated to collecting angry reader reviews. My attention was caught by someone named Nathan, whose take on “Paradise Lost” was: “Milton was a fascist turd.” But it was another reader, Ryan, who reeled me in with his response to John Updike’s “Rabbit, Run”: “This book made me oppose free speech.” From there, I hit the bank of “Lolita” reviews: Readers were appalled, frustrated, infuriated. What a disgusting man! How could Vladimir Nabokov have been permitted to write this book? Who let authors write such immoral, perverse characters anyway?

I was cackling as I scrolled but soon a realization struck me. Here on my screen was the distillation of a peculiar American illness: namely, that we have a profound and dangerous inclination to confuse art with moral instruction, and vice versa.

As someone who was born in the States but partially raised in a series of other countries, I’ve always found the sheer uncompromising force of American morality to be mesmerizing and terrifying. Despite our plurality of influences and beliefs, our national character seems inescapably informed by an Old Testament relationship to the notions of good and evil. This powerful construct infuses everything from our advertising campaigns to our political ones — and has now filtered into, and shifted, the function of our artistic works.

Maybe it’s because our political discourse swings between deranged and abhorrent on a daily basis and we would like to combat our feelings of powerlessness by insisting on moral simplicity in the stories we tell and receive. Or maybe it’s because many of the transgressions that flew under the radar in previous generations — acts of misogyny, racism and homophobia; abuses of power both macro and micro — are now being called out directly. We’re so intoxicated by openly naming these ills that we have begun operating under the misconception that to acknowledge each other’s complexity, in our communities as well as in our art, is to condone each other’s cruelties.

When I work with younger writers, I am frequently amazed by how quickly peer feedback sessions turn into a process of identifying which characters did or said insensitive things. Sometimes the writers rush to defend the character, but often they apologize shamefacedly for their own blind spot, and the discussion swerves into how to fix the morals of the piece. The suggestion that the values of a character can be neither the values of the writer nor the entire point of the piece seems more and more surprising — and apt to trigger discomfort.

While I typically share the progressive political views of my students, I’m troubled by their concern for righteousness over complexity. They do not want to be seen representing any values they do not personally hold. The result is that, in a moment in which our world has never felt so fast-changing and bewildering, our stories are getting simpler, less nuanced and less able to engage with the realities through which we’re living.

I can’t blame younger writers for believing that it is their job to convey a strenuously correct public morality. This same expectation filters into all the modes in which I work: novels, theater, TV and film. The demands of Internet Nathan and Internet Ryan — and the anxieties of my mentees — are not so different from those of the industry gatekeepers who work in the no-man’s land between art and money and whose job it is to strip stories of anything that could be ethically murky.

I have worked in TV writers’ rooms where “likability notes” came from on high as soon as a complex character was on the page — particularly when the character was female. Concern about her likability was most often a concern about her morals: Could she be perceived as promiscuous? Selfish? Aggressive? Was she a bad girlfriend or a bad wife? How quickly could she be rehabilitated into a model citizen for the viewers?

TV is not alone in this. A director I’m working with recently pitched our screenplay to a studio. When the executives passed, they told our team it was because the characters were too morally ambiguous and they’d been tasked with seeking material wherein the lesson was clear, so as not to unsettle their customer base. What they did not say, but did not need to, is that in the absence of adequate federal arts funding, American art is tied to the marketplace. Money is tight, and many corporations do not want to pay for stories that viewers might object to if they can buy something that plays blandly in the background of our lives.

But what art offers us is crucial precisely because it is not a bland backdrop or a platform for simple directives. Our books, plays, films and TV shows can do the most for us when they don’t serve as moral instruction manuals but allow us to glimpse our own hidden capacities, the slippery social contracts inside which we function, and the contradictions we all contain.

We need more narratives that tell us the truth about how complex our world is. We need stories that help us name and accept paradoxes, not ones that erase or ignore them. After all, our experience of living in communities with one another is often much more fluid and changeable than it is rigidly black and white. We have the audiences that we cultivate, and the more we cultivate audiences who believe that the job of art is to instruct instead of investigate, to judge instead of question, to seek easy clarity instead of holding multiple uncertainties, the more we will find ourselves inside a culture defined by rigidity, knee-jerk judgments and incuriosity. In our hair-trigger world of condemnation, division and isolation, art — not moralizing — has never been more crucial.

One question. What do you think Disney from America controls European Disney and must be their canon, what's the matter? Is there something they don't like?

Hi and sorry for not answering this question earlier. You have asked a good question, but I am not sure how to answer it through a long essay or through short explanations, although I will answer it this way.

