thinking abt like. there's so much fiction out there that makes me feel bad! sometimes really deeply bad! and like, in many many cases i could present a whole argument abt how it makes me feel bad bc it's pressing on bruises inflicted by some systemic prejudice that has deeply wounded my psyche—and that argument would be true!—and still i don't want that fiction erased from existence, or modified to suit my taste, or anything else that enacts my will on it, rather than the artist's and the artist's alone; i don't even want the artist erasing it because my argument ultimately convinces them it's Bad! produce a revised edition of it, fine; stick an asterisk or other warning on it, fine; but i still want the original to be available somewhere, because i don't want to be responsible for blotting creation out of existence. even when it's a creation i hate, i don't think that should be my place (or indeed anyone's).
mind you, i absolutely do want to feel that i've got somewhere i can analyze/vent about fiction like that, and people who will take my analysis/venting both seriously and sympathetically;
and i want fiction to exist that doesn't make me feel bad;
and i definitely shouldn't have to put up with discussions around fiction in which fellow discussants further express a prejudice towards me, or justify it, or whatever;
but it just seems so obvious to me that a world where framing yr discomfort with a work of fiction in sufficiently sympathetic (victimized) terms leads to its deletion [not that i think this is what all leftists who complain abt offensive fiction are looking to have happen! but i do get the impression that at least some of them might be?] is a frightening world—
a world where, to choose a sufficiently sympathetic (victimized) example, authors who have themselves been harmed by prejudice become unable to explore the workings of that prejudice in their fiction, unless they're doing it in a way that's unambiguously, didactically condemnatory—isabel fall is the obvious example here, but i'm thinking also of all the women and transmasc authors who write fic that, quite frankly, eroticizes misogyny and abuse of power, and how sometimes i think stories like that are hot and sometimes i don't feel particularly strongly about them one way or the other and sometimes they leave me furious or fucked up or both! but like. even when i hate it, even when it offends me not as a matter of abstract principle or allyship but right in my own personal gut—i still do feel that people have to be allowed to write, and to publish, fiction that strikes me personally as being in bad taste!
because the minute you let anyone's taste dictate what's allowable to express, even if it's leftist taste, you're going down a bad road; it's like saying monarchy can be a good system as long as the monarch is a good person. no! because (a) no system that relies on good actors to be good is a good system; and also because (b) no one who's happy to have power over others is actually a good person! [that's an awfully strong statement and i'm open to the idea that it may have some asterisks, but like. as a general rule: cincinnatus or bust.]
and similarly i feel like. if you personally want not just to critique other people's fiction—valid and good and i do it all the time—but to crush it out of existence because it expresses an ideology you may not (i may not!) like? i don't trust you. i think you're trying to substitute pain for principles, and like. i have huge sympathy for pain! i live with a lot of my own! but pain doesn't actually, in itself, necessarily constitute good moral guidance—it can lead you towards valuable sensitivity that helps people we should care about, but it can also lead you towards impatient reactivity that harms people we should care about; and ultimately it's thinking abt our pain, imo, not the pain itself, that steers us towards the former outcome and away from the latter.
9 notes
·
View notes
What is holding you back?
the inability to see the good in yourself, therefore relying on others to provide it for you.
your heart is so full for the people you love. it's sweet, but you've now forgotten how to care for yourself. you only seem to see great things in the people around you. they're wonderful, and you... you don't like what you're seeing in yourself, right? you need to be reminded that you're enough. that you're talented. that you're worthy. that's partly the reason why you reach out so much. you need to hear it from the lips of someone "better" than you. but afterwards, it makes you feel even more guilty and upset. you feel like your actions are self absorbed. you're aiming for perfection because you see it in others. you're failing to see the flaws in everyone else. i promise, you're no monster. i could say this again and again, but will you believe me when i say you need to find it out for yourself?
Tagged: Stole it!
Tagging: @ofpowr @theircurse @boundcd @cursedlane @longerhuman @giftandguile @f4ilure @mckiingbiird
8 notes
·
View notes
Big ramble ahead but, okay. It kind of bothers me when people say Cinderpelt was forced to become a medicine cat. That language would seem to imply that she was forbidden from becoming a warrior, when that just... wasn't the situation.
After breaking her leg, she couldn’t walk properly. Travel became slow and exhausting for her, and as a result, everyone was worried that she couldn’t be a warrior. Up until this point in her life, becoming a warrior was the path basically everyone took, and if she couldn’t physically handle warrior duties, she feared that she was useless. But Yellowfang appreciated her company in the medicine den. She started giving her tasks to help her feel useful, and Cinderpelt began to regain some of her self esteem. After she had been helping out in the medicine den — not as an apprentice, but as a friend — for some time, Yellowfang made it clear how valuable she was as an assistant. When she eventually offered to take her on as an apprentice, Cinderpelt was overjoyed. She loved the crabby old cat and the work she did for her, and she was very dedicated to both.
