#dmbj: all | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

lunanoc · 5 months

Text

first tentative meta post about wu xie my beloved, more specifically about his characterization in his less than stellar moments, sparked by a discussion with @thelaithlyworm about whether or not the lost tomb 2.5 is in character for wu xie according to the books. i figured i'd take the rest of my thoughts to a separate post since our exchange was clogging up poor OP’s replies, and because i feel like a difference in opinion like this is worth being made public if only so people can get both sides of a rare discussion about the books and reach their own conclusions, so for those who are interested here’s a link to the original post where this discussion takes place in the replies if you'd like the full context. sorry in advance for how long this will likely be, and i hope there's no problem with me directly tackling some of the arguments that were made in favor of lost tomb 2.5 being an accurate adaptation of book wu xie's characterization, which is a take i strongly disagree with

i think much of the problem in the discussion simply lies in the fact that we seem to have fundamentally different interpretations of wu xie’s character in the books, because as i see it, none of the insistences that were quoted prove that wu xie has ever acted the way he does in 2.5 in the books—if anything, they disprove it. the quote from ch. 92 of sand sea that was brought up goes as follows:

this is where i believe the problem of different interpretations is at play, and to be fair some of it is ambiguous so there is some leeway, but i read this recollection very differently from how @thelaithlyworm seems to. as i see it, wu xie is recalling a time where pangzi, understandably concerned about his friend because he sees the toll the sha hai plan is taking on wu xie, and the lengths he’s having to go to in order to set it in motion, tells him it’s not too late to stop and turn back. to which wu xie replies that even if he had decided to stop and live his life blissfully unaware of the extent of the wangs' reach and their machinations, things would have caught up to him eventually given they’d infiltrated the jiumen to the extent they had.

“and at that time you’ll have already left me one by one, leaving me to foolishly face those fists” is the most ambiguous as to what exactly it's referring to, but i personally see it as referencing either the fact wu xie and his friends would have by then eventually drifted apart or they'd have stopped giving him their support should he have decided to ignore the truth and sit around doing nothing, or more sinisterly, would have potentially all been replaced by then if there hadn't been a plan in motion. it's likely a little bit of both. to which pangzi replies that he’s right, conceding and agreeing that wu xie never truly had a choice about his involvement to begin with, which is more or less the entire point of sand sea and the wider narrative of the main story.

no part of this conversation is reminiscent of the open conflict between them in 2.5 in that neither of them here are angry, and neither of them are even aggressive or antagonistic towards each other or in general. this is quite a calm if resigned conversation wu xie is recalling that also fits the overall cynical tone of the chapter itself, and wu xie’s certainly not acting out and pushing his friends away in a bid to deal with everything himself. if anything the entire point of sand sea is to show that despite each character acting independently, the sha hai plan only succeeded because they worked together and not alone, and that wu xie needed his support system to create an invisible yet tangilble network that could take down the wangs. so no part of this particular passage reads as though pangzi is saying he ever considered bailing on wu xie because of his behavior, and even if that were the case, it would still be referring to a hypothetical situation and not their current one.

wang meng's behavior in ten years later is also not the greatest example to use as an argument to prove 2.5 wu xie’s characterization is present in the books, mostly because it's actually wang meng himself who's more so the one acting like that than wu xie himself. wang meng, in his concern for wu xie, tries to guilt trip him into letting go of his obsession with xiaoge, and he is the one who instigates a conflict with wu xie that culminates in him staging xiaoge's "death" as a last ditch effort once spewing bottled up vitriol at wu xie and threatening to take over wushanju don't work.

it's however misguided at best given that not only did all of wu xie's close friends who participated in the sha hai plan agree to do so willingly (i’m of course not talking about li cu and co among others who very much did not consent) and so accusing wu xie of having coerced them takes away from their own agency, but the sha hai plan was a necessity beyond freeing xiaoge, which is something wang meng fails to understand. wang meng makes the mistake many people in the fandom do of pinning wu xie’s determination to see that plan through solely on his desire to free xiaoge, and of course that’s an important part of it, but the narrative makes a point of building up over the course of the main books and tibetan sea flower that wu xie’s entire family was at stake as well, and had been for several generations, so on a personal level it went beyond xiaoge alone. but again, whatever truth there is to wang meng’s words (which is an interesting but entirely different topic) still doesn’t make it true that wu xie was either actively petty or vitriolic towards his friends as a way to vent his own frustrations.