After all, Disney was created in America by Walt Disney and originally they created all the important characters we know, European writers and artists used them in their comics only later, after the Second World War. Back then, there wasn't so much censorship and writers were free to do whatever they wanted without ruining the originality. And so for several decades until the last decade. Romano Scarpa and Guido Martina created separate comics in their own ways, different from Carl Barks and Al Taliaferro and you have an Italian vision through Topolino comics. You also have Dutch, Danish, Norwegian and Swedish writers and artists who, relying on Carl Barks and the American Disney, made comics in their own way and thus created a separate kind of Donald Duck comics. Yes, you also have Brazilian comics who have written a lot of comics especially about Jose Carioca ever since the movie Saludos Amigos from 1942 was shown. And they created those comics in their own way, which is quite different from American comics. Unlike Latin American and European comics, American comics after the 1940s era clearly separated Mickey and Donald so that they neither see each other nor know each other except at times, since they live in different cities, such as Mousetown and Duckburg. American comics, not counting Archie comics, Peanuts, Garfield, and superhero comics, declined after the 1980s because television took precedence, so many watched television, either series, movies, or cartoons instead of reading comics. So Disney comics also experienced a market decline during that period and then you have the making of the OG Ducktales in 1987 which was made mostly by Disney's animation studio in Tokyo, Japan. And since then, the American Disney has not relied on comics, although since the time of Walt Disney, the differences between the canon in cartoons and in comics have been clearly made.

From what I've talked to others, Walt Disney was also unhappy with the popularity of Scrooge McDuck that Carl Barks created, because a different Christmas comic should have been created. However, the American Disney has clearly indicated that the canon in cartoons is the only official canon, while the comic book is not, except in some exceptions, but that's why they force their other productions where they have ownership to obey and respect the given canon that Disney requires. I think since the golden age of cartoons, the story started about how the official Disney can't really stand their comics, even though the comics took Mickey, Donald and other characters to a high level. Many of the characters we know came from comic books rather than cartoons. I'm not saying this for nothing, since your question just stated that since everything is under the Disney name, although they deviated from the path set by Walt Disney, they still determine the main editorial policy for many comics published in Europe and Latin America. Yes, before, as I mentioned, the authors made independently in their own way, but so that Disney didn't even know, but with the arrival of the Internet, that changed and a kind of censorship had to be done. Sometimes due to public pressure, sometimes due to wrong decisions, although I don't like to talk about politics here, but I think that lately politics has had a lot of influence on it, although I will tell you that politics had a lot of influence during the Second World War as well. Propaganda cartoons are very much the case. But in order not to deviate from the topic, I will tell you a couple of examples where American Disney had a lot of influence on European comics and how the writers still had to respect Disney's canon.

Donald Duck had several girlfriends in addition to Daisy and that the earlier Donald Duck fandom preferred Donald with other people rather than Daisy because Daisy was a bitch who treated Donald horribly, although that's not Daisy's fault as much as the writers who over Daisy mocked feminism. Yes, I love when Donald and Daisy fight over stupid things, but not that Donald constantly suffers from Daisy's impossible wishes that never come true and then kicks Donald like that for her displeasure. Disappointed, Donald finds other people who will suit him better. One of the most common examples with whom Donald is on excellent terms is Reginella, the queen of the planet Pacificus, and she appeared for the first time in the comic "Paperino e l'avventura sottomarina" or Donald and the underwater adventures from 1972 by the writer Rodolfo Cimino and the artist Giorgio Cavazzano when Donald first meets Reginella. Reginella became Donald's new hope and their couple was really great in my opinion and so in several comics. Yes, I love the Donald and Daisy romance, but Reginella with Donald is very special to me and I understand why others prefer it over Donald and Daisy.

However, since Disney found out what other comics were doing unofficially, Disney imposed an unwritten rule that their canon must be respected, so Donald must be with Daisy and no one else. So the last comic with Reginella from August 2021 called "L'ultima avventura di Reginella" or The Last Adventure with Reginella by authors Alex Bertani and Vito Stabile and artist Stefano Zanchi is about the breakup between Donald and Reginella because supposedly Scrooge can't more to finance Donald's trip to another planet, and Donald also admitted to Reginella that Daisy is his first and only love. Yes, Daisy has improved a lot in the last comics and treats Donald differently, but again it was really pathetic that something like that had to be done instead of making some kind of deal to make a clone of Donald and stay with Reginella or something like that. It just tells you that official Disney made the decision that way. However, Reginella appears in two more comics after that and has one comic with Daisy, but I haven't read that comic so I can't tell you exactly. Those who are and who know it, would tell you. Although I would like to see Daisy and Reginella together.

Of course the love relationship between Donald and Reginella is not the only one, but I put it as the most common example that Donald is not only with Daisy as the only "canon" girlfriend. You also have romantic relationships Donald with Lyla Lay (Paperinik New Adventures), Xadhoom (Paperinik New Adventures), Kay K (Double Duck), and others. However, in the comic Double Duck "Agent Zero" Kay K admits to Daisy that Donald's greatest love is Daisy and that they are still friends and Daisy was ashamed of that because before she was very jealous that Donald was with someone else and not Daisy. And there you can see that even though Donald is with someone else, he still stays with Daisy, but it is by no means a breakup under Disney's directive as it was done with Reginella.

