i think ,,,,,, even outside of being a betty enthusiast . adventure time would have managed to be 10x better if there were more betty-centered episodes ,,

Love dies in the city; or the romanticism v. modernism conflict on folklore

In my humble opinion, Taylor Swift’s 2020 album folklore is about the conflict between romanticism and modernism. It sets up the natural as a place of freedom and unrestrained love, contrasting this with the city (presumably New York) as a place of hiding and secrecy that ultimately dooms the integral relationship. In the end, Swift expresses her deepest desires to return to the natural world, to restart the timeline that began with her move to New York, something I will elaborate on when discussing “hoax” and “the lakes.” This storyline is the crux of the album, and the motif I’ve used to classify its songs into six distinct sections, which follow a vague plot that is not represented in the track list order.

the natural (seven, invisible string, betty) I would argue that “seven” represents the heart of folklore, containing what seems to be the album’s mission statement (“passed down like folk songs / our love lasts so long”) and describing the earliest point in Swift’s timeline. This song is the one most directly linked to nature, describing a childhood friendship that takes place in the woods. One lyric, “before I learned civility / I used to scream ferociously / any time I wanted,” implies that Swift found freedom in nature, when her secrets were mere promises to friends instead of the pain she had since hinged her life on. In addition, this song is pure romanticism. The interest in childhood is implied, we can reasonably assume both main characters to be seven years old. To support this, the song states “although I can’t recall your face, I still got love for you,” implying that much time has passed since the events. There is awe of nature (the “beautiful things” are the creek and the trees), emphasis on the importance of imagination (your dad is mad because the house is haunted), and a celebration of the individual (“just like a folk song, our love will be passed on,” where the love is the individual she speaks of). This is the dream that Swift wants to return to, and yet her characters already face conflict (the keeping of secrets, hiding in the closet, an angry father). She romanticizes her past into something she can escape into, creating a sort of mythos around an upset childhood.

Our next nature-intensive song is “invisible string.” She again makes a callback to childhood, citing a park where she used to read in Nashville. It would not be incorrect to categorize this as a love song, perhaps the most lighthearted one on the album. Swift emphasizes time and fate, both recurring themes in her discography. Like “seven,” “invisible string” draws attention to nature as a freeing and healing space, which sets the stage for her romance. Lines such as “gold were the leaves when I showed you around Centennial Park” draw attention to the ‘invisible’ connection the song depicts. In the bridge, she notes that there was “a string that pulled me / out of all the wrong arms, right into that dive bar,” implying a protection from the dangers of interpersonal conflict. Throughout the verses, mentions of any city stay tangential (“your first trip to LA… an American singer”) while the focus lies on her freedom. It is a dreamlike song, which implies that the city can be glimpsed but not detrimental, and showcases an utter belief in things working out. 

It is, then, rather ironic that the final song with unique ties to the environment highlights an unanswered apology after the foundations of romance have been shocked. “betty” is ostensibly narrated by a teenager, James, who plans to make up for her mistake in a garden. This perspective ties into the album’s greater focus on time, in this instance equating innocence (“I don’t know anything”) with a natural setting (the garden, which is explicitly removed from society). At first, James wonders if Betty will allow an apology, but wants it to happen without anyone watching (“if I showed up at your party… would you lead me to the garden”). She then casts this hope aside, dreaming about being able to broadcast her love to the world without fear of judgement (“will you kiss me on the porch in front of all your stupid friends”). It is also, then, relevant that the relationship is ruined when scrutinized (“rumours from Inez”). When considering how themes of secrecy and hiding come into the picture once the narrative travels to the city, it is interesting to look at how the hope of an public relationship prevails here. But in the end, James still dreams of going back to any relationship with Betty, no matter how private (“kissing in my car again”). Of course, Taylor Swift herself is James, and James is Swift, so we know that the secrecy dooms the relationship in the end.

the romance (august, illicit affairs) “august” describes a doomed relationship, perhaps meant to be the affair James has that prompts her apology to Betty. However, the story of a love that was never built to last has been referenced multiple times in Swift’s discography (“Wildest Dreams” and “Getaway Car”) and even expressly linked to summer on 2019’s “Cruel Summer.” These songs show distinct lyrical similarities to “august.” Hence, I feel comfortable describing this song in the context of those, rather than within the storyline of Swift’s fictitious love triangle. (Which is flimsy as it stands, but that’s for another analysis.) While there is no set location, this song describes one kind of coming-of-age (“whispers of are you sure”) and delves into the hope associated with a short-lived romance. Here, there is no secrecy to speak of, but a fear of what will come when a return to society comes (“will you call when you’re back at school”). My contrast for this song is saying it is “Cruel Summer” without the ‘happy’ ending. There is a privacy here (“meet me behind the mall”) but it is the instability of the romance that dooms it (“you weren’t mine to lose”). “august” is a time capsule, a reflection on the love that always would’ve ended regardless of the locale.

The next song, “illicit affairs,” is another one that ‘visits’ the city (for lack of a better term) but places the primary conflict in a largely undetermined setting. In fact, there seems to be a rejection of the urban (“take the road less traveled by”). In the sorting of tracks as they relate to different sub-themes, “illicit affairs” is the first song that says, without preamble, that secrecy is the death of love. While the word ‘illicit’ simply means forbidden, the verses describe sneaking around in a way that has been attributed to cheating since album release. There is virtually no acknowledgement of another character outside of the two lovers, save for the ‘him’ referenced in the perfume line. But it is not this person that the narrator seeks to hide from, it seems to be almost everyone. It could be construed as a song about adultery, but taken in the context of the rest of the album it reads as a lament for having to hide a relationship (most likely a romantic one between two women, but this is extrapolation).

the city (the last great american dynasty, mirrorball, mad woman) Now we approach the slew of songs that deal with the actual location of the city. The first song is “the last great american dynasty,” which seems the most removed from Taylor’s viewpoint and yet involves her directly (“and then it was bought by me”). We get an actual move to the ‘city’ (“Rebekah rode up on the afternoon train”) which is reminiscent of Swift’s own move to New York in 2014. Rebekah is immediately disliked by the people around her, blamed for her husband’s death to the extent where she flies in “bitch pack friends.” (1) Keeping with the theme of folklore’s similarity to a time capsule, one could see this song as Swift retelling her own purchase of Holiday House (and by extension much of the events from 2014/2015) through the lens of someone else’s life. Indeed, part of this theory is directly corroborated by the song through the lines “then it was bought by me” and “I had a marvellous time ruining everything.” In relation to the conflict between secrecy and survival of love, “the last great american dynasty” does not offer much insight. However, it effectively sets the scene for songs to come.

(1): I don’t know anything about Rebekah Harkness’ life, this is just how I interpreted the song. 

