#anyway. there's a lot of things fundamental to my person that i'm starting to question only recently | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

infiniteko · 6 months

Note

Hello Ko! I'm so glad you joined Tumblr, I think out of everyone I know and follow, you are the most trustworthy person to get information from. You truly know what you're talking about and you're very very helpful to us with questions. ❤️ I'm gonna try to make this as short as possible because I don't want to make you read a long, rant-ish question. Basically, I really really need some guidance/advice. Like I need some serioussss help..

For about 6 years, I've been "trying" to manifest, reality shift etc. I was focused on desires and getting. I was focused on doing methods to get things and "trying" things. would look all the time for information and "how to's" because I just wanted to shift realities so badly so I could experience all of the crazy things I would imagine. Nothing ever worked for me, not once in those 6 years. I eventually started to panic and think I was wasting years of my life on stuff that wasn't real (yet I'd still hope and try anyway) however I found non-dualism. Like I said, I was VERY focused on desires and getting, so as much as I told myself that I understand non-dualism, deep down I was still attached to ego and understood nothing. I viewed nondualism as a method. I still wanted desires deep down, even if I tried to say "No I want to be free!". I've now come to accept that if I truly want to be free, I need to genuinely STOP seeking desires and things of the ego. I need to accept that if I'm gonna be stuck on desiring, then ND isn't for me. So with that said, I told myself I'd follow non dualism properly and I wouldn't use it as a manifestation or shifting method.

This is the part where I ask for advice. When you're someone who has been stuck up on wanting to shift realities and get things so badly, for SO long, it's hard to let it all go suddenly. I don't know how to drop these thoughts that I get. I feel delusional and depressed because I hate this "life". I remind myself that it isn't real but then I feel insane and I tell myself I need to accept reality and stop hoping for miracles. I no longer wish to fulfill desires or use methods, I want to be free from feeling like this, I want to genuinely not live as if I'm ego anymore but it feels like my thoughts never stop. In the back of my mind, I always think "but I just wanna shift" "I'm delusional" "I am this body/mind"

Ko, I need any kind of guidance. Is there some materials I should read? I'll honestly read whatever books necessary. I don't know what to do 😅 I want to have the same understanding you do. I go to sleep every night thinking "maybe I can wake up in a new reality" and it completely defeats the purpose of me having no duality. I'm always hoping and trying, even when I don't want to "hope" or "try". I get so confused so easily and I think about going back to manifestation, but it never worked and I got depressed because of it. I want to free myself from these ego emotions, free from thinking I need this or that, free from having duality. I want to TRULY understand nondualism and live that way. Forgive me if this is long! I didn't intend to trauma dump or vent in your ask box, like I said before you're just one of the people I trust most. You're very knowledgeable on nondualism and I appreciate your posts very very much 🤍

First step, understand that Non dualism is ONLY(!!!!!!!!!!) a POINTER to what 'you' are. Being fixiated on 'trying to understand ND' is a trap you shouldn't fall into. I used it as a pointer(!) i do not "practise" any concepts.

I cannot stress enough how it is ONLY A POINTER, NOT THE "SOLUTION" NOR "ABSOLUTE TRUTH". "THAT" which you fundamentally are, IS Absolute.

Who has been "trying" all this time? -> The 'person' you THINK you are.

Who "wants" to understand? -> The 'person' you THINK you are

Use it as a pointer and then drop it.

I'm so serious, NEVER see it as the solution, it is a trap to do so. It will help as a start but go BEYOND that. It is nothing but another concept TO HELP.

A lot of you speak about the "ego" like it is some separate entity causing confusion and suffering but it is not. It is ONLY(!!!!!) who you THINK(!!!!) you are. If you stopped thinking about it, could you tell me who you seemingly are?

There are no books needed to """understand""" the basics of this concept, even if you read it, to drop it and be beyond such illusory concepts, is something that is done with or without books.

What you are can NEVER be defined. "THAT" has no name, no label, no characteristics. Nothingness. Yet it seems(!!!!!!) to contain "everything".. but "everything" = "nothingness".

By repeatedly returning to "Nothingness", it becomes clear that you never actually left that "Nothingness" and that it is everywhere.

Drop every label and concept. Everything you SEEM to know. What are you left with?

-> " "

If 'you' want to, you can listen to "YourHigherSelf" on YouTube or the shorter videos of Swami Sarvapriyananda on YouTube.

But again, seeking continously for the Absolute, is a funny game and an even funnier trap. Have enough discipline to not do that and simply BE.

#advaita vedanta #awareness #nondualism #atman #brahman #nonduality #desired reality #reality shifting #consciousness

303 notes · View notes

bonefall · 2 months

Note

Looking for advice since you're great with stuff like this: I'm struggling with how to have a character fundamentally change. A character in my cat story loses his memory and ends up working with the main characters to stop his own plan he made to destroy the world (and after the plan is stopped, he regains his memories). I want his time in the Starless to change him, make him less obsessed with power, but I'm really starting to struggle with whether or not that makes sense and how to work that.

Hmm.. well, first bit of advice I always give is that characters are not people. They are writing tools. That doesn't mean they shouldn't be "realistic" or that connecting to the human traits in the audience isn't important.

It means that a character exists to tell a story.

By "tool" I mean "machine." Every trait is a piston, and ideally they work together to drive your story along. What are you saying with each trait? What is your beginning point for the story, and their end? What do you want to explore? What do you want the audience to take away?

So if you feel stuck on a character, find the larger message you want to impart with them. The job they're doing in your narrative.

What do you want to say about power?

What do you want to say about why Character X wanted to destroy the world? Why was he wrong? What feelings and information lead him to that conclusion?

What is his redemption arc doing for your themes?

Every writer answers those questions differently. For example, I feel strongly that power doesn't corrupt, it reveals. When you finally have the influence to make others do what you want, you make them do it. I don't see "power" as being like... a magic, abstract thing, it's influence over other people, and those people are ALSO individuals with their own reasons for following the leader.

Digressing; what I'm getting at is that, as a writer, I have a lot of thoughts on power itself. I got this way with a lot of reading and interest on the topic. You might find it insightful to experience more art, essays, and commentary on the subject, if you ever get stuck, and develop an opinion you feel strongly about.

Not just about power, as broad writing advice.

Anyway.

If I was writing the character, these are the things I'd be thinking about specifically and changes I'd be making on personal taste. I don't know your full story enough so, hopefully it's insightful;

First of all I'm always SUPER wary of the "correct but demonized radical" trope. Does my villain have a point?

Am i just giving them a Kick-a-Baby scene to make them wrong when they should be completely right otherwise

What are my themes and tone? This is VERY important. Steven Universe is about family and emotions with low stakes violence; the Diamonds are essentially abusive grandparents that Steven is coaching through intergenerational trauma. They fit the universe they're in. Jack Horner does not belong in SU.

So I'd look at Character X's purpose.

Knowing me, I'd actually take out full amnesia entirely. I have memory problems related to trauma so I'm a lot more familiar with major, important details blotting out RIGHT when I need them. Enough that I can put myself in the shoes of someone like BB!Fallenleaf who remembers a lot but the details are fuzzy.

So personally I think I could write this villan to be VERY funny lmao

"Hello. I am Gnagnathor the Destroyer."

"No you're not. He has three horns. You have two."

(DID I USED TO HAVE THREE HORNS?????)

I also just find it more resonant when a character still remembers what they did, why they did it, and is able to refute themselves with their own growth.

To me like... when a character remembers NOTHING to the point where they're not informed by their actions or history at all, how are they really still the same person?

in general though I find total amnesia uninteresting. I wish it was less popular.

What did Gnagnathor DO with his power? What did he WANT from it?

The simplest version of this I know is "Gnag was hurting and wanted everyone else to hurt too. Now that he has a happy place, he doesn't want that."

TO BE CLEAR THATS FINE. That's a REALLY common power fantasy and it's not automatically a bad story. It's popular for a reason.

Personally I feel strongly about the idea, though, that people with power don't change unless they lose it. There's no reason to.

People don't change until you break the environment that contributes to the behavior.

Especially with victims unfortunately-- the ugly truth is that a lot of problematic behaviors exist because they protected the victim from their abuser's actions. You need safety to really start to unpack that.

You can personally identify it and address it as much as you want, when your abuser starts to use That Tone you will still seize up. Just try to yank yourself back into your head when you're disassociating during a screaming session; your reward is raw distress.

That said, not all villains HAVE to have tragic motivators like that, or be ex-victims at all. Leveraging power to get what you want can be as ugly as just being taught the people you're hurting are subhuman.

Or making up justifications for why This Is a Good Thing Actually.

Some people will lash out violently when these justifications fall apart, because accepting it would mean they're Being Bad

Most people have an innate desire to Be Good. Like... the vast, vast majority of people. Some sense of morality is observable in all intelligent social animals; dolphins, chimps, elephants.

Tangentially, if you understand that people don't WANT to be bad and that the natural response to a scolding is defensiveness, you understand that convincing people of something is a LOT easier when you approach with kindness.

AND IN TURN: be wary of those who are flattering while trying to convince you of something. This is Manipulation 101.

So back to Gnagnathor

Do I want to talk about environment and how it changes him to be away from power? How traits that previously earned him wealth or influence are suddenly incredibly taboo, so he can't use them here?

On that-- HOW did he get his power in the first place? Re: I'm very wary of the "correct but demonized radical" trope.

Were his minions following him because they have serious issues and he exploited their desperation? .....are you centering the experience of the poor, sad abuser over his victims

Or are they ALL united over something important and legitimate? With the redemption of their villainous leader, how are you planning for that to frame all of their former followers?

(This is why redeeming minions is usually a lot more productive than doing it to the leader, imo. Redeeming Zuko means you can explore the familial legacy, the indoctrination of the Fire Nation's children, their justifications, the way systems make monsters out of people. Redeeming The Firelord would probably have caused Azula, one of his victims, to pick up his slack and now, suddenly, you have a VERY uncomfortable situation where Ozai is thrashing one of his abused children but Good This Time.)

(Not to mention that, again... why would he do this. He has power. He's doing what he wants and is used to this situation. It would be a numbskulled narrative choice.)

Aaaand that's about all I can say without essentially being a cowriter or editor. It's on you to figure out what you're trying to do and say here. I'm a good writer on this subject because I think about it a lot, which has lead to my strong opinions and point of view. Your art is a reflection of you.

#This is mega off topic but the question kinda reminds me of hazbin which I watched a couple days ago #I'm starting to identify why I was dissatisfied with it I think #I didn't dislike it though and I'm waiting for the next season #If only as something I enjoyed but wish could be better.#Bones gives advice

98 notes · View notes

soracities · 1 year

Note

Hey! It has been on my mind lately and i just wanna ask..idk if it would make sense but i just noticed that nowadays ppl cant separate the authors and their books (ex. when author wrote a story about cheating and ppl starts bashing the author for romanticizing cheating and even to a point of cancelling the author for not setting a good/healthy example of a relationship) any thoughts about it?

I have many, many thoughts on this, so this may get a little unwieldy but I'll try to corall it together as best I can.

But honestly, I think sometimes being unable to separate the author from the work (which is interesting to me to see because some people are definitely not "separating" anything even though they think they are; they just erase the author entirely as an active agent, isolate the work, and call it "objectivity") has a lot to do with some people being unable to separate the things they read from themselves.