2. Canceled characters due to certain things

Dutch comics mostly until 2019 and 2020 drew characters from Song of the South such as Brer Rabbit, Brer Fox and Brer Bear and they even had separate comics and were often represented together with Mickey, Donald and friends because they were anthropomorphic characters that also represented classic Disney. Of course, because of the problems in America related to the African-American population, Disney had to stop it and exclude the given characters because they represented caricatures of the African-American population from the South of the 19th century. The South, I mean the South of the USA, where there used to be a Confederacy that seceded and where the Civil War was fought from 1861 to 1865. Of course, they could have just stated that it was a product of its time and that the value system back then was not the same as today's, but no, Disney banned Song of The South and cut those characters out, and those characters never appeared again, in those Dutch comics. Yes, I certainly condemn racism, but one must know that it should be censored in a different way, that is, to send a warning. Warner Bros. did a good job with Looney Tunes where they just said it was a product of its time and we don't make it anymore. In this way, you respect the old materials, and you also respect other people of other races. That is, everyone is satisfied. However, in the Dutch comics, Brer Rabbit is presented differently, after all, Disney takes the lead and they are not interested in excuses.

Not to mention the censoring of two Don Rosa comics because of Bombie the Zombie. Instead of giving a warning that it was the product of a man who created under the influence of Barks and that Disney had nothing to do with it, they simply banned it as if they were ashamed of the past. And you know who is ashamed of the past and simply forgets it, is condemned to repeat it, but worse. But I would not talk about that, because it is too difficult a topic.

3. There are no dark scenes in Disney comics like before

There are no more dark scenes like gun chases, dark and dangerous scenes as well as related to the depiction of women and ladies in a realistic view, because it is certainly not for children according to Disney, even though those comics are also read by adults, nor should there be anything dark related to Mickey and friends, and you have the Mickey Mystery comics where exactly such scenes appear. Mostly done for security reasons. However, due to Disney's recent policy and knowing what the authors of European comics are doing, they had to take a different approach. It is no longer the 1990s where you could have scary scenes like in PKNA and where you would feel sorry for Donald as if you were watching some dark blockbuster movie, yet the American Disney which supposedly has its main rules and its main say to decide what can be done in comics and what not not. And they deny comic book material, which is really ironic. Although I'm more frustrated about these things that Disney is doing lately, I still partially understand the need for censorship, but not to ban certain characters (especially Hiawatha), but you can't show racist caricatures like before, but it certainly doesn't mean that you should ban them to give the content to be displayed and read, because this negates the past, which is a great danger for future generations. Of course, European comic artists and writers approach these problems differently and write differently, but they certainly have the free right to draw and work, but they must adhere to the main canons that Disney sets. One of the reasons why you don't even get to see Donald's parents alive or the father of Donald's nephews appear and if he even exists.

There is a lot to say, but I think this is enough. I also apologize if I offended anyone with some of my comments, as it is not necessarily aimed at anyone except for certain stupid Disney decisions. I may have been vague, so I ask especially those who know Disney comics to correct me if I made any mistakes and feel free to add what you want to say. I hope these answers will help you enough to know why there are no more dangerous scenes in Disney comics like before. And thank you for asking me and if he has anything to ask me, feel free to ask me.

Hi, I'm Beet!

30+ years old

she/they

mild/vanilla NSFW/kink artist 🔞

This is an 18+ blog, so I prefer not interacting with anyone who is underage.

Interests: femdom, pegging, stuffing, liquid bloating, mild weight gain

Anti-interests: noncon/dubcon, pedo/MAP, incest

[More information here]

-----

Boundaries:

I'm aware that I can't stop underaged users from viewing this blog, (especially since I did the same when I was younger). My only request is that you don't follow nor send any messages to me.

While I'm not shy about sharing my main blog from time to time, I prefer keeping the two accounts completely separate from each other.

-----

Other Notes:

I'm not very active here, as you might tell lmao, so while I am open to drawing suggestions regarding any of my favorite characters, there's sadly no guarantee I'll draw them.

I created this blog from my main blog, so I can't like or follow any artists/writers/etc without revealing my main blog's username.

I'm neither proship or anti-proship. There is a lot of content that I find extremely uncomfortable, but I don't go out of my way to throw insults and accusations to others. I just silently block, report (if absolutely necessary), and move on.