After the initial move, “mirrorball” establishes the new dynamic between the lovers. In turn, it introduces the performative nature of romance in the city (which is referred to and combatted with the line “all these people think love’s for show / but I would die for you in secret” from “peace”). Swift expresses interest in a lover who is “not like the regulars,” who wants more than to watch her turmoil. Still, this song finds her drawn into the nature of performing, consistently showcasing her tragedy to let others see themselves to the extent where she cannot even let her guard down when “no one is around.” Even after the circus has been called off, she seems to have entirely integrated with the role of the mirrorball. This provides some introspection on her viewpoint: digging into insecurities under the viewpoint of desperately trying to save a sinking ship. Almost as a counterpart to “seven,” the lyrics to “mirrorball” show some characteristics of modernism. Individualism is represented through the focus on the person who is the mirrorball, while unrelated characters do not warrant much elaboration. In terms of formalism and experimentation, the format and structure of the song deviate from Swift’s usual manner. The concept of a person being a mirrorball (shown in the music video as a disco ball) is both a symbol and verges into the absurd. All the imagery in this track is based in large crowds; featuring a disco, a circus, and masquerade revelers. It both establishes the setting where love dies and assures that the relationship will end (“the end is near”). 

“mad woman” is the final song which establishes setting more than storyline. It proves the city as a angry and dangerous place, one that is not sympathetic to “people like” Swift. We find her contemplating revenge on someone who has done her a great wrong, which is less attached to the general storyline but serves to depict the setting as actively hostile and worthy of contempt. When compared with other tracks, certain lyrics imply that the narrator is hell-bent on getting the last word (“they say move on but you know I won’t” / “you know I left a part of me back in New York”). There isn’t much else notable about this song in terms of what we are talking about, but it does frame several absurdist tendencies in the context of a destructive setting. 

the death (cardigan, exile, my tears ricochet, epiphany)  In “cardigan,” Swift reminisces on a long-past relationship, which has been interpreted to be James and Betty’s teenage melodrama. This is the first of many breakup songs, which idolize what has passed and mourn the loss. We observe many signs of the city (“chasing shadows in the grocery line”) and individualism (“I knew everything when I was young”). As referenced in “betty,” the cardigan becomes a symbol for the relationship at large. Moreso, the idea that the relationship was cursed to end as it begun is elaborated on here (“I knew you tried to change the ending”) even if it is not ascribed to secrecy yet. In reflecting on Swift’s past work, we see many signs of her being accustomed to this thought (“I can see the end as it begins” from Wildest Dreams and “I knew (...) we were cursed” from Getaway Car), but “cardigan” comes across with deeper pain regarding the whole affair. In tying different lyrics together (“back when I was living for the hope of it all” from “august” and “I hope I never lose you” from Cornelia Street), we begin to paint a picture of the true narrative behind the love triangle. Swift knew her greatest love would end—desperately hoped it wouldn’t, prayed they could ‘get away with it’—and finally channels her anger and sorrow into this retrospective. She almost accepts it: love dies in the city.

Another reflection on a past relationship is folklore’s only duet; “exile.” This song discusses an inability to communicate, the concept of determined endings (“I think I’ve seen this film before, and I didn’t like the ending”), and plenty of ‘hiding in the city’ imagery. This sees one narrator (Swift) faking a relationship (“just your understudy”) to hide her true lover (in this context, Iver). Both agree on various facets that caused fallout (“didn't even hear me out... never learned to read your mind… couldn’t turn things around”) until the final disagreement (“you never gave a warning sign / I gave so many signs”). So while the song is fundamentally about a miscommunication, it is evident that much of the misunderstanding comes from ways of signalling the secret relationship. Presence of the city is acknowledged through lyrics such as “I’m leaving out the side door,” “out here in the hall,” implying that the narrators share an apartment. Nature also gets a brief mention here (“breaking branches”), but this usage explains that the freedom of the narrators is fading, just like their connection to the natural. 

Most do not connect “my tears ricochet” to romantic fallout, but there is no denying that the song hinges around prominent death metaphors. Many metaphors used imply that the narrator has broken up with their lover, but still haunts the hope of what could’ve been. In the line “we gather stones, some to throw, some to make a diamond ring,” a connection to marriage is implied, divorcing the meaning from the loss of Swift’s masters. A crowd of people is repeatedly referenced (the ones in a sunlit room, for instance) and the lover must “save face” in front of them. This external pressure contributes to the greater theme of death of love in the city, which Swift equates to her own death. She describes herself as a recalcitrant ghost (“you know I didn’t want to have to haunt you”) but one her lover must have around (“when you can’t sleep at night, you hear my stolen lullabies”). This song is another one that recognizes Taylor Swift the writer within the lyrics; within this interpretation the “stolen lullabies” are the songs that the ex-lover inspired, work she can no longer look proudly on. While no explicit connections to the city are formed, it is obvious that some external pressure resulted in a damning betrayal, which was painful enough to describe as death. 

The final song in this death theme is “epiphany,” which does not discuss the romantic timeline at all. Instead, “epiphany” is the culmination of two sub-motifs on folklore: water and war. In nature, water gains a passing mention in “seven,” but does not truly become relevant in this organization until “the last great american dynasty.” In “epiphany,” the water reference is “crawling up the beaches now,” which serves to distance it from the overall storyline. The song also deals with the war motif (evident in most of the songs, but “ease your rifle” is very literal) and contrasts soldiers at war to doctors during the pandemic. All of this builds on this section’s burgeoning theme of death. It fits in with the album theme, but does not display obvious modernist or romanticist hallmarks.

the chance (the 1, this is me trying, peace) Opening the album is “the 1,” a frequently disliked song but a very telling one. It is similar to “cardigan” in that it reminisces on a past relationship, but the narrator feigns contentment with her current situation. If all of folklore can be considered a time capsule, “the 1” perhaps describes the headspace of the narrator before they begin reminiscing: convinced they are alright, but not holding up very well. This song involves much city imagery (“I hit the Sunday matinee,” “I thought I saw you at the bus stop”) and deals with the aftermath of many events in the album. It is interesting that this song was one of the last written, as one can imagine the narrator went directly from “it would’ve been fun” to “don’t want no other shade of blue but you” (as described in hoax). The love has died here; but there’s a desperate hope to return (“if one thing had been different, would everything be different”). 

Much like “betty,” “this is me trying” is another last-ditch attempt to save a failed relationship. Both songs find Swift in a doorway, ready to apologize, but “this is me trying” bears the weight of experience and less expectation that they will have a second chance. The increased maturity finds acknowledgement of faults without excuse (“my words shoot to kill when I’m mad / I have a lot of regrets about that”) and an attempt to come to terms with the death of the relationship despite pain. This, of course, breaks apart in the bridge (“all I want is you”) but, as Swift consoles herself, at least she’s trying. Setting-wise, this seems to be in a smaller locale (“the one screen in my town”) which calls to mind the “the only thing we share is this small town” from “Death By A Thousand Cuts.” There is also what appears to be a bar (“pouring my heart out to a stranger / but I didn’t pour the whiskey”) and an influx of people (“it’s hard to be at a party when I feel like an open wound”). It is not necessarily the city, but rather a recovery period that does not go well. 