I'm absolutely not saying it's right, but it's an impulse I do understand. If you read a book and love it, if it transforms your life, or defines a particular period of your life, and then you find out that the author has said or done something awful--where does that leave you? Someone awful made something beautiful, something you loved: and now that this point of communion exists between you and someone whose views you'd never agree with, what does that mean for who you are? That this came from the mind of a person capable of something awful and spoke to your mind--does that mean you're like them? Could be like them?

Those are very uncomfortable questions and I think if you have a tendency to look at art or literature this way, you will inevitable fall into the mindset where only "Good" stories can be accepted because there's no distinction between where the story ends and you begin. As I said, I can see where it comes from but I also find it profoundly troubling because i think one of the worst things you can do to literature is approach it with the expectation of moral validation--this idea that everything you consume, everything you like and engage with is some fundamental insight into your very character as opposed to just a means of looking at or questioning something for its own sake is not just narrow-minded but dangerous.

Art isn't obliged to be anything--not moral, not even beautiful. And while I expend very little (and I mean very little) energy engaging with or even looking at internet / twitter discourse for obvious reasons, I do find it interesting that people (online anyway) will make the entire axis of their critique on something hinge on the fact that its bad representation or justifying / romanticizing something less than ideal, proceeding to treat art as some sort of conduit for moral guidance when it absolutely isn't. And they will also hold that this critique comes from a necessarily good and just place (positive representation, and I don't know, maybe in their minds it does) while at the same time setting themselves apart from radical conservatives who do the exact same thing, only they're doing it from the other side.

To make it abundantly clear, I'm absolutely not saying you should tolerate bigots decrying that books about the Holocaust, race, homophobia, or lgbt experiences should be banned--what I am saying, is that people who protest that a book like Maus or Persepolis is going to "corrupt children", and people who think a book exploring the emotional landscape of a deeply flawed character, who just happens to be from a traditionally marginalised group or is written by someone who is, is bad representation and therefore damaging to that community as a whole are arguments that stem from the exact same place: it's a fundamental inability, or outright refusal, to accept the interiority and alterity of other people, and the inherent validity of the experiences that follow. It's the same maniacal, consumptive, belief that there can be one view and one view only: the correct view, which is your view--your thoughts, your feelings.

There is also dangerous element of control in this. Someone with racist views does not want their child to hear anti-racist views because as far as they are concerned, this child is not a being with agency, but a direct extension of them and their legacy. That this child may disagree is a profound rupture and a threat to the cohesion of this person's entire worldview. Nothing exists in and of and for itself here: rather the multiplicity of the world and people's experiences within it are reduced to shadowy agents that are either for us or against us. It's not about protecting children's "innocence" ("think of the children", in these contexts, often just means "think of the status quo"), as much as it is about protecting yourself and the threat to your perceived place in the world.

And in all honestt I think the same holds true for the other side--if you cannot trust yourself to engage with works of art that come from a different standpoint to yours, or whose subject matter you dislike, without believing the mere fact of these works' existence will threaten something within you or society in general (which is hysterical because believe me, society is NOT that flimsy), then that is not an issue with the work itself--it's a personal issue and you need to ask yourself if it would actually be so unthinkable if your belief about something isn't as solid as you think it is, and, crucially, why you have such little faith in your own critical capacity that the only response these works ilicit from you is that no one should be able to engage with them. That's not awareness to me--it's veering very close to sticking your head in the sand, while insisting you actually aren't.

Arbitrarily adding a moral element to something that does not exist as an agent of moral rectitude but rather as an exploration of deeply human impulses, and doing so simply to justify your stance or your discomfort is not only a profoundly inadequate, but also a deeply insidious, way of papering over your insecurities and your own ignorance (i mean this in the literal sense of the word), of creating a false and dishonest certainty where certainty does not exist and then presenting this as a fact that cannot and should not be challenged and those who do are somehow perverse or should have their characters called into question for it. It's reductive and infantilising in so many ways and it also actively absolves you of any responsibility as a reader--it absolves you of taking responsibility for your own interpretation of the work in question, it absolves you of responsibility for your own feelings (and, potentially, your own biases or preconceptions), it absolves you of actual, proper, thought and engagement by laying the blame entirely on a rogue piece of literature (as if prose is something sentient) instead of acknowledging that any instance of reading is a two-way street: instead of asking why do I feel this way? what has this text rubbed up against? the assumption is that the book has imposed these feelings on you, rather than potentially illuminated what was already there.

Which brings me to something else which is that it is also, and I think this is equally dangerous, lending books and stories a mythical, almost supernatural, power that they absolutely do not have. Is story-telling one of the most human, most enduring, most important and life-altering traditions we have? Yes. But a story is also just a story. And to convince yourself that books have a dangerous transformative power above and beyond what they are actually capable of is, again, to completely erase people's agency as readers, writers' agency as writers and makers (the same as any other craft), and subsequently your own. And erasing agency is the very point of censors banning books en masse. It's not an act of stupidity or blind ignorance, but a conscious awareness of the fact that people will disagree with you, and for whatever reason you've decided that you are not going to let them.

Writers and poets are not separate entities to the rest of us: they aren't shamans or prophets, gifted and chosen beings who have some inner, profound, knowledge the rest of us aren't privy to (and should therefore know better or be better in some regard) because moral absolutism just does not exist. Every writer, no matter how affecting their work may be, is still Just Some Guy Who Made a Thing. Writing can be an incredibly intimate act, but it can also just be writing, in the same way that plumbing is plumbing and weeding is just weeding and not necessarily some transcendant cosmic endeavour in and of itself. Authors are no different, when you get down to it, from bakers or electricians; Nobel laureates are just as capable of coming out with distasteful comments about women as your annoying cousin is and the fact that they wrote a genre-defying work does not change that, or vice-versa. We imbue books with so much power and as conduits of the very best and most human traits we can imagine and hope for, but they aren't representations of the best of humanity--they're simply expressions of humanity, which includes the things we don't like.

There are some authors I love who have said and done things I completely disagree with or whose views I find abhorrent--but I'm not expecting that, just because they created something that changed my world, they are above and beyond the ordinarly, the petty, the spiteful, or cruel. That's not condoning what they have said and done in the least: but I trust myself to be able to read these works with awareness and attention, to pick out and examine and attempt to understand the things that I find questionable, to hold on to what has moved me, and to disregard what I just don't vibe with or disagree with. There are writers I've chosen not to engage with, for my own personal reasons: but I'm not going to enforce this onto someone else because I can see what others would love in them, even if what I love is not strong enough to make up for what I can't. Terrance Hayes put perfectly in my view, when he talks about this and being capable of "love without forgiveness". Writing is a profoundly human heritage and those who engage with it aren't separate from that heritage as human because they live in, and are made by, the exact same world as anyone else.

The measure of good writing for me has hardly anything to do with whatever "virtue" it's perceived to have and everything to do with sincerity. As far as I'm concerned, "positive representation" is not about 100% likeable characters who never do anything problematic or who are easily understood. Positive representation is about being afforded the full scope of human feelings, the good, the bad, and the ugly, and not having your humanity, your dignity, your right to exist in the world questioned because all of these can only be seen through the filter of race, or gender, religion, or ethicity and interpreted according to our (profoundly warped) perceptions of those categories and what they should or shouldn't represent. True recognition of someone's humanity does not lie in finding only what is held in common between you (and is therefore "acceptable", with whatever you put into that category), but in accepting everything that is radically different about them and not letting this colour the consideration you give.

Also, and it may sound harsh, but I think people forget that fictional characters are fictional. If I find a particularly fucked up relationship dynamic compelling (as I often do), or if I decide to write and explore that dynamic, that's not me saying two people who threaten to kill each other and constantly hurt each other is my ideal of romance and that this is exactly how I want to be treated: it's me trying to find out what is really happening below the surface when two people behave like this. It's me exploring something that would be traumatizing and deeply damaging in real life, in a safe and fictional setting so I can gain some kind of understanding about our darker and more destructive impulses without being literally destroyed by them, as would happen if all of this were real. But it isn't real. And this isn't a radical or complex thing to comprehend, but it becomes incomprehensible if your sole understanding of literature is that it exists to validate you or entertain you or cater to you, and if all of your interpretations of other people's intentions are laced with a persistent sense of bad faith. Just because you have not forged any identity outside of this fictional narrative doesn't mean it's the same for others.

Ursula K. le Guin made an extremely salient point about children and stories in that children know the stories you tell them--dragons, witches, ghouls, whatever--are not real, but they are true. And that sums it all up. There's a reason children learning to lie is an incredibly important developmental milestone, because it shows that they have achieved an incredibly complex, but vitally important, ability to hold two contradictory statements in their minds and still know which is true and which isn't. If you cannot delve into a work, on the terms it sets, as a fictional piece of literature, recognize its good points and note its bad points, assess what can have a real world impact or reflects a real world impact and what is just creative license, how do you possible expect to recognize when authority and propaganda lies to you? Because one thing propaganda has always utilised is a simplistic, black and white depiction of The Good (Us) and The Bad (Them). This moralistic stance regarding fiction does not make you more progressive or considerate; it simply makes it easier to manipulate your ideas and your feelings about those ideas because your assessments are entirely emotional and surface level and are fuelled by a refusal to engage with something beyond the knee-jerk reaction it causes you to have.

Books are profoundly, and I do mean profoundly, important to me-- and so much of who I am and the way I see things is probably down to the fact that stories have preoccupied me wherever I go. But I also don't see them as vital building blocks for some core facet or a pronouncement of Who I Am. They're not badges of honour or a cover letter I put out into the world for other people to judge and assess me by, and approve of me (and by extension, the things I say or feel). They're vehicles through which I explore and experience whatever it is that I'm most caught by: not a prophylactic, not a mode of virtue signalling, and certainly not a means of signalling a moral stance.

I think at the end of the day so much of this tendency to view books as an extension of yourself (and therefore of an author) is down to the whole notion of "art as a mirror", and I always come back to Fran Lebowitz saying that it "isn't a mirror, it's a door". And while I do think it's important to have that mirror (especially if you're part of a community that never sees itself represented, or represented poorly and offensively) I think some people have moved into the mindset of thinking that, in order for art to be good, it needs to be a mirror, it needs to cater to them and their experiences precisely--either that or that it can only exist as a mirror full stop, a reflection of and for the reader and the writer (which is just incredibly reductive and dismissive of both)--and if art can only exist as a mirror then anything negative that is reflected back at you must be a condemnation, not a call for exploration or an attempt at understanding.

As I said, a mirror is important but to insist on it above all else isn't always a positive thing: there are books I related to deeply because they allowed me to feel so seen (some by authors who looked nothing like me), but I have no interest in surrounding myself with those books all the time either--I know what goes on in my head which is precisely why I don't always want to live there. Being validated by a character who's "just like me" is amazing but I also want--I also need-- to know that lives and minds and events exist outside of the echo-chamber of my own mind. The mirror is comforting, yes, but if you spend too long with it, it also becomes isolating: you need doors because they lead you to ideas and views and characters you could never come up with on your own. A world made up of various Mes reflected back to me is not a world I want to be immersed in because it's a world with very little texture or discovery or room for growth and change. Your sense of self and your sense of other people cannot grow here; it just becomes mangled.

Art has always been about dialogue, always about a me and a you, a speaker and a listener, even when it is happening in the most internal of spaces: to insist that art only ever tells you what you want to hear, that it should only reflect what you know and accept is to undermine the very core of what it seeks to do in the first place, which is establish connection. Art is a lifeline, I'm not saying it isn't. But it's also not an instruction manual for how to behave in the world--it's an exploration of what being in the world looks like at all, and this is different for everyone. And you are treading into some very, very dangerous waters the moment you insist it must be otherwise.