AI: my thoughts

Imagine a world where your dream job is certain to be rendered obsolete by a machine, now open your eyes and see the same image. I am an artist in our current age. My line of work is likely to be replaced by two quick lines of writing into an AI. Will I have to pursue a line of work I harbour no passion for due to the certainty of my likeness being stolen? An unfortunate amount of people hear anyone talking about these issues and disregard them, thinking “Oh no! Another nihilistic luddite screaming about the end of the world”, but I’m here to show you why these seemingly nihilistic claims have actual basis. AI, while promising, poses a threat to all who desire to join the workforce. Whether it’s the plagiarism that takes place in training an AI, the doors it opens for tech giants and other multimillion dollar companies to replace all workers with machines or even the fact that it steals from artists just to replace them, AI is a bigger issue than anyone could’ve ever imagined.

The main ethical quandary with generative AI is the fashion in how it learns. Machine learning, for the uneducated, works by archiving provided media into its vast data banks, in which it then uses to generate a “new” piece of media by stitching together anything similar. This, in a vacuum, isn’t inherently bad, however, its possibilities are. Closed source AI’s currently on the market have been fed copious amounts of media from copyrighted and privately owned sources with neither permission nor financial compensation. I would bet that at least half of you in this room are thinking “oh that’s not good! These AI’s should be sued!”, but that’s the thing, they can’t be. It is currently impossible to prove any specific piece of work has been used to train a generative AI, and it is too impossible to state any piece of work produced by one is copyrighted, as it steals from so many different sources, the origins obscure each other. This isn’t just image generating AI’s either, chatGPT and Gemini are text based generative AI that have both been proven to not only regurgitate copyrighted work; such as Lord of the Rings and Harry Potter, but completely make up fake historical events due to such! Most terrifyingly, voice replicating AIs such as Voice.AI and elevenlabs and deepfake AIs such Synthesia and TopApps not only pose a threat to the entire entertainment industry, but to the reliability and reputation of all digital footage. This potential replacement of all white collar work with no chance of enacting any legal repercussions leaves AI manufacturers and consumers to perpetrate this plagiarism and leaves little room for human-made work that genuinely contains soul.

“The rich get richer”. It’s a saying parodying the quote “You need money to make money”, which is quite relevant when talking about the ethical concerns behind AI. The media giants and other mega-corporations everyone gets mad at are only going to be fueled by the introduction of AI, the only reason they haven’t taken the leap is because of the public perception of AI and the writer’s strike that happened in protest of it! Casual use of AI, for personal use or purely for a joke between friends is an endorsement of AI use in general, and therefore the use of copyrighted imagery and replacement of workers by these corporations. Until some actual policies regarding the use of artificial intelligence in corporate context come into play, any use of AI, wholesome or not, endorses the self-destructive abstraction of one’s own job. I had a similar conversation with a previous friend, and here is an argument they had to say: “all productivity improvements take some jobs but if there were no productivity improvements ever there would be the same amount of jobs but everyone would be poor”. This is a poor argument due to the fact that every time a new innovation such as this has threatened jobs, there have always been union labour laws put in place to prevent such issues. However, with the speed at which AI is being developed, legislation has been struggling to keep up with the necessary interventions due to its lack of priority in all political contexts.

As previously stated, I am an artist, a voice actor specifically. My job is being actively replaced by AI, by ripping the voices out of people's throats. Disregarding the security issues especially in politics for now, any person with enough footage of someone and a powerful enough AI model can steal someone’s voice just to use it for free. It is evident that this poses a COLOSSAL threat to the entertainment industry. And not just voices! Any artist can be completely replaced by their own artwork! This is disgusting. Semi-personal anecdote here, but I heard a story, from a fellow voice actor, where they did an over-the-phone audition. I heard a story where this “over-the-phone audition” was an elaborate scam used to train an AI off of their voice, rendering them completely obsolete because they were betrayed by their own voice. This isn’t just an exaggerated story thought up for some irrelevant emphasis, this is a genuine threat that exists right now. Artists might have to stop sharing their passions in fear that by sharing them, the AI conglomerates will devour their work and spit it back out, soulless and deformed, but cheap and fast. What makes art compelling? What is art if not created by an artist? If art reflects a person's life and experience, what is “art” created by a machine? It’s nothing, it’s absolutely nothing.

So what is there to do about it? I’ll tell you, protest! Go on strike! That’s right! How else are we going to grab our government's attention? The most famous protest in history was the 1963 March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom, and guess what, it was famous not only because it was successful, but because this was when Martin Luther King Jr. made his famous speech. Quoted directly from an article from resilience.org published in 2024 “Suppose a movement to ban AI were to succeed. In that case, it might break our collective fever dream of neoliberal capitalism so that people and their governments finally recognize the need to set limits.” Make some noise! Get mad! Are you really going to let these machines steal your job? Your voice? What makes you human? No. We, the people, will overcome this threat, and we will take down this mechanical menace. So go out there, express your opinions, use your voice, use the rights you are entitled to as a human being to speak out against the use of AI. And remember, “silence in the face of injustice is equal to complicity”.