If the painful instruction of “illicit affairs” acts as a foil to 2014’s “How You Get The Girl,” then the anxiety of “peace” complements 2017’s “Delicate.” While “Delicate” expresses the sufferance of an early, undefined relationship (“is it cool that I said all that”), “peace” begs the lover to reconsider the end one last time. As “hoax” makes undoubtedly clear, it wasn’t enough. We see the dangers of outside influence (“I’d sit with you in the trenches”) and the strength of the romance (“the silence that only comes when two people understand each other”). It is a final plea for someone to stay, a list of the success and a fatal acknowledgement of the worst. There is a declaration that sums up much of the album: “all these people think love’s for show / but I would die for you in secret.” As we’ve seen from other songs, it is the secrecy and the hiding that has doomed them. Swift sees this, she briefly suggests a return to the free and safe woods (“give you my wild”) but is ultimately stuck on the question of peace, which she wishes she could give her partner. 

the return (hoax, the lakes) The original album closer, “hoax,” finds Swift leaving a part of herself in the destructive city that has become home. She makes an attempt to return to her home, only to find that it is not the way she’s left it (“my barren land”). With her lover, she has gone through a journey that changed her too much to return to innocence (“I can go anywhere I want, just not home” from “my tears ricochet” contrasted with “you’re not my homeland anymore” from “exile,” where the lover becomes the homeland). She turns to a bleak setting, using sparse lyricism and simple constructs to describe her pain and betrayal. While Lover highlights themes of likening one’s love to a religion, the Swift we see on “hoax” has given up on any sort of healing coming from her romance. All she acknowledges is that the circumstances of her love have “broken her down” and “frozen the ground” (from which she hopes a “red rose” will emerge in “the lakes”). 

In “the lakes,” Swift tries to move forward but still sets her sights on the natural world, citing a deep desire to escape the scrutiny that destroyed her romance completely. This is a call to action for her former lover, a final request for shared freedom that reminds the listener of the lyric “would you run away with me?” from 2017’s “Call It What You Want.” Swift continues to call on aspects of romanticism she’s referenced on reputation and Lover to make her point. It then tracks that she has been inspired by this muse all along, and is finally asking for a return; both to the early romanticism her albums are built on and to her lover’s “homeland.” Her desire for a new home is evident, her conviction that her former lover should join her too great to be overcome.

The response of the muse to this, of course, is unclear. 

M, AD, AF, AK!

Nice choices, I’m going to convert them into number, and then let’s go!

13/M. Has a ship ever broken your heart?

Constantly.  There’s a roughly 50% chance that, in a show where at least one person dies, one or both members of my ship will die.  It just...it just KEEPS HAPPENING, my god.  But a special shout out to Chiaki/Makoto from The Girl Who Leapt Through Time for ripping my heart out and stomping on it even though they both live.  Like my HEART, how DARE they.

30/AD. Name a couple of fandoms in which you have no ships.

I generally only actively seek out fandom stuff when I have a ship because searching for gen stuff is pretty futile, but it happens occasionally.  Newsies is the only one I can think of off the top of my head; I just want to read about Spot Conlon without shipping him with anyone (canon character or OC, it doesn’t matter), but that, like, never happens.  It did happen once though, in the excellent fic In New York about how he joined Tammany Hall and whatnot.

32/AF. Share five must-read fics.

Ok, are we talking across all fandoms or across Riverdale fandom?  Fuck it, I’ll do both, with the Riverdale choice that would normally be in the multi-fandom part moved to the Riverdale section.

Multi-Fandom:

1. Ambivalence by DreamScene (Code Geass) - An excellent look at a Shirley Lives AU.  It’s dark, it’s interesting, it’s a good character piece, the Lelouch/Shirley interactions are perfect in every way, and its got some nice smut at the end.  It’s a little screwy with the timeline, but it’s so good in every other respect that I do not care.

2. Ascendant by Samurai 101 (Naruto) - A very, very interesting Itachi time travel fic with a great and very unique take on time travel in general.  It really dives into clan politics and the difference in Itachi as a child and Itachi as an adult.  And the looming threat of Madara is so, so great.  Every side character is so fleshed out and real, and I love it.  Let it be known that I normally don’t like Itachi, but I really like him in this.  He’s not some perfect, all-wise ninja god; he’s a fuck up of a teenager and a kid trying his best, and he’s actually relatable.

3. Wanted It To Be a Game by SkylaDoragano (Persona 4) - An excellent role reversal fic with Adachi and Yu (well, more P4 Protagonist than Yu as we know him).  It really follows the domino effect of switching their roles out in terms of who lives and who dies and who joins the party in what roles.  It’s so interesting to see the domino effects of it all.  It really gets into the psychology of different characters, and everyone’s dynamics are fantastic, with a special shout out to Adachi and Saki’s friendship.  Seriously, if you like Adachi, this is a must-read.

4. 365 Days of Winter by zauberer_sirin (Durarara!!) - This is the perfect Izaya/Namie fic.  Like, their dynamic is so, so on point, and watching them fall in love when they really would rather not is such a delight.  I love the monthly format, and I love Izaya’s subtle jealousy, and I love how they never even explicitly confess their feelings.  It’s all so them, and I love it.

5. Executive Reform by karanguni (Final Fantasy VII) - It’s a Final Fantasy VII/Pacific Rim mash up that works surprisingly well.  It’s such a great gen fic, and the focus on the Shinra executives delights me.  Like, Scarlet and Hojo interacting while neither are being crazy?  Genius!  And it does such a great job of depicting the complicated relationship between Hojo and Sephiroth even though Sephiroth isn’t even an active character.  Everyone is so human in this, and I absolutely love it.  Tragically, it’s abandoned.

BONUS: Seven Suitors for Shirayuki by Sabrael (Snow White with the Red Hair) - Look, this doesn’t quite make the all-time top five, but I want to plug it here anyway because oh man, guys, this is top-notch slow burn/pining.  Like, by the end you are DYING, the burn is so good.  It fleshes out minor canon characters very well, and there are some great OCS, but they’re not OCs for the sake of OCs but ones that are truly necessary.  And the characterization is on point, and the obiyuki is SO GOOD.  Seriously, if you followed my advice about the show and fell into obiyuki hell with me, go read this.

Riverdale (Do you know how hard this was?  Narrowing this down?  There are so, so many things I want to add but can’t grrr)

1. cut while shaving by areyouabadwolf2 - I’ve made no secret of the fact that this is my all-time favorite Riverdale fic.  And in fact, it would normally knock Executive Reform out of its #5 spot.  It’s such a great post-season 2 darkfic, just an excellent look at where everyone could go from there.  It’s heavy on the Serpents, just the way I like it, and all the relationships are so cool.  Like, Jughead & Cheryl friendship?  Sign me the fuck up!  It’s also SO good at suspense and keeping secrets from its readers, and no one ever talks in a way that makes you go “ah yes, thank you for telling me that even though everyone in the room already knows about it.”  And like, the characterization in this is flawless, absolutely flawless, and the Betty/Jughead dynamic is amazing with them as a criminal duo.  I just. I love it.  Tragically, it seems to be abandoned.

2. The town called Riverdale by satelliteinasupernova - Yeah, you wrote this, so technically it’s redundant for you, but it belongs here, so tough.  This is the Riverdale/Princess Tutu mashup that I didn’t know I wanted, and it has an extra dose of eldritch horror.  The meta-y goodness is so delicious, and the suspense is fantastic, I was always on the edge of my seat.  It’s so great watching Veronica try to figure out this mystery while people around her are either cagey or don’t realize there’s a mystery to solve.  There’s such great uncertainty running throughout it,and I highly recommend it.