Whatever it means to be in the world, it is anything but straightforward. In this world people cheat, people kill, they manipulate, they lie, they torture and steal--why? Sometimes we know why, but more often we don't--but we take all these questions and write (or read) our way through them hoping that, if we don't find an answer, we can at least find our way to a place where not knowing isn't as unbearable anymore (and sometimes it's not even about that; it's just about telling a story and wanting to make people laugh). It's an endless heritage of seeking with countless variations on the same statements which say over and over again I don't know what to make of this story, even as I tell it to you. So why am I telling it? Do I want to change it? Can I change it? Yes. No. Maybe. I have no certainty in any of this except that I can say it. All I can do is say it.

Writing, and art in general, are one of the very, very, few ways we can try and make sense of the apparently arbitrary chaos and absurdity of our lives--it's one of the only ways left to us by which we can impose some sense of structure or meaning, even if those things exists in the midst of forces that will constantly overwhelm those structures, and us. I write a poem to try and make sense of something (grief, love, a question about octopuses) or to just set down that I've experienced something (grief, love, an answer about octpuses). You write a poem to make sense of, resolve, register, or celebrate something else. They don't have to align. They don't have to agree. We don't even need to like each other much. But in both of these instances something is being said, some fragment of the world as its been perceived or experienced is being shared. They're separate truths that can exist at the same time. Acknowledging this is the only means we have of momentarily bridging the gaps that will always exist between ourselves and others, and it requires a profound amount of grace, consideration and forbearance. Otherwise, why are we bothering at all?

#this is so much longer than i intended but yeah. those are my very long 2 cents #tbh i also think social media makes it worse in a way especially bc “transparency” has become a form of public vetting which is insane to m #me* transparency and honesty are not the same thing ans its ludicrous that this is where we're at and while we all have to live with this #demand for transparency i do think it affects writers differently bc the whole art as mirror thing comes to the fore in this argument #why would you sit with your feelings about a book when its easier and more accessible for you to @ the authors twitter handle #but anyway #ask #anonymous #book talks

399 notes · View notes

adventuringblind · 19 days

Note

Jos hate jos hate jos hate

He just gives me the creeps. Like Max’s tone when talking about him reminds me of myself talking about my parents.

Detached. Wanting to move on but still try to be open about it even though it’ll make ppl ask questions especially if you avoid and don’t answer the question. (Did that make sense?)

So yeah. I don’t know him, but from what I can observe through a screen I’m not a fan.

- 🦒

IT DOESSSSS

(Hello new anon! Thanks for joining me and starting a rant!)

Don't get me STARTED on the psychology that is Max Verstappen. His mind is my obsession and how anyone could ever paint him as a villain hasn't been through trauma with a parent (or hasn't realized that they have).

Like, joking about trauma is a very clear indicator?? "My dad did that once to a mechanic??" I'm sorry??? Max, baby, that's not something you're supposed to laugh about...

Key word here is supposed. I laugh about my trauma all the time and it concerns my therapist.

It sucks that Max's personal life is out there for the media to pick apart. I've seen debates about Jos' parenting style and how he has given Max everything. I don't see any ungrateful bone in Max's body. If he was, then Jos would've been out of Max's life the second he turned eighteen.

So then people ask: if Jos is a bad parent, why is he still around Max?

Answer: Traumaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

(Rant under the cut about abuse trauma... you've been warned)

Good god, are people so ignorant? It's hard to detach from a parent! Specially one who you spent all your time with! You get used to it eventually, you figure out how to cope and then you know nothing else aside from that.

All those times Max was driving recklessly when he was younger? I've listened back to his radio. He was in fight or flight because he had learned early on that it's better to risk crashing and injuring himself then placing lower.

I did the same thing! I was good at archery. Like, I was giving adults a run for their money at the age of thirteen. I switched from a recurve bow to a compound and about two weeks before a tournament. It was an absolute pain because it was an entirely different way of shooting.

I have this memory of my dad driving me to his friends house to sight in some longer distances the day before. As in, crunch time. We were out there in the cold and rain for hours. I was sore already because constantly pulling back sixty pounds of resistance with just your arms gets tiring. I broke so many fundamental rules; the ones my instructors were specific about. However, I knew it was break myself or my dad was going to lash out.

Anyway, I tore two muscles in my dominant arm by the end of the day. I got home and my dad went to shower so I hid with my mom in the kitchen icing it to hopefully lessen the pain.

I placed second in regionals. My dad lectured me in the car on the way home. He said the injury was my own fault. The doctor I saw said they didn't know how I managed and my instructors said I couldn't shoot at the range for over a month.

My dad hailed me a hero to everyone who asked about it.

Jos Verstappen is so outwardly aggressive that anyone who has been through something similar can see what's happening. Just because he's done a lot for Max doesn't negate the other behaviors. This isn't math, you can't cross cancel, two negatives don't make a positive.

Rant over! :)

#Ren's.inbox #Ren's.thoughts #maxverstappen.things #🦒.anon

27 notes · View notes

paper-mario-wiki · 1 year

Note

how do I deal with the fact that I find yours and similar posts extremely annoying even though you've done nothing wrong and are surely a decent person

Great question! They actually put a function onto the website for stuff like this, it's called the Block Button.

You are not required to have a reason for not enjoying the posts I make. The website was designed to make you happy, so go find your happiness somewhere else.

(More thorough answer below, though)

If you're asking because you're genuinely concerned for yourself, then maybe start to consider that by viewing the world from a different perspective, maybe a little bit more of a clinical one, you are made uncomfortable because things aren't as simple as you like to pretend they are. It's entirely possible that when I talk about language or begin to dive deeper into the communicative process that people on here tend to have, you start to realize how little you actually think about the fundamental parts of your own world and are annoyed at me for revisiting and adding complexity to concepts which you thought were easy. People who have a low tolerance for these kinds of things fall under that category a lot of the time.

And for the record, that doesn't make you, like. Dumb. It just means you care about different things than I do. At the very worst it makes you anti-intellectual, which is something a concerning amount of young people are these days and I do think that's a bit of a problem, but not one you should lose sleep over.

What I talk about doesn't carry some extreme importance or universal truths which I think people need to consider, they're really just like. Observations. That's why I've always tagged my text posts with either "Random Thought" or "occurrence" for the past 6 years that I've had this blog.

Just know that whenever I make a big long post about how and why I speak the way that I do or talk about what I studied when I went to university, I'm just doing it cuz it's fun for me! I get a lot of joy when people want to talk to me about things I find interesting.

And in the same way you are not obligated to enjoy it, I am not obligated to change.

Anyway, beginning to reconcile with that may make you a happier person, but I'm also like. 100% speculating based on this very short message lmao.

#The Man With No Face

336 notes · View notes

artbyblastweave · 2 months

Text

So on balance I generally do enjoy Mark Millar, and a big part of why I enjoy Mark Millar is that a lot of his superhero stuff demonstrates the same awareness about the genre that Worm does- the sense of an unstable equilibrium, that the center cannot hold in the superhero universe as typically presented. Jupiter's Legacy, Super Crooks, Old Man Logan, Wanted, The Ultimates. Arguably Civil War. I have a whole other post buried in my drafts about how that bleak throughline keeps cropping up in his cape work. Specifically in his cape work, also- the man has written a lot of lighthearted, at times almost cloyingly sincere and optimistic one-off miniseries in other genres. Starlight: The Return Of Duke McQueen, Huck, Chrononauts, Beyond. In tension with this cynicism about the capes is the fact that he also clearly believes that superheroes are really cool, and on some fundamental level a really deeply noble and empowering idea. Even Wanted, which is probably the most thoroughly tasteless thing of his that I've read all the way through, I recall as having had this interesting subtext of anger over the fact that there's an audience for a superhero work as cynical and grotesque as Wanted. ("Fine. We took all the whimsy and wonder and derring-do you claim to have outgrown out back and shot it. The corpse is cooling. Are you happy yet? Dark enough yet? Mature enough yet? This is what you wanted right?") Anyway, I think Kick-Ass the comic suffers gigantically from a failure to break in one direction or another, in regard to that tension. It gets very, very close to saying useful and interesting things about the genre at several points but keeps undercutting itself by transforming back into the object of its own attack. There's this initial line of questioning, right, which is, "what kind of person, in real life, might actually try this? How would it go?" And the comic has some compellingly miserable answers to that question! Everyone in costume is chasing the same power fantasy, clinging to the idea of being somebody. Dave is, in his own words, motivated by "the right combination of loneliness and despair," and he's not competent. He alternates between minor wins and brutal hospitalizations, the first two issues and change is just the world punishing him for being dumb enough to try this, and for the most part he's a LARPer, a self-identified asshole. Red Mist is a rich kid playing with his father's money. Big Daddy and Hit-girl are framed as the "real deal", genuinely competent in their ability to dish out violence, and the comic to some extent has the self-awareness to recognize that people who were actually any good at this would be even more horrifying than the LARPers. The Reveal that Big Daddy was an accountant- that he made up a tragic backstory and made his daughter a human weapon in order to pursue an escapist fantasy- genuinely lands like a meteor! But it fucks it up, because it also needs to be cool, cool enough to keep our attention, and so it pulls an about face. The horror of Hit-girl gets subsumed by the realization that she's also the coolest thing in the whole book, almost loadbearing in terms of having actually cool and interesting things happen on-panel, and so the end of the book turns into the exact kind of superviolent revenge story it was initially skewering as unrealistic and disconnected from the much more grounded grief and loss Dave is experiencing at the start of the book. Dave's costumed escapades goes from being an obviously stupid and egotistical attempt to claw back control of his life to... an actual method by which he claws back control of his life, and not in a way that feels terribly well-earned!

The sequels double down on this- alternating between "in real life this would be cheap and stupid and tinged with anticlimax" and "woooo! Let's ape Tarantino until something cool happens!" and honestly, that feels less worthy of analysis because what I'm pretty sure happened there is that the movie blew up and created A Demand For More Kick-Ass. In general what it feels like fundamentally happened here is that you ask, "what if superheroes were real," you land on the answer of "they'd look stupid, be stupid and die badly," but what does that leave you with? It's not like that wasn't the obvious answer already and it's definitely not eight issues of material. He can't pull the trigger on having everyone involved die badly in meanspirited ways to drive the point home, and he never quite threads the needle back to the reconstructive middle ground he badly wants the book to inhabit, the "real heroes work in soup kitchens and look out for their neighbors" area. Things just happen.

That said, the gag about the astroturfed swear-word "Tunk" is fantastic. 10/10, no notes

#kick-ass #thoughts #meta

33 notes · View notes

justatalkingface · 6 months

Note

I saw your answer for the ua sending kids to danger, especially war, and I raise you a different possibility (100% speculation on my part) "can we say for sure the others schools were asked the same thing but said no?"

Yes. We dont know anything about the others schools. Maybe they offer and Hori never show as we saw them entering in the war part 2: the eletrical bangaloo....but to be fair, it would be hard for them to sit in class and doing homework as war is literally in their grounds, streets and so forth.

But on part 1. We dont see the others students there. So again, my especulation, what if they had put feets down and said no?