several moments in which wu xie objectively does terrible things or acts horribly were listed as a way of justifying that his behavior in 2.5 is in character and in line with how he acts in the books. and of course these moments do happen, and it's very true in sand sea especially that wu xie does terrible things (it's part of what makes him such an interesting character). but again, this argument feels somewhat in bad faith in that it conflates all negative behavior and traits together regardless of what specific shape those negative behaviors take in order to justify that his portrayal in 2.5 is faithful to the books simply because he displays negative behavior in that adaptation, completely disregarding that his less than stellar actions and emotions aren't expressed in the same ways in the books and in 2.5. my dislike of wu xie in 2.5 doesn't stem from him doing unlikeable things, otherwise i wouldn't like wu xie as a character in general. wu xie absolutely does do a lot of terrible things in sand sea especially, but the inherent problem with 2.5 is that none of the things he does or the way he acts in the books ever lines up with the specific way he acts in 2.5.

in the books, even before sand sea, yes wu xie is manipulative (re: threatening bodily harm to himself to force wu erbai into sharing information with him), yes he cut up bodies and sent them to li cu among other extremely morally questionable things, yes he kidnapped li cu and made him go through literal hell, and likely did much the same to other people before him (hence the seventeen scars on his arm). he has and continues to have even in recent book canon re: yucun biji the ability and will to inflict permanent psychic damage on people he deems to be deserving of it or a threat. he’s by no means perfect or even overly kind, and if someone were to say that a number of the earlier drama adaptations especially soften his character and make him much more wide-eyed and innocent than he actually is in the books, i would absolutely agree with them. i would also agree if someone said that gap in characterization is why some people don’t like him much in the sand sea drama. but the fact is for all the negative traits and behavior he displays at varying points in the books, none of them are ever expressed in the very specific way they are in 2.5.

@thelaithlyworm rightfully mentions wu xie's ptsd as justification for much of his more "toxic" reactions to things, and his ptsd is incredibly important in understanding how wu xie works as a character and what his experiences have forged him into, to the point it's a topic that deserves its own in-depth post. but saying we have different definitions of what ptsd is is both accurate to the complex nature of ptsd, and a bit disingenious because of the complex nature of ptsd, because the emotional dysregulation and impaired decision-making it entails won’t necessarily manifest in the same ways in different people.

in 2.5 wu xie, ptsd manifests in the form of vitriol and anger he directs at pretty much everyone in his immediate vicinity, more especially pangzi, because it has no other outlet in that situation than outwards. and i’m not saying ptsd expressing itself like that never happens, because it very much does. what i'm saying is that book wu xie's ptsd, while very real, doesn't manifest in the way it does in 2.5 wu xie.

in book wu xie, ptsd manifests in much more internalized ways, and so he’s far more prone to directing the anger and pent-up emotions inwards through self-harm, both mental and physical (i.e. the scars on his arm, his persistent self-hatred, etc.), and the emotional dysregulation very often comes not in the form of chaotically expressed emotions, but rather abnormal lack of them, as arguably wu xie's bad coping mechanism is emotional dissociation, and when the emotions are truly too strong to be distanced from, they come out in the form of panic attacks he often doesn’t recognize as such (i.e. when he finds xiaoge and believes he’s dead in book 8, or when he has flashbacks on their way to motuo in yucun traveling notes) or of general breakdowns (i.e. wu xie stays numb once xiaoge disappears behind the gate up until he starts crying in the street once he returns to hangzhou).