3. Black Cherry Chutney by lilibug - I love dark!bughead, I love it so goddamn much, and this is a great depiction of it.  And like, not just dark!Betty or dark!Jughead but both of them, and it’s such a delight.  Like, I absolutely love this Jughead from the word go, and Betty is so great because she is, like in canon, so much more than what she first seems.  The bughead dynamic is great, and the smut is fantastic.

4. Fullmetal Riverdale by lnles - This is such a good mashup of Riverdale and Fullmetal Alchemist that I cannot articulate it.  Like, it’s not just 1-1 insert Character A into Role A; it really works with the setting and characters of Riverdale to create something new but familiar.  It’s working with great pieces, and it does them both justice, which is saying a lot because Fullmetal Alchemist is very, very good.  I love the characterization and the hints of what happened in the past and the prose and just everything.  It’s not done, but it’s got a regular update schedule, so I’m hoping it gets finished. Go give this some love!

5. Shake, Rattle, and Roll series by TakeAWalkOnTheWildside - Ok, so I’m cheating here by putting in a series, but let me cheat, ok?  I’m still amazed that there are so few 1950s AUs for bughead, but I’m really glad we got this series.  It’s sexy, it’s fun, it’s period-appropriate, and it’s dramatic too.  Like it’s a whole saga of Betty and Jughead getting together and then being together, and it’s so fun.  Also, he eats her out on her dining room table in part one, so that’s great.

37/AK. Do you have a favorite trope and/or AU for your OTP?

For my OTP of OTPs, shirlulu, does Everyone Lives count?  Because that series does not end well for them.  But, ok, other than that, I want to see some mutual pining for them because the idea of Lelouch pining is so goddamn amusing, especially when mixed with perpetually pining Shirley being completely goddamn oblivious.  As for bughead, one thing I don’t see enough of (and crave more of) is their friends and family trying to play matchmaker for them but failing spectacularly.  Also, more 1950s AUs please.

Peathers: Why Does Veronica Make Her Choice?

WARNING: SPOILERS FOR ENTIRE PEATHERS SERIES IN THIS POST. If you are on the fence about watching it or not, I strongly recommend at least watching two or three episodes before deciding. I have links if anyone needs them.

.

.

“My entire life, I’ve always had someone talking at me, telling me what I’m supposed to think and feel and do. My parents, little dead Lucy, Heather Chandler, and now you.”

Grace Victoria Cox’s Veronica Sawyer is definitely one of the most mind-boggling protagonists in a drama series I’ve recently watched. Capricious, obsessive, and a bit hypocritical, for me she’s the most challenging and inconsistent character. Since watching the series’s shocking finale, I keep coming back to her character’s final moments alive, lying beside JD on the dusty boiler room floor, on the verge of a terrible decision. As she reconnects the explosive’s wires, what is it her character really wants, is aiming for? After some thought, I think I understand how I interpret Veronica’s character throughout the series. For the record, I still think she’s written in a way that’s pretty inconsistent, but this is my best effort.

The best way to break down Peathers’s Veronica Sawyer is with three basic principles. One: She doesn’t want to just move past labels, but prove to everyone she’s past them. Two: Her love with JD for her transcends labels. Three: JD’s murderous path does not ultimately transcend labels. It’s only a symptom of the system.

Veronica’s motivations are broadcasted with her first dialogue scene. She sits down with Mrs. Fleming, who asks her who she wants to be. Veronica answers that she’s “a good person.” When Veronica says she’s a good person, she’s not truthfully describing herself (We can clearly see through the series she murders and manipulates when it serves herself.), but she is describing a part of her motivation. Because she recognizes everyone at Westerburg as a bad person (The students and adults all participate in a system that drives students to violence and suicide.), her desire to think of herself as a good person is her way of saying, “I’m not like everybody else.”

The show makes a very clear point to show that this desire of Veronica to think of herself as a good person is so strong that it’s why she murders Lucy as a child, a Heather-Chandler-like bossy girl who sings, “You’re not, you’re not, you’re not,” telling Veronica she isn’t really her own unique person, a “good person,” but just as bad as everyone else. Veronica wants to be thought of as different so badly she will kill for it, which is why she strikes Lucy with a croquet mallet.

Her seething looks towards her parents in episode nine show how much she feels like they don’t see her for her, and just stick her in a box. Clearly this anger about the question of who she is goes way back.

But she doesn’t really want to be thought of as “a murderer,” so her outburst doesn’t truly solve the problem. It silences it for a short while, and Veronica grows up still in this pressure.

We meet Veronica when she’s in high school, and her main strategy to society’s, and Mrs. Flemming’s, constant questions about identity is to be close to Heather Chandler. She still expresses herself a little bit (with her clothes, even when Heather C calls them “Banana Republic,” and other style choices), and she doesn’t have to bear the actual weight of the label of “Heather,” so it’s a decent compromise. The only problem is, she has to be with a girl who constantly labels her.

“You’re nothing.” “Well, at least l’m a good person.” ”A good person? Grow up, Veronica. You’re Panera. You’re Sbarro. You’re Cheesecake Factory.”

Just like Lucy, Heather Chandler constantly suppresses Veronica’s desire to be whatever she wants to be, and not a label. Hence why in the first episode, Veronica fantasizes about burying her in the ground. “I just wish Heather would die so I can finally be free.”

When Veronica and JD kill Heather, it’s representative of putting a stop to Westerburg’s constant labeling and belittling of its students. Only problem is, it doesn’t work. Even in the first episode, Heather Duke and Betty Finn spar in Chandler’s absence for the privilege of being the school’s next big labeler. When Heather Chandler returns in episode two, it symbolizes that nothing at Westerburg will change. Whether Chandler lives or dies, the essential problem of how its students are treated by each other and by society will continue.

For Veronica, JD is a potential solution. He adores her, is jealous of “every drop of rain that gets to fall on [her] cheek.” He knows that she’s not just what Westerburg thinks she is. JD is the only character who sees Veronica as she craves to be seen–as something not basic, weak, or even popular, but someone amazing. Someone special. (Veronica likely feels that Betty Finn, even in her more genuine moments, still views Veronica as weak in a way or as part of Westerburg’s system of power.)

But JD’s love isn’t perfect. In episode two, Veronica is clearly disappointed when she flaunt’s her murderous act to JD (something atypical about her) and he’s oblivious to her true meaning, still seeing her as more basic than she really is. In episode three, Veronica becomes upset with JD’s growing nonchalance and how his political ramblings seem more important to him than she does. That he skips Heather McNamara’s funeral is a big point of contention. She can’t feel special through JD if he doesn’t show up. When she tells JD she likes how her date with Ram “felt normal,” I interpret she’s saying that his intense antipathy towards Westerburg isn’t solving the problem–it’s only illustrating it. The only real way to solve it is to care about her in a straightforward but passionate way, not to be some rebellious hero.

Veronica’s character veers off the deep end in episodes four through six. When JD handles the problem of Betty’s suspicions, I personally saw it as doing whatever it takes in his job in the context of his murderous relationship. However, Veronica doesn’t see it this way and sees his kiss as a betrayal. She sort of has a point–there was never any real danger of anyone believing Betty when she went to the cops. When Veronica blows up JD’s car and has him committed, she’s punishing him for underestimating her. For Veronica, the solution to her problems is for JD to put her first, period. All other plots and schemes come second. This is because what sets them free isn’t that they’re murderers. That is a label. What sets them free is the way they see each other. That goes beyond labels. They love each other as full human beings.