But Nezu said yes? I can think of a few reasons for that. (Keep in mind I dont think Nezu is a smart as Hori and the fandom wants us to think)

1) could have been a power play of sort. "Only mys students can handle this" which well...could work as Nezu is not human and doesnt seem to care about the students on a whole (remmeber Mina and Kami vs Nezu? How fair was that?)

2) he genuinely thought his students would be an asset to the heroes and said ok. Which makes me believe even more he doesnt care for his students's safety.

3) he was forced. Ok, what could have made him agree to this? Blackmail comes to mind but what secret is si damn important you are willing to send kids to war?

Those are my top 3 reasons. And not sure if is canon this but I think the class A1 didnt know they were sent to a war...if this is true, then is anothet adult(non human) who failed Izu.

Like MHA is an accidental dystopia.

The thing is with Nezu is the age old standard of Int/Wis; Nezu is book smart, he has a lot of knowledge, facts, and ability to apply those facts to make a thing happen. That's Intelligence, the ability to use your mind, and he's probably only has even faint in his sheer Int score with Dr. Diabolus Ex Machina.

Wisdom, on the other hand, is when you go, 'But should I do this'?

At a memetically extreme example, a High Int, Low Wis character could find a door somewhere, decide to open it, and make a siege engine out of, I don't know, hamburgers and coat hangers to bust it open. This is certainly a thing they could do, and it'd work because they are, in fact, that spot.

Meanwhile, the character with higher (any) Wisdom would walk up to the door... and then try to open it like a normal person.

Intelligence is ability to use your mind, and Wisdom is what tells you how you should use your mind, and when you look at Nezu, you only really see Intelligence, and then no one in story ever seems to question his decisions, really, because he's really smart, but there's a real question if he uses his intelligence well? Because there are a lot of 'I can do this, but no one, including me, ever asked if I should do this' kinds of choices in UA, and if we're not just blaming it on bad writing, all of that comes down to Nezu, in the end. The literal cities they just... have? The robots that probably have killed people? The Sports Festival? All of those are thing with very questionable elements that UA does anyways, seemingly because they can and no one's ever stopped them from doing it.

That's looking at the question from the angle of 'Nezu, while well meaning, made a bad call'. There is, however, one other major option, and it starts with this: why does Nezu run a school? On a fundamental level, I'm not sure Nezu's goal in running UA is for the students, so much as he views the students as a step towards his goal.

Unironically, he's a sadist who enjoys low-key torturing human beings because of past trauma, which... before anything else, begs a question: is it just low-key torture he likes? Or is he just practical enough to realize than anything more would be more trouble than it's worth?

But, beyond that problem, let's look at his position: he's the head of UA, the biggest, bestest school for Heroes, which is a job that comes with a lot of publicity/power, which, inevitably, rolls back to him. His job allows him massive amounts of control over the development of the cutting edge of heroism, who by dint of their fame and success influence other heroes, all of which collectively influences Japanese society as a whole by a pretty significant degree.

Meanwhile, Nezu is: brilliant, deeply traumatized, likes torturing, and through that defacto controlling, humans. He's also not a human, and takes pains at times to point out that others are humans and he's not, while also having assumably inhuman instincts and priorities; almost certainly he has some level of anti-human bias.

There's... there's an obvious correlation here. Fundamentally, Nezu is a character who seems to be made to be complicated, imperfect, with dark depths to him. The way he's written, Hori clearly doesn't want him to be, but, well, he writes a lot of deeply flawed characters we're supposed to find no wrong with.

If you look at Nezu that way, where he views students more as an asset, or an investment, than as, well, students, or as people, then your point takes on a different light. Looking at it with cold logic, the students can contribute to the various conflicts; even if they die, for the greater good of society (which he lives in and benifits from), heroism as a career (which he is in a position to benefit from greatly, as well as influenced greatly), and quite frankly as a living being on Japan/Earth, that cost is more than worth the price if they help support the status quo; its not like there's not going to be more next year, right?

And that's the thing that really interests me; what the hell was Hori thinking when he made Nezu? With Bakugou and Endeavour, for example, you can see where they started off one way, and went another? Nezu though? His entire point as a character seems to be firmly as the 'nice but somewhat manipulative' principal, but it's a waste of his fundamental characteristics. Did he have a different role in the prototype? Because if I was writing Nezu as a character, here's what I'd write him as:

An enemy. Not evil, not a villain, but a obstacle for Izuku to surpass in UA; it's not that he's bigoted, like Aizawa is (or at least to the same extent), he just well and truly doesn't care about people and what they do as long as his bottom line is met. And Izuku isn't there to be a new hero, like Bakugou, about fame and wealth, he doesn't fit. Worse yet, if we're working off of the original, 'Quirkless Hero' framework? Fundamentally, he is a threat to the concept of heroes that is established, that makes people want to think outside the box, and the thing is? Nezu likes the box. He's one of the people who designed it; he'd like everyone to stay in the box, please and thank you.

There's this epic story we're never going to get of Izuku being a little revolutionary, fighting against the heroic establishment to change heroism for the better and for the rights of the Quirkless, and his first major enemies are: Bakugou, the bully, Aizawa, the biased teacher who enables Bakugou and attacks Izuku, and Nezu, who enables all of them, and barely gives a shit about Izuku at all but would absolutely murder him in a heartbeat if he thought he could get away with it, but is resigned to fact he can't just kill people because they mildly irk him.

To your last point, though, fundamentally MHA is exactly a dystopia, by design; it's dystopian nature is one of the main causes for almost all conflicts in the story, from the villains, to the heroes, to Izuku's core personality traits, but for some reason Hori got really scared to admit that so he covered all the bars and locks with confetti... only after he got all the ways he purposefully made it a dystopia looking all harmless and fun, he missed all the ways he accidently made it a dystopia. To this day, I'm still not sure if he designed the heroic pay system, what little of it we know, to be purposefully that fucked up, or he just did some basic work to support what happens in the story and missed how deeply disturbing those implications were.

#ask #bnha critical #mha critical #nezu's kind of super interesting if you stop to think about him #incredibly sus #but interesting #its an injustice he's not an amoral authority figure Izuku's supposed to rebel against #hori's deeply disturbing world building #and hori's accidentally deeply disturbing world building

41 notes · View notes

utilitycaster · 6 months

Note

You've talked a bit before about genre and genre-expectations. If you have the time/inclination, could you talk a bit about what classifies something as horror? More specifically, what makes Candela Obscura fall into the category of horror?

As a bit of background: I am a Travis-level scaredy-cat, but I love the supernatural - ghost stories, monsters, superstitions. I tend to rely a lot on genre labels to help me differentiate, and media labelled "horror" is pretty generally a no go. I starting watching Candela out of curiosity because I'd heard great things about the characters in chapter two, and was fully prepared to have to nope out. Instead I found that it sat comfortably within my "supernatural" bubble of tolerance, and I absolutely loved it! Obviously a person's tolerance for what is "scary" is deeply individualistic, but its got me wondering what exactly classifies something as horror? (and whether there is other media similar to candela that I am missing out on because my genre expectations are skewed)

So...genre boundaries are all very permeable and take a on very "I'll know it when I see it" quality when you get to the edges. There's a poll about horror tolerance going around right now and I actually found it completely unusable because, for example, all three of Jordan Peele's films are considered horror, and while I consider myself also kind of skittish, I loved Get Out and Nope whereas the premise of Us fundamentally is on my personal "absolutely cannot" list. Basically: defining horror is tough (though I'll make an attempt, with the understanding that I am the most amateur and there are actual media studies folks in the fandom who might be a better bet) but also a lot of people, myself included, who consider themselves bad at "horror" often, as you say, actually have a very specific personal list of tolerances and plenty of horror is fine for them (and plenty of non-horror might not be!) Basically this is a great question and multiple people out there are writing their PhD theses attempting to answer it, and they probably have different answers, is what I'm saying. I also, in looking up horror on Wikipedia in order to see what that definition is, found that it defines the genre differently for literature vs. film. Short answer: no one fucking knows; scary shit.

I think horror is most generally works that are intended to build a sense of fear or dread, and I recall (possibly incorrectly) someone on a podcast talking about writing define the difference between a thriller and a horror movie is whether the protagonist succeeds; I'd modify that to say "whether they succeed without a great cost (thriller) or whether the price of success possibly outweighs the win (horror)."

Anyway, I do have a list of horror subgenres here that speaks the language of TTRPGs, namely Van Richten's Guide to Ravenloft, and I find that horror subgenres are more helpful signposts than just the "horror" label, and I suspect you may find the same as well. I'm not going to run through them all, but, for example, "Ghost Stories" and "Dark Fantasy" are two of them, and those never bothered me and it sounds like you like those! Candela covers a lot of ground - elements of body horror, gothic horror, cosmic/eldritch horror, and occult detective stories, but it is absolutely in the supernatural realm. It is worth noting that a lot of not explicitly horror shows often dip into horror and I (and possibly you) are fine with it. The CR main campaign and D&D in general absolutely has horror elements. I only watched the Nine and Ten seasons of modern-era Doctor Who but that absolutely has episodes that are basically straight up horror (Midnight? Silence in the Library? Don't Blink? Even though, famously, everyone lives in that one set during WWII, the "are you my mummy" line is chilling.) Again: genre/subgenre lines are very permeable and hard to use as signposts.

What has been most helpful to me in finding horror works I can personally enjoy is understanding what I can't do. I don't mind blood and gore but I don't want that to be the point (I don't think I'm so much upset by slasher films so much as don't enjoy them) and I don't want to watch torture porn (which is pretty much exclusively within the realm of horror film, not literature). I have a lot of trouble with zombie films but a lone zombie in a D&D game is fine. The premise of a film like The Thing is intellectually fascinating to me but the idea that you can't trust anyone or anything is too unsettling...although also that was kind of the premise of the monsters of Candela Chapter 2 and I thought that slapped. Psychological horror is case by case; folk horror can be great or can mess me up; like Marisha I flat out don't do narrow tunnels in caves and I especially don't do caves with water in them. Cosmic/Eldritch, dark fantasy, and gothic horror are all almost always okay or if they're not it's because they take place in a water-filled cave. Honestly, I don't have a good answer of how to find things but I use subgenre, talking to people you know who watched the film/saw the show in question, and understanding your own personal issues - whether they're genuine triggers or just "this will upset me and I don't find it fun." I will say a lot of the tropes within horror that bother me bother me out of horror; the cave diving, for example, is part of a general hard line I have; I don't like zombie comedies even though horror-comedy can mitigate other issues (eg: I liked Cocaine Bear even though it's basically a slasher film with a bear because it's pretty funny).

Another really big distinction for me that might be true for you: audio horror, literary horror, and actual play horror (even if filmed), where the visuals are limited or only described, is much easier for me than visual horror. I don't know if that's the same for you, but it's very true for me.

Some other similar media I can personally recommend as someone who I suspect has similar broad preferences re: horror:

Of the Candela touchstones listed, will personally vouch for V. E. Schwab's Darker Shade of Magic series (dark fantasy books, wouldn't even classify as horror), Frankenstein (the book); Crimson Peak (gothic horror/ghost story film; I recall it having a lot of blood but not gore but I saw it in theaters so it's been a while); Penny Dreadful (is it good? debatable. Is it fun? absolutely.)

The New Weird genre is often thrown around and I don't think Candela per se falls into it, but it's certainly the same vibe of horror/fantasy crossovers that don't always fit into one or the other. Anyway: I have brought up the Silt Verses, which is a podcast solidly in that genre which I think I would not enjoy as a film but greatly enjoy as a podcast.