I think the idea that her life was a tragedy because she switched to medicine cat training comes not from the first arc where her story actually takes place, but from Power of Three. When you’re years removed from a narrative, it’s very easy to think back on it and recontextualize it to fit into your own mindset. And that’s exactly what Power of Three did to her. In that arc, we do have a disabled protagonist forced to become a medicine cat (which is an even more complex topic), and Cinderpelt’s reincarnation of sorts as Cinderheart for the purpose of living the life she was supposedly meant to have. It’s... a bit of a tricky issue, because the notion that her life was a waste because of her disability is... troubling, to say the least. And the interpretation that her life was a waste because she didn’t cling stubbornly to the warrior path isn’t much better.
The reason this bothers me is because I feel, based on the books she's actually alive in, that she lived a full life (or would have, had she not died young). Cinderpelt wanted to be a warrior, yes. Her entire culture glorifies being a warrior more than anything. After her injury, she had to give up on that dream and pick up another. And she was a fantastic medicine cat! Before she was even officially made Yellowfang’s apprentice, she was praised for her enthusiasm, good memory, efficiency, and trustworthiness. It’s pointed out that she’s a quick learner and good with patients, and we see this regularly too. She was very determined, always going out of her way to do the right thing, even when she wasn’t allowed to. And this, combined with her medicinal skills, allowed her to touch so many lives. Cinderpelt didn’t accomplish the things she planned for when she was little, but her potential was not lost.
I’m not claiming that Warriors isn’t ableist at times. But I notice a tendency for folks to reframe every disabled character’s life as a sad tale of someone being forced to give up their dreams and live a worse life because no one believed in them — even when that isn’t really the case. Disability is a very complicated and sensitive subject that needs to be written with more care than it often is. But for a character to face limitations due to their disability, that doesn’t necessarily mean it’s bad writing and/or the abled characters around them are terrible. For a character to lose something as big as their dream, their goals, their ability to keep up with their peers... I don’t believe that alone is unrealistic or cruel. What matters far more for me in a story is how the disabled character handles their limitations and where they go from there. Please understand, also, that sometimes handling limitations is not the same as overcoming them. Not everything can be overcome. What’s important is what you do with what you have.
I may not have a twisted leg, but I do have a neurological disorder that has impacted every area of my life at one point or another. My spasms have been severe enough to injure me many times, and for years I couldn’t learn to drive because I was too afraid (and often rightly so) that it would be unsafe with my condition. I eventually had to give up on my education and dream job because of my failing health in general. For a long while, I was afraid I could never amount to anything because I couldn’t do any of the things I’d been aiming for since childhood. But with time, my situation has changed. I aimed for more realistic goals, bearing in mind that my disorder is made far worse by stress and exhaustion. My symptoms are less severe these days because I’m no longer stressing myself out trying to force my way through a career that my disability is simply not compatible with. Things aren’t perfect. But I’m figuring out a better way to proceed.
I think you get the picture. What I’m trying to say, and what Cinderpelt’s story means to me... is that having to give up on something doesn’t mean you’ve wasted your life, it doesn’t mean that you’re worth any less, and it certainly doesn’t mean you’ve been defeated. When bad things happen, you may not be able to return to how life was before. And maybe that’s okay.
21 notes
·
View notes
Watching Looney Tunes on HBO Max, and never realized just how fun his Porky and Daffies can be. Any shorts of his that you’re a fan of in particular?
OH GEEZ not sure who exactly you’re referring to here so i hope you don’t mind me being very general :’) I REALLY DO LIKE 99% OF PORKY AND DAFFY SHORTS i’m super biased but there’s like… only two or three i can think of that i DON’T like and it’s either because it���s racist or has made-in-the-mid-60s disease
SOME OF MY FAVORITES THOUGH… i’m particularly fond of Baby Bottleneck, Porky Pig’s Feat, Daffy Doodles, My Favorite Duck, Tom Turk and Daffy, You Ought to Be in Pictures, Yankee Doodle Daffy, Porky’s Last Stand, Daffy Duck Slept Here, Riff Raffy Daffy, Boobs in the Woods, Duck Soup to Nuts, Fool Coverage… IT REALLY IS HARD TO NARROW THEM DOWN. i feel they’re so versatile and every director has such a unique spin on the dynamic and there are so many WAYS in which the dynamic can be spun but is still anchored, and that versatility is WHY i like their cartoons so much.
guess it really depends on what sort of dynamic YOU prefer for them! Bob McKimson has quite a fun repertoire of more antagonistic cartoons towards each other, Chuck Jones’ dynamic duo interpretation of the ‘50s is nice, Friz Freleng strikes a great balance with his antagonistic/befuddled Porky and heckler/sophisticate Daffy… Bob Clampett’s Baby Bottleneck is my personal favorite team-up of the two because i think it strikes a really effective balance between the dynamic duo partnership and antagonistic heckling. likewise, Porky Pig’s Feat i think is one of the best cartoons put out by the studio and is easily one of Porky and Daffy’s best as a whole
their relationship as a whole has so many nuances and different interpretations that it’s hard to pin down as just “this director directs them THIS way and this way only”, but there are very few Porky and Daffy shorts that i’d tell people NOT to watch
15 notes
·
View notes