“Dear Diary: You have to hand it to America. We can even take something like teen suicide, wrap it in a pretty package, and sell it to the highest bidder. God, I’m starting to sound like JD. But so what? He’s the only one who makes any sense anymore. And you know what? I don’t care if what I’m about to say is so high school, it makes you upchuck: Our love is the only thing left that’s real. You can’t turn it into a poster or sell it to anyone with fifty bucks to spend, because it’s ours. Everything else is just photoshop.”

Thankfully, JD is only turned on by the extreme lengths Veronica goes to. JD values violence as a means to strike back against and potentially change society. At the beginning of episode seven, their love is at its height. Veronica never sees a world in which JD cares about something that isn’t her, and JD thinks that Veronica will be by his side as he moves towards not just killing Heather, but killing Westerburg, and thus ending all Heathers in America. This bliss only lasts the episode, however–the remaining episodes will prove them both wrong.

When Veronica decides to murder Mr. Waters, she’s largely already gotten what she wants. But she knows that Westerburg as a whole is still sick and wants to honor Heather McNamara’s memory as someone who wasn’t able to transcend the labels and ways the school got to her, including Mr. Water’s predatory behavior. While I think Veronica enjoys aspects of murder, she knows it’s not an end to her problems–as an act of violence it’s symptomatic of the system, and also just brings on her another label. At the end of episode seven, she tells JD that they’re past it, that they’re going to be something else now.

That isn’t enough for JD. And when he indicates he’s not taking her to prom, she realizes something she perhaps knew subconsciously all along: His love for her doesn’t overpower the way he labels himself with violence and antisocial behavior. She considers him a Heather–someone who wants to play his role (the “bad boy”) but doesn’t truly want to be something different.

Her decision in episode eight to recommit to the Heathers baffled me on first viewing, but in hindsight, Veronica’s character recognizes the bizarrely eternal meaning of prom: What happens there is what she will be forever. If she cannot be special by being there with JD, she’ll do the next best thing. And that’s being back to square one: powerful alongside the Heathers. Still kind of labeled, but it could be worse.

It’s Heather Chandler and JD’s ensuing actions that push her over the edge. First, JD murders Heather Duke, her last closest semblance to a friend, to serve his plan. Second, Heather Chandler has no reservations about stepping over Duke’s dead body for the prom crown. Veronica cannot stand to be along for the ride with either of their ways, both of which she views as corrupted and ultimately selfish. She has to go alone.

During the final episode, Veronica comes to a final decision about how she will and will not be labeled forever. She’s first stupified by JD’s plan, which is inherently much more radical and less humanistic than her usual philosophy. But when Heather Chandler describes to her what Veronica’s voiceover in the episode also affirms–that high school and prom are forever, that your labels here are what you’ll always be–she realizes that it’s now or never. If Veronica lets herself be nothing under Heather Chandler’s reign, then it doesn’t matter what happens in the future. Nothing she will always be.

“You know the best part, Veronica? Unlike you, they’ll never forget me. I don’t care if Dylan Lutz becomes president or if Driffany Tompkins cures cancer. No matter where they go, no matter what they do, no matter how high they fly, there will always be a small part of them that worships at the altar of Heather Chandler.” “You think too highly of yourself, Heather.” “I seem to recall that I got so inside your head that you tried to kill me. Doesn’t get more influential than that, does it, Veronica? I made you so angry that you wanted me dead. I revel in that every day. ... I’m already inside everyone at Westerburg.” “Like a virus.” “Call it what you want, but you and I both know that every moment of every day, every important decision, every relationship, every moral choice they ever make, I will be there, permanently in their heads, guiding them towards the truth that is the Heather Chandler Way. And then their kids, and their kids, and on and on and on and on, because that is what power is. Even after you and I are both long gone, I will live on forever, pulling the trigger on every decision in their sad, lonely, pathetic lives.” “Still beautiful, Heather.” “Well at least I’m not nothing like you.” “Find me in ten minutes and then tell me if I’m nothing, bitch.”

Sorry for the long dialogue pull but it encapsulates a lot about the show, including how murder didn’t solve the problem. I don’t think that Veronica’s anger is directed towards the idea of Heathers in every day and age–she is only angry at Heather Chandler, how Heather Chandler has affected her and everyone else at Westerburg, and she wants to change the narrative.

I admit I find Veronica and JD’s last dance to be a beautiful moment where once again their goals align. The song “I Think We’re Alone Now” indicates their nirvana–seen by everyone while embracing their love no one else can label, they can finally reach what they’ve always wanted.

But their paths sadly diverge again when JD learns of a school shooting and has to put a stop to his own tragedy. For Veronica, the power is in the personal, not the political, and if Heather Chandler’s prom night goes uninterrupted, it’s an injustice she can’t stomach. (Heather Chandler and Veronica’s remembered soundbites during the conversation also indicate that she is thinking of how Heather McNamara suffered under Chandler’s rule.) She accuses JD of being a Heather, caring more about the appearance than the real thing. I personally would only consider this true if JD’s plan wouldn’t work, but I honestly think it wouldn’t and he wants an excuse to end his and others’ lives in a spectacular fashion that his conscience would let him have.

When I first watched the finale, I was disappointed that Veronica and JD were doomed to suffer in afterlives of solitude–clearly a type of hell. However, when I think about it, it’s true that this does express the choices that the characters made. For JD, his heaven was being alone with Veronica after dying in a way that expressed his agony. While he wishes he could have accomplished his goal, he’s still content to die alongside her.

However, that doesn’t satisfy Veronica. She still has the image of Heather Chandler in her head, and she needs to upend her reign. So she does the unthinkable: She reconnects JD’s bomb and makes a social media post that will make her a star of suicide. And in a way, it does work: Now excluded from the violence that Westerburg and society craves, which once almost made her popular with her own attempted suicide, Heather Chandler’s fate is to be forgotten. But when she blows up Westerburg, Veronica blows up her relationship with it. Veronica and JD could have had each other. “Our love is God,” he offers. But she corrects him, “Our love was God.” She can’t escape the way Westerburg labeled her and has to relabel herself. In the end, JD’s love was not more powerful than the dehumanizing effect of the school. If Veronica had chosen JD, she still would have been remembered as “nothing,” having died under Heather Chandler’s label. Veronica’s act of defiance is at once both just the system perpetuating itself and her own personal way to be free. She won’t be what Heather Chandler says, and neither will anyone else for that matter.

But tragically, in deciding that JD’s love was not enough to set her free, Veronica chooses an afterlife without him, and his consciousness during her choice makes him aware he won’t be seeing her, either. She also knows that in the end, she only did what society was deep down wanting her to do as a student: Commit suicide. Ironically, she still is “nothing.” Even if she isn’t under Heather Chandler’s control anymore, she still did exactly what “they” wanted.

Peathers Veronica Sawyer is decidedly less likeable than the original film’s protagonist (in part due to the writing, and I don’t think Grace Victoria Cox is to blame, as I think she knocks it out of the park with a manner that’s somehow both poised and intense) with motivations far less noble. But even in her most outrageous actions, she is still in a strange way a relatable character, at least to me. Driven by societal pressures practically to madness, her first and last scenes are her confronting the issue: How do you answer the question of who you are when everyone tries so hard to answer the question for you? In a way, the answer is to say “fuck you,” even when you know it won’t change anything.