The Southern Reach Trilogy is...not Candela in vibes exactly but I just think everyone should read it, and it is in that weird horror-inflected sf genre space.

Twin Peaks and the X-Files which are very different stories in some ways, but are also investigations of horrors in a world where most people don't believe in that, and Spenser says his cinematic description style is using some of that lexicon, notably from the X-Files' cold opens. (The X-Files is very long and I only watched a few seasons but also while there is an overarching plot, from what I recall it's kind of ridiculous so you can bounce around; Twin Peaks is worth the watch through though I never watched anything after the original series).

I'm not going to lie, I listened to all of Alice Isn't Dead, which was a horror podcast from the Night Vale team, because the actress was so good, but the plot never totally clicked for me, but worth checking out. More worth checking out, while definitely New Weird and not horror, is Within the Wires, which I mentioned before, if you find the concept of Newfaire interesting on a sociocultural level. I am going to make a shitpost about Within the Wires in a second so just look at that. I also never finished Old Gods of Appalachia, but if you liked the Candela playlist Spenser and Rowan put out and are interested in the Bridleborne Mountains region/vibe with folk horror, it was pretty good; I just found it hard to binge, personally, and I listen to so many fucking podcasts it fell by the wayside.

Hope this helps!

#answered #Anonymous #what is horror: no clue lets get you some podcast #candela tag

51 notes · View notes

i-eat-deodorant · 7 months

Note

Weird question for you 👉👈 do you have any drawings of the lamb or narinder like, naked? NOT in a horny way I SWEAR, I love your style and I just wanna see how you draw their legs lmao, I can't figure it out myself and other artists I can find are like, too human.

(nakey animals ahead)

Okay, so to preface this I'm a hobbyist artist who commits anatomical atrocities for shits & giggles, and this is by no means a professional/accurate way to draw animals, humans, or any combination of the two. This started as me struggling to explain how I draw instead of just sticking to the most brutally honest explanation of "I just wing it", but having to draw out different parts of anatomy and how proportional they are to each other was hugely helpful to help me re-evaluate how I draw animals. So thank you.

I'll be mostly using Lamb and Narinder for reference, because the brainrot is strong and they're what I draw the most.

A lot of my style comes from the fact that I'm primarily an animal artist, not a human one. In fact, COTL's the first fandom that I've drawn anthro characters in, and it was a trial trying to adapt what I know to upright animals.

Best way to get a better grip on anatomy is to sketch from references. Nothing that can really replace practice. It's helpful to look at skeleton and muscle diagrams and get a good idea of where body parts are in relation to each other. Then, search up actual references and try to overlay the shapes and bones onto them. When I'm not sure if something of mine is proportioned correctly, I just measure something with my fingers and compare.

Some specific things to note: generally, the hind legs of quadrupeds have a larger metatarsal area (the large flat portion of your foot) compared to humans--that's why people say cats tip-toe. Humans have theirs relatively short; how long you make that area largely determines how Creature the design looks. I know some people who draw purely human legs, some who draw human legs then add the extra foot length on top, all of that's fine. Personally, I will shorten the leg length above the knee to compensate. In quadrupeds, the knee will draw up very close to the torso area, as you can see in the jackal doodle.

Another note: when standing, it's important give the impression that there's a center of balance. When standing straight, a straight line drawn from the hip to the foot of a leg should be relatively perpendicular to the ground.

(Of course this all goes out the window the moment anything other than standing straight is involved but w/e.)

A lot of the fundamentals carry over between my quadruped and anthro art: the general shapes, the proportions, etc. One thing I noticed while sketching Lamb is that sheep have a femur that's almost entirely against their torso, and their legs are mostly just the tarsal parts (sorry if I'm butchering the anatomy).

For the arms/forelimbs, I mainly just use human anatomy with a repurposed number of fingers. It's easier, plus I can't exactly have a sheep with sheep limbs carry an axe around. I mean it's doable, just kinda awkward.

After getting the basics down, I move to more complex poses. One thing I struggle massively with is anything involving knees--kneels were something that eluded me for months. There are things that humans do that look very awkward when you factor in other animals' anatomies. I'm not super good with action poses so I can't really say how I've overcome that limitation, because I haven't :'D.

When I'm doing more simplistic poses, I just result resort to drawing a slightly bent line and calling it a day. You don't see much outside clothing anyways.

Last thing I found interesting: because of the weight distribution, the positioning of the arms in relation to the torso is different in bipeds and quadrupeds. Drawing anatomy with arms that kinda come forward and legs spread apart give designs a more animalistic vibe to me.

#long post #my asks #my shit #idk if this helps or not #it's just how i draw things not how to draw them correctly #i wrote this at 3am so it may make no sense whatsoever oops #but yeah i don't really??? do consistency??? so i constantly violate my own rules #reminder that my narinder is a jackal/cat hybrid #cw suggestive #not rlly but just in case

35 notes · View notes

silvermoon424 · 8 months

Note

Hi! I wanted to know, how do you do typesetting for manga? What sort of tools do you use? I recently discovered a series that has text only translations, and wanted to learn how to typeset so I could combine them with the raw scans.

Hello! It's great to hear that someone else is getting into typesetting! I'm entirely self-taught (didn't even look at guides or anything, I just felt it out and it shows in my earlier work lol) but the nice thing about typesetting is that it's pretty easy to get a feel for. Honestly, Photoshop does most of the technical work; I would say a lot of typesetting has to do with art and visual aesthetics. It's your job to make things look right, and you can get really fancy with it (especially with sound effects).

I'm very slowly working on a very long PMMM doujinshi, here's a sample page of my work and what I mean about making things look "right" (in regards to text placement, cleaning bubbles, etc). My personal preference is to break up words as seldom as possible, which is a philosophy even a lot of official typesetters don't share lol (probably because a lot of typesetters value speed over little touches like that).

Anyway, Photoshop will be your best friend! I'll be honest, it's been a hot minute since I pirated my copy and I don't even think the method is valid anymore. From what I understand GenP (Windows) and AdobeZii (Mac) are the new methods of cracking Photoshop. Here are the GenP and AdobeZii subreddits for guidance. Also, if you have a Mac apparently downloading directly from Cmacked is the way to get Photoshop.

Anyway, I really can't get into all the tricks and intricacies I've learned over the years about typesetting. However, I found this AMAZING, comprehensive guide that I would strongly suggest using as a reference. They cover all of the fundamentals as well as a lot of the extras. There's even a few things in here that I wasn't aware of and will definitely be brushing up on!

I've also uploaded my font reference file to Google Docs. All the fonts show up as arial, but I've included screencaps of what they look like. These are all free fonts and can be found/downloaded if you just Google the name. Generally, Wild Words is considered the standard font in manga/doujinshi scanlations (although of course there are variants). It's what I use in all my standard text. All the rest are for sound effects, aside text, emotional text that is meant to be elevated, etc.

I would also suggest at least downloading custom heart and star shapes (or brushes) for Photoshop; there are a bunch of free ones available and those shapes tend to come up in manga speech bubbles a lot.

Oh, and make sure you make a credits page for your releases. Mine are super bare-bones (just white text on a black background for the most part) but you deserve to be credited for your labor! So does whoever translated the manga. Once you get the series up and rolling I would suggest starting to upload to Mangadex (the hub of scanlation where tens of thousands of people can see what you've made). If you need help figuring out how to do that, hit me up again when you get to that point. You'll have to create a group but it's super easy.

Am I forgetting anything else? This is such a near and dear hobby of mine and I feel like there's just so much to cover, lol. Please let me know if you have any other questions!

#typesetting #scanlation #scanlations #guide #my guides #tutorial #tutorials #resource #manga

39 notes · View notes

voxofthevoid · 6 months

Note

Hello! First, let me just — hold your hands. See, you don't need to sit on them to not ramble. I'll always welcome authors' ramblings, in fact, I crave them like a man possessed, starved. So, please don't be cruel and deny a poor soul your ramblings. With that said...

I feel as if you opened a door inside my brain when you said Gojou is holding his own leash in "every version of the story". From the snippets you've posted about the story before, I feel as if Gojou wants Yuuji to hold it, and he's desperate for that sunshine boy to do it. Sure, he's canonically very dominant, very imposing, very against people telling him what to do, but even still... Well, I think he craves just giving up some control, especially to someone he knows won't "misuse" it, even though I think he wouldn't mind if, say, Yuuji did it. An ex. of that was when he was younger and Getou was practically his moral compass.

It's sort of ironic in "every version of the story" because Gojou needs to practically tire Yuuji out by any means necessary (cough sex, isolation, questionable life experiences, etc. cough) just so he can shove said leash on Yuuji's hands so they can become "equals". After all, to have some degree of influence on the strongest is power in itself, even if the other person doesn't realise it yet. It also makes for such a compelling dynamic, which he only got glimpses of in canon.

I guess I'm the one rambling now, huh? Anyways, I just want to congratulate you on your characterization of Gojou. It's exactly on point — a delicious sort of pathetic, obsessive, sadomasochistic and unhinged —, and one of my favourites across all the Goyuu verse.

Hope you have a good weekend. <3

Ah, if you're holding my hands, then I suppose I have no choice but to type away.

Ah well!

First things first, anon, you should know that I read "From the snippets you've posted about the story before, I feel as if Gojou wants Yuuji to hold it" and went You—You Get It.

The Gojou/leash thing (in the sense of how he's the only one holding it as well as how he might want someone else to) is something that now informs my approach to him in general, though the specifics vary depending on whether I'm writing teen!Gojou, post-Toji!Gojou, or adult!Gojou. And while Gojou's strength in terms of his self-control was something I was interested in from the start, every version of the story fundamentally altered my take on the whole thing.

Characterization breakthrough: Horror edition.

(Okay, everything I've written after it has been pretty tame on the Gojou end, but you should see some of my unwritten ideas...)

Back to the point, you're right! Gojou wanting very badly for someone—someone he has the luxury of trusting with himself—to hold that leash is a pervasive undercurrent in every version of the story. He wants an equal, and Yuuji's one of the people he identified as having the potential to be one; these are canon. And I've already rambled a lot about how one of the most appealing parts of Gojou's and Yuuji's dynamics is how they humanize each other from the beginning to the end. Combine the power aspects from the former with the emotional attachment engendered by the latter, and you get a scenario rich with potential for some wildly shifting power dynamics.

You've already seen glimpses of it in the WIP Wednesday snippets, and the full fic has a lot more it. A good percentage of the storytelling happens during and through the sex, and it's a zigzagging road overall. Where we start is starkly different from where it ends, and the path there isn't kind or pretty, but I hope to god that it's interesting.

Also, I can't tell you how delighted I am by you liking Gojou's characterization in that fic, especially because "pathetic, obsessive, sadomasochistic and unhinged" encapsulate everything I was aiming for. Thank you so much 💗

And feel free to ramble in my inbox anytime; your thoughts are *chef's kiss*

Have a good day!

#anon #i love my anons #fic: every version of the story #goyuu

24 notes · View notes

marvel-starwarsfangirl · 7 months

Text

Mori Ougai (I just want to talk about him)

Guys, I've been thinking a lot lately about Mori and his Beast counterpart. I really, really, really love Beast Mori and everything that he represents. He's not just the "good Mori." In my eyes, and others as well, he represents Mori's humanity (side note: I'm not saying Mori is secretly a hero or something) and what main story Mori could've been if he wasn't in the mafia.