it’s incredibly rare that wu xie’s trauma directs itself outwards towards his loved ones, and while he might do so in his head quite frequently (which we the readers see since most of the books are from wu xie's point of view), it's rare he actually externalizes it, and since his comments can only lead to conflict if they're extrernalized, there's rarely ever genuine conflict between him and his friends. one of the only times it happens with pangzi specifically is in tibetan sea flower were he makes an honestly cruel dig at pangzi about yuncai because pangzi’s withheld information about xiaoge from him:

but even this scene, which is the closest to anything that's portrayed in 2.5 between them, plays out differently, not only because wu xie knows very well he’s going too far, his mention of yuncai isn't solely an outlet for his anger. he’s very consciously trying to bait pangzi into telling him what he knows, and so aims at where he knows will hurt most. it's targeted and mean because it's meant to be, but it's also not a gratuitious outlet either unlike his comments are more often than not in 2.5. it's manipulation, and he's certainly not trying to push pangzi away, nor is it driving a wedge between them despite how uncalled for his comment it. and more importantly, pangzi once again proves himself to be the most emotionally stable of the iron triangle by not stooping to that level or making light of the conversation. he knows perfectly well what wu xie is doing, so any conflict is diffused before it can even take root, and stays an isolated incident, whereas in 2.5, conflict is an underlying theme.

ironically there are more examples of this type directed at xiaoge, but even those don't showcase the same blind anger or gratuitous meanness that 2.5 wu xie consistently displays, and it's that specifically that's out of character. while wu xie vents his frustrations at xiaoge in book 4 over being kept in the dark, he's more serious about it than angry, and very quickly realizes his foot-in-mouth comment and backtracks accordingly:

he's at his most openly angry with xiaoge at the end of book 8 when xiaoge leaves them all in banai, and even goes as far as trying to have xiaoge detained by qiu dekao in a last ditch effort to force him to stay (which in itself is the real manifestation of him not being able to control his emotions correctly and reason going out the window where xiaoge is concerned, and it only ever really happens in relation to xiaoge, but that's also a topic for another post):

but again, while he's visibly angry and upset, and is looking for support from others around him to validate his upset at xiaoge leaving, he never actually spews any vitriol at xiaoge himself despite his anger being obvious, never actually calls him names outside of his own head despite the rare quality of his anger, never tries to instigate conflict for the sake of venting his overflowing emotions, nor does he ultimately stop xiaoge from leaving. even later as he follows xiaoge up changbai mountain, his desperation eventually turns into resignation and acceptance, not venting.

this post is way too long, but my entire point here as it has been from the start of this discussion is that while wu xie in the books does get angry, he does have ptsd, it does manifest in the ugliest ways and he's certainly not an angel, his anger in general never veers into extended open conflict or gratuitous vitriol thrown at his loved ones as a misguided form of venting his own emotions like it does throughout the vast majority of lost tomb 2.5, just like a number of the conflicts he gets into with other characters stem from out of character reactions from those characters to begin with (i.e. xiao hua absolutely losing it over wu xie hiding wu sanxing's betrayal of xie lianhuan in 2.5 vs. this information being very casually received in book 7). and that's where my point of contention with that adaptation lies.

i feel as though this is a case of agreeing to disagree as far as interpretation of wu xie's character goes, and that's absolutely fine, but in the same way that it's alright to dislike things simply because, it's equally as alright to like things for the same reasons. it's fine to like lost tomb 2.5, and my opinion of it is purely my own, but liking it doesn't necessarily have to be rooted in whether it's adapting the books correctly, even if it can be.

my dislike of 2.5 stems from how i consider it to be out of character by comparison to the books, and my entire point here has been to explain that different interpretations of any particular source material can exist, and therefore yes, it's entirely possible to view 2.5 wu xie as out of character, just as it's entirely possible to dislike that adaptation for the same reason. and i'm far from the only person to have this interpretation. so no, my dislike of 2.5 doesn't come from not liking it when wu xie’s doing unlikeable things, or else i wouldn't like wu xie as a character, nor is it because i don’t understand what ptsd is given the particular ways in which it can manifest from one specific person to another

#i just have strong opinions about this sorry if it's coming off strong #and i'm perfectly willing to debate with quotes etc #but lbr there's a reason lost tomb 2.5 is more or less unanimously the most disliked adaptation across the board #both in the western fandom and chinese fandom #though tbf the chinese fandom doesn't tend to like the dramas all that much in general #which is valid sometimes tbh given some of the takes i've seen about dmbj as a whole from people who refuse to touch the books but well #still #first wu xie meta #exciting #dmbj #dmbj meta #wu xie #dmbj novels #lost tomb 2.5

38 notes · View notes