While everyone on Heathers is a bad person, I see a little bit of good in all of them, and all of them are pretty easy to feel sorry for, from Chandler overhearing her mother’s derisions to JD’s devastating loss of his mother to Veronica’s best social prospect being letting the queen bee treat her like a dog. I wouldn’t have ended with JD and Veronica doomed to misery, though it does make sense with the show and honestly the ending was fucking ballsy enough with Westerburg blown up without the people who did it having an ending that wasn’t unhappy. For me, the ending is with Veronica and JD on the dance floor. It’s true that they didn’t escape. But they saw hope of escape, through each other.

For me the show is far from perfect, but Veronica’s character is interesting if extremely frustrating. But enough about that basic cable bitch. Why did you read all of this? Get a life, loser! And remember: Tell your mom to spit out the devil’s jizz before you tongue-kiss her in hell.

Thanks for reading.

BUS TRASH

Why do you hate Betty Draper?

                                                     --SPOILERS--

In my opinion, Betty is as essential to Mad Men’s narrative mission as Don. Although it is unfortunate that her screen-time decreases as the show progresses, I do not think that her character’s journey was, in any way, inadequately depicted. She is, to me, one of the show’s most terribly real characters, and it was her fraught relationship with her daughter, Sally, that, as the show progressed, gave rise to some of the show’s most emotional scenes. There are no words in Betty’s final moment in Mad Men - in fact, it is a very simple panning shot, reminiscent of those we have seen in the final moments of many previous episodes - but it is so piercing that little else in the show is as achieved. 

You will therefore understand my surprise when, reading through all the opinions online after I finished the show, Betty was constantly referred to as one of the least-liked main characters. Constantly, I would see positive opinions on Betty prefaced with an assertion that they could not forgive her treatment of Sally or some reference to her emotional unavailability, hypocrisy or immaturity. In a community where praise for characters like Don, Joan, Roger, Pete or Peggy is rife, why is Betty thus criticised?

I honestly do not think that these criticisms have anything to do with misogyny, because anyone who watches Mad Men is coaxed into unravelling the fallacies which support sexist attitudes. Instead, I think it has something to do with the general tendency within the Mad Men fan-base to afford the social conventions of the time far too much importance in determining characters’ actions. It is, to my mind, part of the genius of the show that it refuses its audience the opportunity to wholly absolve any of the characters with any assertion of such things as ‘X was only adhering to social expectations’ or ‘X was influenced by societal convention to act such a way.’ Unfortunately for us, it seems to me that many of the characters, by virtue of their personalities and personal histories, would have a tough time operating even in today’s vastly less oppressive world. (I understand that there is nothing perfect about our current state, but we might agree that much has been improved upon since the 1960s.) It is not simply the social conventions that effect the development of characters but the relationship between these conventions and a character’s emotional drives. 

For example, would the barriers to Peggy’s ambition have mattered to her if she was not ambitious? And is she, like Joan, not uniquely ambitious, even by male standards? Would Don’s impulsive promiscuity be considered much less of a destructive habit in today’s post-marriage world? Is the confusion that consumes all the characters regarding their priorities in life not simply a perennial problem? Sometimes, we genuinely do not know what we want, and it is not social conventions which confuse us but ourselves. 

This focus on the influence of social conventions appears to me to lie at the heart of the criticism surrounding Betty Draper. She is not simply, as some would have you think, the subversion of the “perfect housewife myth,” frustrated by the limited opportunities afforded to her and driven to the point of insanity by boredom. Of course, she is those things and, I will admit, she was raised to value the life that she came to hate but, much like Don and Peggy, she is consumed by an innate yearning for completeness that leads her on an endless search for that mythical something-else and, whilst this feeling may be particularly American, it is not alien to the emotional world of any person. It might therefore be instructive to view Betty’s dissatisfaction with married life as being partly the product of a jealous, perennially-dissatisfied temperament, complexly formed by her upbringing, subjective experience and the social conventions of the time, rather than the sole cause being the external realities of marriage and the specific realities of being married to Don Draper. Betty Draper is as sympathetic as someone struggling to realise themselves can be - which is to say, not often all that much, given the mistakes one often makes. 

 As the show progresses, Betty becomes so deeply entangled in a web of a sad confusion that she is not emotionally-mobile enough to navigate her increasingly complex circumstances. Self-hatred, betrayal and grief all conspire to ensnare Betty Draper and therefore, in attempting to escape or rectify, her actions need not be allowed but they can easily be understood. She mistreats Sally and, much like the fans that this post is criticising, I do not forgive her for that, but what she sees in Sally is the person she was before she was blunted by her own confused sadness. Sally still has the ferocity that Betty sacrificed on the altar of her own beauty. To her, it is a hateful sight and she becomes resentful, treating her daughter with alienating contempt. 

Betty loves Sally. There is no question of that. She just does not know how to communicate that love. Partly it is because she, like Don, was not given parents from which such a lesson could be derived. At a loss, she upholds their values, despite her own understanding of the ways in which they left her so sad and confused. Partly it is because, at that time, a mother was required to raise a daughter to be a certain way, namely physically beautiful and feminine. Sally, prematurely perceptive of the hell that results from an extreme observation of these rules which bred secrecy and alienation in the marriage of her parents, rages against these conventions until such time as they become important to her. Partly it is because Betty cannot love herself in any sustainable way for she has little access to the areas of herself that would enable such an ability. Her self-worth revolved around her beauty, and despite being successful in other areas - amongst others, we learn of her degree in anthropology -, it was first and foremost for her outstanding beauty that she was admired. As sexual creatures, we cannot help but respond to beauty and thus men act as differently towards Betty as women towards Don. That is not a malleable convention but a fixture of human society. She cannot be blamed for wanting to preserve that which sets her apart from the crowd. But what happens when that isn’t enough to keep her husband faithful? What crippling self-doubts so deep beneath the surface are confirmed? What hell does betrayal release on poor Betty Draper?

She is no innocent victim, no one in Mad Men can be viewed this way, all are complicit in the horrid game, but Betty Draper is no malicious monster. It is a horrific experience to see her fade from a life that brought her such misery and despair, but it is even more of a terrible marvel to see her finally reconcile with her own pain, to see her eschew her dependence on her sexual attractiveness and to find contentment in the striving for, not the achievement of completeness. And as the final light drew closer, finally she could see her poor daughter for all she was and not reject her. In her final moments, she found herself at peace with her loved ones and at peace with her life, miserable as her experience of it was, knowing finally her own blindness and feeling, at last, that no one so dangerous or spiteful was out to get Betty Draper as herself. 

Towards A Better X-Men

Generation X v1 is problematic. I love it, deeply. I still think the book is great. I would suggest it to anyone who is interested in X-Men. But Scott Lobdell’s M, specifically Claudette St. Croix,  was a horrible sort of depiction of autistic people. It’s tough when a characterization in comics ages this poorly, especially for a character so unique and so full of possibility. The media has been terrible about depictions of autistic women and this particular mismanagement has never been rectified. Despite their older sister retaining her powers through M-Day the St. Croix Twins, Claudette and Nicole, have not been seen since Generation X v1 #58. That, itself, would be poor, but Claudette isn’t alone in being lost like this. It’s worth asking for more from the X-Men Franchise when it comes to representing autism.