I also just want to talk about Mori in general because he's actually very fascinating and more complex than some make him seem.

Just hear me out, ok?

Also, shoutout to @hopefull-mindset. Their analyses on BSD have been very interesting and definitely have given me a different perspective on Mori and helped me understand Beast Mori so much more.

Anyways, these are just a pile of thoughts I have on Mori as I began to understand him more. Please note: these are my personal thoughts gathered through lots of analyses digging and reflection on his character. If you dislike Mori, that is completely valid.

Understanding Beast Mori

When I first read Beast, I was so confused. How could Mori be so different when every other character had basically the same personality? Mori in the main story is cruel, cold, and manipulative. Yes, he is very pragmatic and smart, but that doesn't take away from his bad qualities. However, the more I dug deeper into the mystery of Beast Mori, the more things started to make sense. The Mori we meet in Beast is still the same Mori from the main story. And for those who question that, look at Beast Aku and Beast Atsushi. They may have swapped organizations but their fundamental traits are still the same. Atsushi, PM or ADA, still has major guilt and self-worth issues that stem from the Orphanage Director. Aku is the same. Even if he is in the ADA, he still has his intense bloodlust and determination.

So, why is Mori different? As @hopefull-mindset has pointed out in one of their posts, he's in a different environment. There are no negative influences or stressors unlike the mafia. Also, he's working with children. Children often represent innocence and positive emotions. Mori, surprisingly, is really good with kids because we the see the orphanage thrive in his care. It makes perfect sense that Mori, who likes kids (and not in the creepy way), would learn to become a more caring figure. In the main story, Mori is often presented as a necessary evil; he's the dark to Fukuzawa's light. But now that Dazai replaced him, Mori can act without always making the optimal solution at the cost of anyone that gets in its way, himself included.

Honestly, I think Beast Mori does humanize him. It doesn't erase the wrongs he did (and believe me, I haven't forgotten), but it does show you a different perspective. Beast shows us that Mori has complexities. He's not just an evil monster for the heroes to overcome. There's more to him than that.

Note: I am not saying any of his actions towards Yosano, Dazai, or any other character are justified. He hurt them emotionally and psychologically. It wasn't fun to watch or read. Saying Mori is more than a one dimensional villain doesn't take away from the bad things he did. I'm just trying to offer a different perspective because Beast Mori is that interesting, at least to me.

Elise

I've never been able to fully reconcile with this aspect of Mori. It is weird. It is uncomfortable. It is perplexing. Elise to an extent, is Mori. She is a part of him manifested and can act on her own. And I get the controversy behind it; it's not normal. That being said, never have we seen Mori in either the manga or the anime act in that nature towards her or even Yosano. He makes weird comments about Elise, sure, but nothing super explicit. At most, they're treated as weird jokes. And, for the record, that doesn't make them ok or any better. I won't argue back and forth on this topic because it's a difficult subject.

However, I don't believe he is actually a *you know what* because of Beast Mori's entire existence. Riddle me this, why would Asagiri-sensei write a character as a *you know what* and then have his counterpart work at an orphanage full of children? That, at least to me, crosses a moral line. It makes it even more weird and uncomfortable. Also, idk about y'all, but I wouldn't find it fun or quirky if someone portrayed a very famous and beloved author as a perverted creep, just saying.

So, where did Elise even come from then? Well, she's a companion to Mori in many ways. He's rarely seen without her. Mori's backstory is a mystery to us. My honest theory is that Elise manifested as a companion for Mori because he was in a really bad spot. Either he was abused in some shape or form or was very isolated and alone. We know that Mori's had her since the Great War. He was 26 at that time. That's still fairly young so I think it's safe to say he's had her since he was a child or a teenager. Of course, I could be wrong. But based off what we know about abilities so far, I think it's safe to say that Elise didn't manifest without reason.

The Optimal Solution

Going into more speculation about Mori's backstory, I have so many questions. Mori essentially has the same big question as Kunikida for me: when and why did he decide to follow the optimal solution. For Kunikida, it's his ideals. Both characters stick so adamantly to their beliefs that it leads to conflict externally and internally. Mori's optimal solution is the reason why Yosano was traumatized.

It just got me thinking, when did he develop this line of thought? After all, a kid who grew up with an average life usually doesn't worry about the "optimal solution." Between this and Elise, I strongly believe he came from a dysfunctional home. It would certainly explain why he tells Dazai that the latter reminds him of himself. Mori is very good at repressing his emotions; he's hard to read which makes him dangerous. He likes to take advantage of situations and manipulate them to his will, or whatever he deems to be the optimal solution. The battle with Fukuzawa during the Cannibalism arc is a good example of this. Mori knew he couldn't win so he decided to get Fukuzawa to let his guard down enough to strike. In my area of study at school, the home life of a person can be very telling as to why someone may act in a certain way. Mori coming from a rough home without love seems pretty plausible to me.

Mori is a very well-written character with a lot of complexities that tend to get overlooked. Why does he do what do? At what point did he decide to follow his optimal solution? It's such an interesting question because it affects so many characters and situations.

Conclusion

If y'all got this far, congrats! I hope that people will take the time to look deeper at his character. You don't have to like Mori. I'm just tired of people portraying him as something he's not. I also don't want fans harassing other fans because they like Mori. And I'll admit it, I was so quick to judge both him and Francis. Had I kept up my shield and continued to shoot unwarranted hatred at them, I wouldn't have appreciated their characters as I do now.

And yes, I do overhate on Fyodor (mainly bc the man is cockroach and he hurt Kunikida). I get it. However, I know Fyodor is a deeply complex character. His way of thinking is actually quite fascinating and I have so many questions about him. I don't like Fyodor, but I'm not gonna let my personal grievances stop others from enjoying him.

#bungou stray dogs #mori ougai #my thoughts #beast mori #kafka asagiri #let me enjoy Mori please

23 notes · View notes

the-modern-typewriter · 10 months

Note

Hello!!! I’m reading The God Key right now, I’m about half way through and I’m really loving it!!! I wanted to thank you for sharing your art with the world and also ask a question about it. While reading it I’ve been so surprised by Gabriel’s character, he is the most clear 1w9 I’ve ever seen in media (to me) and he’s a very disintegrated version of one too. Usually people do not treat characters who are so focused on goodness like this at all. I am so happy to see this kind of character. In my experience there is never this much poured from the writer that makes them be disintegrated while still holding on to the things they care about and idk it’s really really cool to me to see. His mental health and his fixations on moral goodness while drifting away from his own values and his belief in all these contradictory things is amazing. There was so much thought out into all of this and his mind and I’m so so impressed by it all. My question is I guess if you’re familiar with enneagram and if that played a part in your writing? I’d also be really curious about the rest of the cast’s types. Thank you so much for your art and for your time and energy, I really appreciate it!!

Glad you're enjoying it! And Gabriel!

(The God Key is my novel)

I'm vaguely familiar with personality tests and types in general, but it isn't something I focused on while developing the characters. (I had to look up what 1W9 was because I knew there were types, but not the subdivisions!)

That said, I did put a lot of thought into the characters and their stances to the key conflicts in the book, so I'm glad it's appreciated! :D

I started with Gabriel because he was the clearest in my head from the start, with Isaac as a close second because I have a habit of character-creating in pairs. You'll possibly have noticed they directly mirror each other's attitudes a lot.

As a brief example:

Gabriel is a very certain person and believes in objective morality, which he believes means we absolutely must help people and do good whenever we can. Isaac is a very uncertain person and believes in subjective morality, so how the hell do we decide what's right enough to try and force our values on everyone else?

I was very interested in The God Key in exploring the way having super-powers might utterly break you as a person, especially side by side with a lot of our tropes of 'one person can save the world!' Like, what would it look like if you actually believed that about yourself? What would it look like if you knew you could, but fundamentally didn't think you had the right to?

Dahlia might be the most well-adjusted of the lot? Idk.

Anyway. I'm not sure I know enough about enneagram types to correctly evaluate them, so I would absolutely love to hear everyone's opinions!

#The God Key

33 notes · View notes

schismusic · 4 months

Text

Æon Flux and the end of all things

I don't remember the first time I heard of Æon Flux but I sure as hell remember the first time I watched it, and it wasn't too long ago which would technically not warrant the level of obsession I have for that shit, but here we are anyway.

I was knocked the fuck out on painkillers, two of my wisdom teeth freshly removed, not even remotely worried about the exam that I had coming up in like two days from then. So I was barely moving away from my swivel chair and sleeping on a whole ass armored pillow to prevent from tossing and turning and shit felt so surreal to me. It was like the eating chair from the last Cronenberg movie. So I delved into Æon Flux essentially blind and bingewatched the shit out of it. Twice. Ended up downloading the whole thing from some sketchy ass 1080p remastered torrent, rewatched it again, and spread it around personally in a more cauterized Google Drive folder (so if you guys got a nasty ass virtual STD from it, my bad I guess), not even a month after watching the series. Shit was fucked, in short, and every rewatch just fueled this obsession even further.

(image taken from Episode 1, Season 1)

One thing about me: when I obsess over stuff I want to draw something at the very least inspired by it. Happens to me a lot with Autechre, who are actually one of maybe three bands I would not hesitate to call my favourite based on an absolutely objective principle which is absolutely not up for discussion and which might be the object of a future post at this point. But the point is fucking Æon Flux is essentially impossible to replicate because Peter Chung's character designs are so recognizable that you start seeing them in literally every other movie that came out in the late '90s/early 2000s - and for reference, Æon Flux was brought to an end in 1995. Consequently, all attempts at drawing Æon Flux-inspired stuff end up either feeling very derivative or looking like fucking trash. Artistry is a weird thing because sometimes it inspires other people, other times it just inspires man-slaughtering rage.

Somewhat many of my friends are or have at one point tried to be accomplished visual artists. Some have made it to professional/teaching level, some others have an art school diploma or degree - and I'll be using this space to shout out @coto-letta aka V., who has recently rejoined Tumblr after years of absence. We met on here, when her handle was much different, and I mistook her for an ex of mine (whom, surprisingly, we are still on relatively good - if quiet - terms with) so I slid into her DMs as you do, and she was like "yeah actually I have no clue who the fuck you are I just think your blog is neat and dropped a follow" which was quite a fundamental moment in understanding that while my life was written like a dodgy soap-opera, that didn't mean I was the centre of the entire world. Anyway, the reason I'm shouting her out is because sometimes something deeper and older than you remember has a way of finding you again when you least expect it and that's what happened when in January 2023 (after V. had left Tumblr for at that point about two years and we had exchanged Instagram accounts) I somehow ended up on her Insta and found out she had been tagged in a picture taken somewhere that looked suspiciously like my university's conference hall and I could not fucking believe she was in my city. I slid into her DMs again, as you do, and found out that no, that wasn't my uni's aula magna, but yes, she was in fact relocating in my city for her master's. So we met up after maybe seven years of on-and-off Internet friendship. It's a neat story, sure, but how the fuck do we tie it into Æon Flux?

