Starlo should be Clover's dad
Why? Because ↓
1) Both dress into cowboy-themed attire to feel braver/more important than they are
2) Clover, instead of a regular kid, wants to feel like a hero; Star, instead of a regular farmer, also wants to feel like a hero
In reality, Star is not the tough guy he pretends to be. His optimism, protectiveness and caring nature make him a hero though.
In reality, Clover started off as a scared kid who became more confident and skilled thanks to Flowey's resets. Their heroism comes from their forgiving and selfless nature and the hidden courage they got the chance to explore.
2) Both acted childish during a dangerous situation
Clover came down the mountain with a toy gun so that it would bring them comfort/they'd feel more in control of the situation (if you remember, Frisk refused to play with Asriel's toys in UT, saying how they're "too old," and I assume Frisk and Clover are the same age).
Starlo brought a fake gun before confronting Clover in genocide, just to feel cool.
3) Both not only value justice, but base it on compassion
Clover's entire mission was to bring justice (avenge the kids), but along the way changed that mindset (in pacifist). Star says how him and his posse aren't bandits, tests Clover's sense of justice and morality with the trolley problem, and wants to give Ceroba a second chance despite her actions.
4) Starlo's got protective fatherly instincts
5) fatherly pride
8) a lot of monsters associate Clover with the Dunes/Wild East
9) oh and... Starlo referred to the Wild East as Clover's.... home. Twice.
he could have easily said 'Wild East'
... get the adoption papers.
107 notes
·
View notes
In discussions of TCW-Anakin vs. film-Anakin, I understand why some people see them as being incompatible or entirely different portrayals. But whatever problems I personally have with TCW are more to do with certain OOC dialogue lines that I don't agree with, or the overly-contrived situations that TCW tends to force him into just so an episode or scene can function as a 'meta-commentary' on his character or storyline. Believe me, I have issues with specific aspects of TCW's writing for Anakin, but the fact he's more outwardly 'suave' or 'dashing' than some people expected is not one of them. If anything, I see the 'Skyguy' persona as perfectly in keeping with Anakin as portrayed at the beginning of RotS, and I would argue that a great deal of the TCW characterisation is pulled directly from those Battle of Coruscant scenes. (TCW Anakin is also heavily inspired by Jake Lloyd's Little Ani in TPM, which, lest anyone forget, counts as FILM-Anakin.) The actual baseline 'persona' for both versions of the character isn't actually that different, and I'm tired of this idea that film-Anakin ISN’T supposed to be seen as ‘cool’ in-universe, just as much as I’m tired of the idea that TCW-Anakin ISN’T supposed to be viewed as a figure of pathos by the audience, either.
Imo, they’re both takes on the same character coming from different angles, set at different stages in his life, and portrayed through different mediums (animated series heavy on self-aware, darkly ironic humour in a more contemporary style intended to entertain and increase enjoyment of the Prequels-era and its characters vs. serious Greek tragedy with Shakespearean overtones made with old-Hollywood-style sensibilities as part of a mythic six-film saga). Just because TCW Ani doesn’t shed literal tears on-screen doesn’t mean he’s not emotional or emotionally vulnerable. As far as I remember, there's even a scene where Obi-Wan and Anakin discuss the fact that Anakin has trouble keeping his emotions hidden, which is the opposite of the 'macho' ideal the TCW version gets accused of being. And the amount of times we're constantly bashed over the head with dramatic irony about his fate as Vader in that series surely drives home the point that his trajectory is still a tragic one. (The way he cries out in agony in the Mortis arc, 'I will do such terrible things!' gets to me, every time.) Despite his powers and prowess, TCW Anakin is even shown as being physically vulnerable at times, as well. (See the Jedi Crash storyline which he spends mostly knocked-out unconscious, the nod to his mechanical arm as a liability in the Zillo Beast and Citadel arcs, and the scene of him futilely struggling like a wild beast before being captured with ropes in the Zyggerian arc, or the fact he gets captured and tortured by Dooku in 'Shadow Warrior'.) Fandom makes endless jokes about TCW Ani getting electrocuted every other episode, but then turns around and uses this to fuel the dismissive view of him as just some dumb himbo instead of understanding that this, too, is supposed to add to the character's pathos.
Likewise, fandom claims that film-Ani is 'uncool' and 'cries all the time', which is simply not true. Film-Anakin banters, jokes, laughs, makes daring jumps out of speeders, does bold piloting moves, is in fact an imposing duellist, and so on. Sure, his character is not supposed to be seen as aspirational (obviously!) and the most memorable and dramatic moments of the latter two Prequels films feature him in the midst of extremely intense emotions. But the oft-repeated view of him as 'uncool' completely ignores the fact that by the time that RotS starts, Anakin is also supposed to be a well-known and widely-admired charismatic general, aka the Hero With No Fear, who is viewed as almost singlehandedly saving the Republic. The audience may be privy to Anakin's inner turmoil, but in-story he is supposed to be seen as THE golden boy of the Jedi Order and the Republic. The RotS novelization frequently mentions that Anakin has 'dash', 'boldness', and a 'presence' 'like the Holo-Net hero that he is'. It literally says he's the best at what he does and he KNOWS it. He's not just supposed to be some sad, awkward idiot like the fandom thinks he is (rather, he's supposed to be shown as falling from a 'great height'). By the time of RotS, film Anakin has just as much swagger and self-confidence in his role as General Skywalker as he does in TCW. Just because that side of him is not the main focus of the film doesn't mean it's not supposed to be there.