From the relatively humble beginnings of Phalanx Covenant, which was not a very good crossover, a few moments were etched indelibly into my eyes. Never will I ever forget Blink’s sacrifice or the Phalanx spires of techno-organic flesh covered in soundless screaming human faces. I had read some of adjectiveless, X-Force, and Excalibur at the time and when a new book that had Jubilee AND a character named Everett in it came out? It was over for me. I couldn’t be torn away from the page. In Generation X’s introduction M was the powerhouse. Gifted with The Package (Super-Strength, Super-Speed, Invulnerability, and Flight) and a Telepath to boot she was the haughty and superior Veronica Lodge to Paige Guthrie’s Kentucky Betty Cooper. It would turn out that M was secretly the twins Claudette and Nicole St. Croix impersonating their older sister and that their occasional bouts of catatonic stupors were the result of Claudette’s autism.

My little sister was born in 1994, the same year Generation X debut, and she is autistic. But far from the stupor and idiot savantism demonstrated from Lobdell’s depiction of Claudette’s personality my sister Madisson provided me first-hand experience with the reality of an autistic child with pervasive developmental delay. In caring for my little sister I have learned a great deal and now that we are adults she never stops teaching me. I have had the fortune to meet more than a few members of the autistic community. If I could, please allow me to communicate one specific flaw with Generation X:

It is not okay to depict the autistic as wordless cyphers with magical abilities and no personality. Ever.

People with autism are People first and foremost. Sadly Generation X v1 at no point put in the time or effort into making Claudette a person. Where Nicole was the girl we saw as M for years, the one who got development and speaking lines, Claudette was a mystery and not a character. I cannot excuse that. It’s a damning mark against the book and hopefully one that people will only have dimmer views on in the future. With any luck someone who cares may bring these characters back into the fold but they haven’t been seen in years and there is precedence that they never will again.

Laura Dean is an Alpha Flight character who was autistic and also a twin. Her backstory involves her parents being mutantphobes and trying to abort Laura’s twin sister. That sister fled as a foetus into Liveworld where it would grow to become Goblyn, a blue skinned creature with sharp fangs and teeth. In their original incarnation they could swap places when Laura was endangered, but that was changed as Laura grew in her ability to control her portals to other worlds. We haven’t seen this character since 1994, or so says the Marvel Wikia. Not being on the autism spectrum myself I cannot speak to the original depiction being well handled or not, I would guess not, but either way the character is certainly unseen in just a little under 25 years. The similarities between Laura Dean and Claudette are stark. Both mutant twins of African descent, both pairs only allow limited expression of each member in their initial outing. Both have their problem of cohabitating with their sibling’s body resolved before vanishing from continuity.

There was no effort put into Claudette. Monet St. Croix is the Black Female X-Man with the second most appearances in the 616. That the St. Croix Twins have been missing for this long is curious to say the least. But then we don’t see much of Emma’s sisters either. But I, at least, ask that Marvel do better. Part of what makes the X-Men Franchise is that it embraces and espouses diversity. We need stories about autistic mutants. It doesn’t have to be any more complicated than that. Writing those stories ensures that mutants represent all minorities, as they should. Generation X Volume 1 suffers greatly in retrospect for not taking the opportunity to do something meaningful with the characters it had.

Find out more about teen superheroes in our podcast Here.

Or at any of the places you may already listen to podcasts: Apple Podcasts Google Play Stitcher

Written by Everett Christensen, Young One’s Lead Editor

Images: Generation X #5, #9, #12 #57

Uncanny X-Men #316

Speaking of GENOCIDE CONTINUES...

The Genocide Continues is the most famous theory about Glitchtale and the most important one so far which was 97% correct according to Camila. This theory explains how the game is trying to fix itself and other important stuff (which you should really read if you want to understand what I’m basing on here).

Genocide REALLY continues

It’s true that Bête Noire (Betty) wants to kill Frisk to end the timeline but there are other facts that show us that the Genocide Route isn’t over: I thought about this long ago when we knew Frisk leveled up from one to two. So, as we know the game has “2 values”:

Pacifist Route: true Genocide Route: true

But, so far we’ve seen that Frisk didn’t really have issues during their travel on the Underground, yes, they fought against Gaster and they had to deal with Chara (which was the old enemy put by “the game” to stop Frisk from the Pacifist Route) but this isn’t about the enemies she encountered like Chara/Betty. When I mean ISSUES, I’m saying that the Pacifist Route was executing correctly without characters dissapearing / things glitching even if the game had 2 values for EACH character:

Papyrus dead: true Papyrus alive: true

WHICH ROUTE IS MORE POWERFUL?

When I say this I mean: Even if the game has 2 values for each character it shows their pacifist state where they’re alive / they don’t hate or attack Frisk. THE QUESTION HERE IS WHY? Well, since the timeline has a “host”: Frisk (even if he cannot interact with the timeline anymore, he’s still the “owner” of it) there HAS TO BE be another value that says:

FRISK LV 1: true = PACIFIST: TRUE FRISK LV >1: true = PACIFIST: FALSE = GENOCIDE

IF FRISK LEVELS UP TO 19 THE GAME WILL THINK IT’S IN A GENOCIDE ROUTE?

At first I thought YES and then I thought NO but then I thought WAIT, MAYBE YES?

Why? Well first of all I didn’t have many facts that proved it but with last episode I got it clear. First of all I thought that Frisk leveling up would get characters killed faster OR showing them in the Underground for a few seconds with a glitch because the game thinks there’s a Genocide Route going on, their personality would change for a few moments, beeing sad or aggresive against Frisk. Then I thought ok, this would probably happen but do we have facts about this so far? NO, then my theory was over. BUT NOW:

FRISK GAVE CHARA THEIR SOUL JUST LIKE AT THE END OF A GENOCIDE ROUTE

Sure you might say that Frisk dissapeared to give their position to Chara and that is different from how it happens in a Genocide Route. But I tell you that that might work in-game but speaking in “code” language the game detects that there’s a Chara alive with a different soul from her original (cause the game KNOWS that Chara gave her soul as a vessel for Asriel’s current soul).

So, if the Pacifist Route was the one beeing shown so far because it had more pacifist events than genocide ones: What will happen now that the game has a Chara alive with another soul that isn’t her’s just like at the end of a Genocide Route?

Will the game swap the preferences? It certainly DID swap alredy: Betty has gotten stronger suddently which could be related to the game putting more effort on the Genocide Route trying to show more genocide events. But that’s what I can come up so far.

I JUST GOT NEW INFO

IF CHARA REPLACES FRISK WHY IS FRISK REMOVED IN OTHER SCENES:

Original version (Love pt.2):

New glitched version:

WHY IS THIS CHANGING?

Also, as we see Frisk is replaced in every memory by Chara but he is also REMOVED from other memories where he hurts the ones he love.

At the end... Does this make sense?