(image taken from Episode 3, Season 2: Leisure)

Not trying to be overly dramatic here, but Æon Flux to me is just about a condensation of everything that "art" can mean. Not just visual flare or style, not just deep meaning or interesting ways of putting across one or more questions and never a definitive answer to any of them (more often than not, it's sets of possible answers - usually two, neither of which ends up covering the whole array of possibilities, both of which actually leave a lot to be desired in a number of different ways), not just this insane fucking music that toys with everything you expect from animation courtesy of Drew Neumann who may just rank as one of the best soundtrack artists ever in virtue of this single work. It's the whole package. You would think it'd work taken in pieces, and it does, no objection to that: but it works even better as a whole package. If the moral questioning (and the philosophical musings of season 3, which is unjustly underrated because "it's too normal" by hipster wannabe critic dilettantes who like to think that they could do better than that. Everybody else on the other hand is generally able to stop pull their head out their own ass and recognize, at the very least, the excellent craftsmanship and talent that went into the ten long episodes) wasn't accompanied by the weird fetishistic sex it'd be somewhat less impactful, almost like a cauterized Tenshi no tamago made into a series for mainstream late-night TV audiences. The twist was that MTV's executives, at the time, "didn't understand [the double entendres], they didn't even notice them. So, we were okay", in producer Japhet Asher's own words in the short documentary Investigation: The History of Æon Flux. The network was, in fact, trying to break into the mainstream - they simply couldn't keep their creatives at bay. No wonder they turned to Jersey Shore as they went along.

(image taken from Episode 5, Season 3: The Demiurge)

Even just the main characters' purported edginess, clearly something "of its time", is never played entirely straight. Both leads are way too complex, and very clearly presented as such, to be just summed up by "Æon Flux is an anarchist/Trevor Goodchild is a dictator". Both of which are true, by the way, they're just one part of a full picture. Even within the context of its necessary linearity - this is still an animated short and as such moves only in one direction, even though a number of episodes (specifically Mirror and Chronophasia) deliberately fuck with the viewer's perception of times on varying degrees of diegesis and extradiegesis - the series could be perceived as, indeed, a sandbox: consequently, the viewer could set sail and explore it. This is further encouraged by the series's active weirdness to whoever would want to try and make sense of the world's story. There is no history, there is just the story at hand: an eternal present which you can't understand ("un eterno presente che capire non sai": Ferretti knew his shit, regardless of how it went after CCCP) and which Æon and Trevor are not interested in even trying to contextualize. Not a surprise then that they'd be into each other: their closeness in body and heart doesn't exist at the mind's level, and the whole thing falls apart miserably every time it looks like they could be finally let their weapons down. But as Æon completely understands, and as Trevor seems to actively try to ignore, the fight is already the whole point: star-cross'd as they may be, the entire act of playfully hunting each other for sport both in the bedroom and on the battlefield is what Trevor Goodchild and Æon Flux thrive on. Trevor wants stability but an Æon who doesn't fight back is simply not Æon; Æon does not want the stability, but she definitely likes Trevor to an extent and finds more in common with him that she would probably be willing to admit (I would like to thank Tumblr user @brw on thons very good analysis of the episode A Last Time for Everything, which heavily inspired this section of the post!). In short: if Trevor seems to embody Pier Paolo Pasolini's idea that "there is nothing more anarchistic than power" ("non c'è nulla di più anarchico del potere") then Æon flips the statement on its head: "there is nothing more powerful than anarchism". That is, of course, until we once again confront my signature ad-hoc elephant in the room that this statement just summoned.

(Image taken from Episode 1, Season 1)

No spoilers intended, but if you so much as google the name of the series you will easily find out that Æon Flux dies a whole lot throughout the series*. Season 1 and all the shorts from season 2 end with her dying ungrateful deaths and a couple of the long episodes leave much to be desired in the way of positive closure, with Ether Drift Theory representing a peak in bleakness for season 3. Most of the shorts where Æon dies imply that either absolutely nothing changes in the world around when she's lost or that Trevor Goodchild literally just succeeds in all of his goals (see Season 1's finale), and one could make a case that even if she did carry her missions through there would be absolutely nothing to show for it: somebody goes up the chain of power, everything is restored, there is one more tyrant to murder. Not to be that one guy who quotes Nietzsche about everything, but the eternal recurrence of the same is the first thing that comes to mind when watching Æon Flux, especially exemplified and even literalized by the episode War, possibly the best of the short ones: it's the same fucking story four times over a five-minute run time and nothing ever gets better for anyone. The body count in the episode is unquantifiably large - every one of the fallen a potential new Æon Flux or Trevor Goodchild. But this, in a way, implies that Æon keeps being reborn, and one could argue that the act of capturing a fly with her venus-fly-trap eye could simply be her coming back to life, as it were; stopping the most evident sign of decay, turning her eyes outward yet again, to face the eternal return of the same again and again and again…

(Image taken from Episode 8, Season 3: Ether Drift Theory)

You can find Æon Flux for free on the Internet Archive.

*as I was discussing the final draft of this post with my friend @oldshittydog we had a pretty interesting discussion which I thought should be added here for an even clearer, fuller picture:

#schismusic #animation #tv series #aeon flux #aeon flux 1991 #aeon flux 1995 #peter chung #japhet asher #mtv #liquid television #pier paolo pasolini #giovanni lindo ferretti #a lot of random bullshit #i guess i had fun with this

12 notes · View notes

sesamestreep · 3 months

Text

30 Day Writing Challenge - Day 4

Write about your MC’s personal style (from this list) ➸ set in the Bakeoff AU, before the events of summer came like cinnamon, so sweet and referencing an event from the first chapter of @firstelevens original fic in the series (sugar pie, honey bunch) and yes, I'm aware this is a huuuuge stretch for this prompt, don't worry about it!

Karen’s just left them to go get another round from the bar when Foggy’s phone starts ringing. On the screen, a photo of Daisy looking comically crestfallen while holding a ruined sufflé pops up and Foggy swipes to accept the call immediately.

“Hey, Daisy, what’s up?” he asks, aiming for casual but…well, Daisy’s roughly his age and avoids talking on the phone as much as anyone of their generation does, if not more. He’s slightly concerned that something must be wrong. Across from him, Matt’s expression turns pinched, probably because he’s thinking the same thing or he can hear the worry in Foggy’s voice.

“Did you watch the episode last night?” Daisy asks, without preamble or greeting.

“Oh, yeah. I mean, me and Karen did. Matt fell asleep like ten minutes in.”

Daisy scoffs over the line at the same time as Matt says, “I already apologized like five times for that!”

Pulling the phone away from his mouth slightly, Foggy says, “I know you did. And I forgive you. I know how important your beauty sleep is to you.”

Matt rolls his eyes, looking vaguely embarrassed at the same time. Foggy’s not sure if the extended time away during the show has made old things he’d gotten used to before new again or if this really is something new, but Matt’s easier to fluster than he remembered. Foggy could have sworn he made lots of jokes about Matt’s good looks and Matt always just brushed them off. This new shyness about it is surprising.

“Anyway,” Foggy says, turning his attention back to Daisy, “I saw the episode. Why do you ask?”

“Have you been online at all today?”

“You mean, have I been connected to the Internet at all? Yes, of course, Daisy, come on!”

“No, I mean, on social media,” Daisy says, impatiently.

“I don’t really use social media. You know that.”

“I know you have your finsta,” she replies. “I didn’t know if anyone had tagged you in anything there. Or if you have a dummy twitter account to lurk sometimes.”

Foggy laughs. “God, no!”

“Don’t say it like it’s totally ludicrous! People do it!”

“Yeah, but not me,” Foggy says, still laughing. “I’m just a simple country lawyer. What need have I of your twitters and your algorithms?”

He feels like he can hear Daisy roll her eyes on the other end of the call. “You’re such a dork!”

“Sorry. What’s so important that you needed to call me on the phone to ask if I have a secret Twitter account?”

“The Internet is freaking out about you, Foggy Nelson.”

Foggy’s stomach sinks. “It is?” he asks. “What did I do?”

“You looked too damn hot in this week’s episode, apparently.”

“I—what?” Foggy asks, feeling so utterly stupid. None of those words made any sense to him, which is troubling because most of them were pretty simple. “Wait, did I look really sweaty or something?”

“No, dumbass,” Daisy says, “I mean ‘hot’ like ‘god, he’s so hot, I want to have his babies,’ which, by the way, is a real tweet I read about you not fifteen minutes ago.”

“What?!” Foggy basically shouts, which makes Matt lean forward in his seat and give him a questioning look.

“Your humility is really beyond the pale, Franklin. It’s like you don’t know you’re hot!”

“I don’t know that,” he says, still freaking out slightly. “I’ve been called that by three, maybe four people in my whole life before today! It’s not a common occurrence.”

“I don’t believe that for a second,” Daisy says, because she’s fundamentally loyal and it makes her confused sometimes.

“Well, if it’s happening a lot, it must be behind my back, then.”

Matt, apparently done with being out of the loop, reaches across the table to poke Foggy’s wrist with his index finger. Foggy replies in turn by patting Matt’s hand with his twice, hoping that conveys that there’s no emergency.

“Well, it’s happening a lot on Twitter right now,” Daisy replies. “Which, I guess is still behind your back, technically.”

“That’s…great, I guess…”

“I thought you’d be happier,” she says, sounding worried. “You seem upset.”

“It’s just weird to think about,” Foggy says, keeping his tone mild. He’s not mad at Daisy by any stretch, but having people outside of the neighborhood know who he is and have strong opinions about him has proven to be a tougher concept to reckon with than he originally anticipated. “It’s that thing of being perceived in a way that I have no control over.”

“Yeah, I get that,” Daisy replies, thoughtfully. “I just…I thought you should know you’re the Internet’s reigning boyfriend at the moment.”

Foggy laughs, still feeling weird but in a warmer, cozier way than before. “Well, it’s an honor to be somebody’s boyfriend, I suppose.”

Matt’s head perks up at that, like a dog who’s heard a strange noise, and Foggy resists the urge to laugh at him for it. Karen returns with their next round at that precise moment, too, and makes a face at this pronouncement as she slides Foggy’s beer across the table to him. He also sees her look over at Matt, as if he’ll have more answers somehow.

“I’m guessing based on your blasé reaction to this news that I shouldn’t send you a curated collection of mine and Colleen’s favorite tweets about how gorgeous you are?” Daisy asks, innocently.

“For the sake of my mental health, you probably shouldn’t,” Foggy replies, “but honestly, today’s been a weird one and we had a miserable time in court, so it might cheer me up.”

Daisy squeals excitedly, which is not a noise Foggy knew she made before this very moment. She didn’t even make that noise when she won Bake-Off, not that he’s allowed to tell anyone that yet. “That’s what I like to hear,” she exclaims. “Alright, well, get ready for some screenshots. And also sorry in advance for any psychological damage I may cause.”

“Thanks,” Foggy laughs. “Both for the apologies in advance and for making sure I knew about this.”

“What are friends for?” Daisy sighs happily, and then hangs up without a goodbye.

“What’s going on?” Karen asks as she takes a sip from her beer.

“Have you been on Twitter today?” he asks, in response.

“I’m a journalist, Foggy. Unfortunately, most of my life is spent on Twitter.”

“Do you follow any Bake-Off people there?”

“I might follow the official twitter for the show itself, but I’m not sure. Why?”

“Apparently, Twitter is freaking out about me in last night’s episode.”

“Really? What do they have to freak out about?” Matt asks, frowning.

Foggy shrugs. “I don’t know. Just me, I guess? I looked good or something.”

“I told you that you looked good last night,” Karen says, gesturing broadly to convey her annoyance. “You didn’t believe me.”

“You’re one of my best friends, Karen. You have to lie to me about that kind of thing!”

“No, I don’t! And I wasn’t!”