93 notes
·
View notes
One super fascinating thing about Kristen's current arc in JY is how much it reflects real-world conversations I've been following about effort and consistency and reliability in relationships. Specifically, I've been reading about the resentment in (primarily het) relationships caused by uneven distribution of mental load and repetivite, constant labor between partners.
Follow me now-
I've seen a few posts on here from people who have ADHD highlighting how realistic it is to their experience that Kristen is SO GOOD for doing grand acts and big miracles, but struggles so deeply with "the boring stuff". Upkeeping social media for Cassandra/YES!, consistently holding meetings to maintain whatever following she does develop for her gods, even just bi-weekly essays. I can't speak to the ADHD experience myself. However, from my relationships with people who have it and a decent amount of the posts I see on this website, that is a consistent manifestation of the disorder.
Dovetailing from that is the very real conversation I've heard time and time again about people whose family/friends/partners refuse to help with the little tasks of keeping a home in order or a project on track, but will pull through for big events under the assumption that it balances things out. It's a conversation that occurs a lot in spaces of studying gender dynamics in relationships - i.e. In a dynamic where the wife is responsible for doing all of the cooking/cleaning/grocery shopping/organizing, the husband will do a singular, high-effort task or grand gesture, "I built you an armoire!", "I took the kids out for a full day so you could relax!" and reference that singular event or task as a counterbalance for smaller tasks they do not aid in (daily dishes, laundry, running errands). This can also take the form of one partner doing grand gestures on occasion, but not showing up in smaller ways throughout the relationship on a day-to-day level.
-Ex. Partner A indicates that would appreciate more frequent affection in the relationship, such as date nights, flowers, non-sexual physical contact, etc. Partner B responds by planning a fancy dinner, gratuitous non-sexual contact/complements, and buying a lavish gift - but they do not increase displays of affection in their daily lives. Partner A mentions that though they appreciate the gesture, it didn't solve the initial problem, and Partner B doesn't understand why all of the obvious effort they put in isn't enough. The cycle continues and resentment grows as both people feel like their needs aren't being met/their efforts aren't being appreciated.
(Sorry if that's an over-explanation, I'm trying to be clear lol)
I think a lot about two things Cassandra said to Kristen:
"You're unreliable." and "It's not fair." in the context of these dynamics.
I've seen a decent number of people talk about how mutually unfair bringing Cassandra back was for both her and Kristen. I have also seen a lot of very valid arguments about Kristen being a LITERAL CHILD who makes a lot of impulsive (re: bad) decisions because she cares so deeply about specific things. We've also seen that Kristen CAN be so good in the little ways (Giving Lydia Barkrock the Help action, supporting Tracker through her bullshit, trying to do okay in school to help Riz). For all intents and purposes, there is no actual lack of effort on Kristen's part - she very obviously cares deeply. However, those efforts are more occasional and case-by-case than something constant, like going out every day to spread the word of Cassandra or doing something boring like homework.
Cassandra, whose entire thing is that she's always there to offer support -"I'm there holding your hand in the dark"- knows these things as well. She knows what Kristen is capable of. The hurt, then, doesn't come from the fact that Kristen can't but because, for some reason, she won't.
In conversations about how certain partners... underperform in relationships, one theme that often arises is that of, "I know he can do it, he simply doesn't." Whether that be daily chores or consistent acts of affection, Partner A has seen Partner B be helpful or put effort into things that they find interesting. There is no question of capability - Partner B can do whatever it is Partner A requests. Partner A thus concludes that Partner B doesn't because they don't want to. -Ex. "He refuses to help me because he doesn't care about me/He doesn't think I'm worth the effort."
While I obviously cannot make a true 1-to-1 comparison between this particular manifestation of Executive Dysfunction in people with ADHD and lackluster partners in relationships (I am aware that it is deeply harmful to imply that being a "bad" partner is in any way correlated to any singular disability), this is a degree of parallelism to be found in the Kristen/Cassandra dynamic and the type of dysfunction I reference in above examples. There is the caveat that if you have ADHD and know you struggle with doing things that are smaller or more tedious/repetitive, you can work with the people in your life to accommodate that. Additionally, men (at least in the US) are traditionally socialized to undervalue the traditional female labor that is caretaking.
That said, in universe, Kristen doesn't seem to know she has ADHD and thus could not articulate her limitations to Cassandra - and even if she could, it might not have solved the problem ( though it could have kept Cassandra from getting so upset).
The entire reason I wrote all of this is that I've seen several responses to the most recent preview for FHJY wherein Kipperlily Copperkettle accuses Kristen of not caring (and, to be clear, Kristen fully does not care about the Presidency. That is very likely what KLCK was referring to, and she is not wrong in being upset if Kristen wins this thing she hasn't even bothered to campaign AT THE SCHOOL for). The trend in the responses has been people listing Kristen's miracles more than anything, and while those do prove that she does CARE about SOME THINGS, it doesn't address the fact that for most people care is displayed through active, consistent, reliable effort rather than big dramatic displays: While the shrimp jump was cool, it does nothing to prove that Kristen gives a shit about student government.
25 notes
·
View notes