“Well, you’re about to be vindicated,” Foggy says. “Daisy and Colleen are sending me screenshots.”

As if on cue, Foggy’s phone lights up with several messages being sent to his and Colleen and Daisy’s group chat and the notifications don’t slow down at all for another full minute.

“God,” Foggy says, just looking at the new messages pouring in. “She wasn’t kidding.”

“You want to read them,” Karen asks, with a bright, dangerous look in her eye, “or shall I?”

Foggy hands over his phone without a second thought. “Probably better if you do it,” he says, feeling genuine panic and terror at the idea. It’s too late to go back now, though. He’s gotten her hopes up.

“Oh my god,” Karen says, after he’s gotten his phone unlocked for her. She puts her hand to her mouth to disguise her…horror? Amusement? Both? It’s hard to tell.

“What?” Foggy asks, anxiously, and Matt turns over his hand underneath Foggy’s palm so he can give it a quick squeeze, which…that shouldn’t be as soothing as it actually is. It’s, frankly, ridiculous that it helps so much.

“Foggy,” Karen says, excitedly, “you’re a sensation!”

guy with no problems • juliachildsplay

um… hello?? Foggy coming into the tent with those little braids??? I’m experiencing symptoms????

the hateful nate • nateorade

I’ve been online too long because the minute I saw Foggy Nelson with his hair in braids, I just shouted OOOHHH GENDER!! at the top of my lungs. my gf and my cat both left the room in protest.

kelly nguyen • gaygrenadine

me normally: it’s so embarrassing when cis dudes get so much credit for the mildest defiance of gender norms… me seeing foggy’s braids in GABO: yasss queen thank you for my rights 🌈🙌 gender is sooo over!!

brynn it to wynn it • flibbertigibbety

I did not actually think Foggy could get hotter to me than when he responded to people ridiculing his French pronunciation by revealing he speaks fluent Punjabi, but I was WRONG!!

Ezekiel (he/they) • ezeydoesitt

how is anyone getting any baking done right now when foggy is there looking so so good?? couldn’t be me!!!

world’s #1 trilla apologist • eldritchedeelite

lord, I am not one of your strongest soldiers… foggy in that salmon colored t-shirt and those braids… I am WEAK

dinah (derogatory) • surelytemple

my two cents is that Ava deserves star baker this week because she is somehow still baking with foggy nelson’s whole beautiful self directly in her eye line. talk about performing under pressure.

bram (not stoker) • bramblinnmann

I am watching bakeoff with my family right now and it’s getting very difficult to pretend to be straight in front of them when Foggy’s out here looking this hot

your future canceled wife • thecouturevulture

THEM: hey how was bakeoff this week? what did everyone make? was it good? ME: FOGGY NELSON WORE HIS HAIR IN BRAIDS!!!

citizen paddington • genderemporia

I literally couldn’t tell you a single thing that happened in this episode of GABO. Foggy appeared onscreen and my brain shut off for the next hour. I came to and I was googling wedding venues, idk man

Kira Iris • villainesque

I don’t condone people getting obsessed with public figures and violating their privacy but if some of yall wanted to be weird and find out if Foggy’s “partner” he references is a business thing or a romantic thing, I would look the other way just this once

Default Username, Esq. • shrimpheavencanwait

thank god foggy nelson isn’t on social media or I would be embarrassing myself I would be in those DMs like cheese filling in a danish I would be bringing shame upon my ancestors for that man I promise you

Helena Bee 🐝♿️ • bananabreadcrumbs

that part of the episode where Colleen walked behind Foggy and pulled one of his braids to say hello and he smiled at her??? It just hurts to see other people live your dreams???

spy x savage x fenty • coolnormalchill

foggy deserves star baker because he cured my depression and my gender dysphoria in one fell swoop and that’s that on that

Lindy the SEO bitch • easilysearchablebrandname

other bakers: [make the snack] Foggy Nelson: [is the snack]

sayid’s secret account! • sayidsayless

I didn’t hear who won star baker, I didn’t see who got sent home, l learned nothing about sweet dough, I was busy googling foggy nelson Instagram foggy nelson partner foggy nelson star sign

hb lovecraft • hazelbleu

I've already decided to call out sick from work tomorrow so I can spend the whole day watching the inevitable Foggy fancams that will come from this week’s GABO. It’s my duty as an American.

go gert go • yorkestown

if there’s any uneven bakes this week, we all know it’s because Foggy was simply too hot to handle and it threw off everyone’s baking times

SORRY 4 PARTY BROCKIN’ • attackthebrock

foggy saying that one thing he loves about bakeoff is never having a shortage of people to share his bakes with, because normally it’s just up to his partner to finish them. ME AND WHO TBH????

nora mcclain 👻🥀🖤 • themostest

Foggy explaining the hot cross bun recipe he’s making prompted my (allegedly) straight husband to say, out of nowhere, “I’d let him put a bun in MY oven!” Like, sir??? I’m right here???

stardew valley girl • wooloolemon

it’s crazy how many babies are going to be born nine months from the airing of Great American Bake-Off Season 3 Episode 6

Tolkien Straightguy • helmsdeepthroat

it’s pretty normal for me to end an episode of bake-off hungrier than I was before, but I’ve never finished one this THIRSTY my god

maddie📍grad school hell • doctorwormphd

seeing foggy with those french braids made me crazy y’all!! I almost redownloaded tinder I was so lost in the sauce

blandine montpetit ☮️💟 • peaceandloafs

Ava’s star baker moment was so deserved, I’m just sorry we were all too distracted by Foggy being the cutest human alive to really appreciate it. But not sorry enough that it won’t happen again.

“We’ve strayed very far from the light of god, I think,” Foggy says, with his face pressed into the sticky surface of the table, which…yeah, bad idea, but one of many he’s had tonight. Matt pats the back of his neck with a hand that was maybe supposed to be more in the direction of his head and ended up somewhere more weirdly intimate by accident. Foggy lifts his head to put an end to it, not because it didn’t feel nice but precisely because it did and that in turn makes him feel a bunch of messy emotions he doesn’t like. “Karen, what are you doing? Are there more?”

“Yes, but they’re getting a little redundant, honestly,” she says, squinting at his phone’s screen. “Everybody wants you to impregnate them, apparently.”

Matt chokes on air at the same time as Foggy chokes on his beer, so it takes both of them a few seconds to recover and respond.

“They what?” Matt asks, looking pale.

“The power of a new hairstyle,” Karen says, with a self-satisfied smile, though she directs it at Matt, for some reason. They have a lot more meaningful looks and mysterious half-conversations these days than they used to before Foggy went away to film the show. At least, that’s how it feels to him and if Karen didn’t have a boyfriend that she seemed to love a lot, he’d be worried that she and Matt were going to try dating again, for all it was a disaster the (admittedly brief) first time. Instead, it feels like they developed a shorthand while he was away and, granted he also made a bunch of close friends who he essentially talks to in baking-themed twin speak, it still makes him feel strange. He didn’t think him being away for the time that he was would change so much, but apparently it did. Matt and Karen speak in code now, and the Internet wants to fuck him. Life is strange.

“Do you really talk about me on the show that much?” Matt asks, apropos of nothing, it feels like.

“What? What do you mean?”

“A lot of those tweets referenced you talking about your partner,” Matt replies, looking thoughtful. “That’s me, I assume.”

“Yes, obviously,” Foggy says as his face heats. “Why shouldn’t I talk about you?”

“I’m not saying you shouldn’t. I just didn’t realize it was enough to be noticeable.”

“One thing I’ve learned about the Bake-Off viewers is that they notice everything,” Foggy says. “And I don’t mean to talk about you a lot, but you’re important to me and you’re in most of my stories and…all that…”

Matt seems to be thinking hard about that, while Karen is sitting with her chin resting in the palm of her hand, still scrolling through Foggy’s phone.

“What are you doing over there, Page?” Foggy asks, in the hopes of distracting everyone from the corny admission he just made that got met with silence.

“Just sending a few of these to my phone,” she says, with a sheepish look. “I want to show Frank.”

“God, no!” Foggy yelps as he reaches out to snatch his phone back. “I don’t need Frank knowing about these! It’s bad enough Matt had to hear them!”

“Why is it bad for me to know?” Matt asks, startled out of his reverie by the mention of his name.

“Because you think all of this is stupid!”

“All of what? Twitter?”

“No,” Foggy sighs, and then thinks it over. “I mean, I assume you do think Twitter is largely stupid, actually—”

“And you’d be right,” Karen adds.

“What I meant was you think all this stuff about the show is stupid.”

“No, I don’t,” Matt says, frowning. “I mean, I confess I don’t understand half the stuff you say on the show or about it, but that doesn’t mean I think it’s stupid. If anything, it makes me think I’m stupid.”

“Well, you certainly can’t be impressed by everything Karen just read us,” Foggy replies, gesturing with his phone. He’s aware, in the back of his mind, that he’s doing that thing you’re never supposed to do and negotiating against himself, but he can’t really stop it, for some reason. “It makes the fans of the show sound insane!”

“I understood even less of that than I do of the baking terminology, honestly,” Matt admits, “but I think most of those people have the right idea.”

“You mean, hitting on Foggy via Twitter? You think that’s the right move in this situation?” Karen asks, and there’s some kind of play acting going on in her tone, like she’s goading Matt about something that Foggy doesn’t have the context for.

“I’m saying Foggy’s loveable,” Matt replies to her with an unexpected amount of heat. “I don’t know why he acts like he isn’t.”

Foggy blinks at them, feeling like he’s stepped into the middle of an old argument he didn’t know about. “Am I still a part of this conversation, or…?”

Karen’s expression clears first and she turns to Foggy with a reluctantly amused expression, like she doesn’t know what to do with him, he’s so silly. “Of course you are! Matt and I were just agreeing about how great we think you are! That’s all!”

“Yeah, sure,” Foggy replies. It sure as hell didn’t sound like two people agreeing on anything, but he’s willing to let it go. “Well, if I’ve learned anything from this uncomfortable incident, it’s that I should braid my hair more often.”

“And that you look good in that salmon-colored shirt,” Karen adds, helpfully.

“Which is too bad, because I spilled ink all over it a few weeks ago.”

“Writing with a quill again?” Matt asks, innocently.

“No, I was helping Ruthie,” Foggy says, rolling his eyes when Matt’s smiles stupidly at his own joke. “Her newest hobby is calligraphy.”

“I thought she was into knitting now?” Karen says.

“Old news,” Foggy replies. “I’m just praying her next kick is baking so it can be something I’m even remotely good at.”

“I suppose it’s too much to ask that she gets really interested in reading up on legal precedent, huh?” Matt asks, thoughtfully.

“Yeah, probably,” Foggy laughs. “The point is, my magical salmon shirt that apparently makes me irresistible to random people on the Internet is out of commission.”

“Oh, well,” Karen sighs. “You’ll just have to subsist on the attentions of your local admirers.”

Foggy takes a sip of his beer. “I wasn’t aware I had any of those,” he says.

“Probably a lot more than you think,” she says, and she’s giving Matt another one of those weird looks again. Foggy decides it’s probably safer not to ask, and resolves to change the subject instead.

#i don't know what this is but it's done i tell youuu hwhat #it does not work that well for the prompt but what can you do #hws30days #homelywenchsociety #that's my writing tag! don't worry about it!#bakeoff au #the gbbo au #mattfoggy #daredevil #foggy nelson #matt murdock #karen page #writing challenge #series: how sweet it is

9 notes · View notes