It certainly does, Frisk repaired the timeline becuase he is removed in every scene he levels up, so every scene that involves the battle of Frisk vs. Betty is sort of weird now. If Chara doesn’t level up she is not able to match Betty’s Fear+Hate so everything is just messy. Also Asriel forgeting his heartlocket... BACK HOME? Isn’t that his house now? mmmm... I really can’y come up with more so this will last as lightings on the minds of those who don’t really get what’s going on.

ANYWAY THIS IS JUST A THEORY AND REMEMBER NONE OF THIS IS TRUE (except the Genocide Continues theory mentioned at the top which, well, you alredy know) IF IT ISN’T CONFIRMED BY IT’S UNIQUE OWNER CAMILA CUEVAS.

Thank you again @camilaart for your awesome series that makes us think about what could or couldn’t happen. Remember: fk rushers and take your time to recover from this episode, we want you healed :3

"Split"- The M. Night Shyamalan we knew and loved is back with a vengeance! 'Split' is a taut and intense thriller!

Save for a few controversial political figures, fewer people have proved to be as divisive in recent years as the filmmaker M. Night Shyamalan. Though his career got off to a promising start with an excellent trilogy of thrillers including the iconic "Sixth Sense", underrated "Unbreakable" and heartfelt and frightening "Signs", he soon took a nosedive with a series of severe misjudgments and a string of critical failures. Whereas before 2004, his name piqued curiosity and excitement, for a time there, he became a small laughing stock. Thankfully, he's gone through something of a career-renaissance. Between his very decent television series "Wayward Pines", his entertaining 2015 found-footage horror-comedy "The Visit" and now his excellent new feature "Split", it appears that the M. Night we so fondly remember… the same man who brought us that brilliant trilogy of films so many years ago… is back with a vengeance! "Split", a sort-of drama/thriller starring the excellent James McAvoy and wonderful newcomer Anya Taylor-Joy might just be one of his best films yet. It's a shocking return to form for Shyamalan, and it honestly came out of nowhere for me. I never gave up on him entirely even when his later films started to get progressively worse... but even I wasn't expecting "Split" to be just as good as it is. It's still early in the year, but I have my doubts that the year will produce any other thrillers that are just as deliciously creative, genuinely suspenseful, oftentimes hilarious and downright breathtaking as this film. Bravo, Mr. Shyamalan! Bravo. We follow a trio of teenaged girls, including troubled outsider Casey (Taylor-Joy), who are kidnapped by a troubled man named Kevin (McAvoy) who suffers from Dissociative Idenity Disorder. With twenty-three identities inside of his mind, Kevin is completely unable to control his own body, which is being increasingly inhabited by a small group of corrupt and twisted personalities who tease the girls about the coming of a twenty-fourth personality known only as "The Beast." Casey, herself coming from a dark history, tries to assist the others in figuring out how to save themselves, all while Kevin's psychiatrist Dr. Karen Fletcher (Betty Buckley) becomes increasingly alarmed by his recent behavior. To star, the cast is just phenomenal, and everyone is perfectly cast in their respective roles. Anya Taylor-Joy, who got her start in the excellent art-house horror feature "The Witch", makes for a remarkable protagonist who you can't help but root for. She has a talent far beyond her years, and it's going to be great fun seeing her career develop. Betty Buckley is wonderful as a brilliant psychiatrist whose goal is to help Kevin, even if she suspects there might be something sinister going on. She adds a great sense of class to the role and also helps to fill the audience in on the details and eccentricities of Kevin and his disorder. But of course, James McAvoy is the real standout here. The role of Kevin is one that if played poorly, could have destroyed the entire film. But McAvoy is absolutely stunning, and steals the show in virtually every scene. He perfectly balances his performance, and plays it just over-the-top enough that it works, while never becoming cartoony. Each of his "alters" feels like a unique role, and all of them elicit a different reaction from the viewer- whether it be the threat of the predatory "Dennis", the entertainment and sadness brought about by the childlike "Hedwig" or the likability of the dominant personality "Barry." Just an incredible, award-worthy turn from the excellent McAvoy. Shyamalan is at the top of his game in regards to his writing and direction, and I actually found this one of his most ambitious and striking films to date. His script has a wonderful sense of pace and structure, doling out information at a deliberate but steady pace, allowing the pieces to organically fall into place. You'll always be at the edge of your seat. He's also thankfully dialed back quite a bit on the eccentric "quirky characters" and wonky dialog that have made his last few films somewhat unbearable, and it feels a bit more naturalistic as a result. In addition, I think his keen eye for visuals- which has always been one of his greatest strengths- is on full-display in this film. Despite being one of his lowest-budget features, the film is never anything less than slick and stylish, with the camera snaking along like a serpent ready to strike at any moment, and a chilling atmosphere of isolation and oppression established early on. This is also perfectly complimented by the moody and grungy soundtrack courtesy West Dylan Thordson, whose tones and themes match the picture perfectly. And then there's the big finale. I won't spoil it, but suffice to say my jaw was literally on the floor for the rest of the day. Just an astonishing climax. "Split" will no doubt go down as one of the most pleasant surprises of the year. It's a refreshing and much-needed return to form for director Shyamalan, and is definitely amongst his best work. It's thrilling. Exciting. Spellbinding. And incredibly eerie. While I did have some very minor issues with a few of the developments and the handling of a few key sequences, these faults were so small that they cannot detract from the otherwise completely enthralling experience. If you're one of those people who has dismissed Shyamalan's work or completely written him off, I beg you to give him another chance. Because "Split" is without question right up there with his excellent earlier work. I give it a fantastic 9 out of 10!

How Does A The Moon Family Member Think?

How Does A Narcissist Think? Here is how narcissistic behavior is dangerous and harmful to others Posted May 22, 2017 Is the word narcissism being over-used and thrown around lightly? Do we need a deeper understanding of narcissistic behavior and why it is harmful and even dangerous? Having studied this disorder for over 25 years, and in treating many victims of narcissists, I have seen firsthand how dangerous, harmful, and disarming the narcissist can be to others. There are certain traits of the narcissist that don’t really matter so much, like the obvious boasting to cover up their fragile sense of self. But, when the behaviors hurt others and particularly children, it does matter. A lot.   It might even matter to the best interest of our country if we have a narcissistic leader. I’m not diagnosing, but in reading and learning more, you can make your own determination. I think it’s important to break down narcissism from a clinical standpoint using the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders as a guide.1 This guide for mental health clinicians lists nine traits seen in the personality disorder of narcissism. Let’s unpack with some examples. 1. Has a grandiose sense of self-importance, e.g., exaggerates achievements and talents, expects to be recognized as superior without commensurate achievements. Okay, this one…not sure we really care? We know a lot of arrogant people and most of us realize that when people have a need to overstate themselves they are really covering up their own fragility. Confident and solid people with a good sense of self, achievement-oriented or not, don’t feel a need to brag. The most interesting thing to me about this trait is the part about being recognized as superior without the achievement to back it up. This kind of thinking can be harmful to others when the narcissist says, “Look at me, I am better than you! I am bigger, and more powerful, and I may use it against you.” Particularly in intimate relationships or parenting, this can be hurtful and damaging. Example: Jack believes he is more intelligent than his wife or any of his five children. Therefore, no matter what they accomplish or what viewpoints they share, Jack reminds them that they do not measure up and are “not good enough.” He may say something like, “it’s great that you are in track now, but when I was your age, I was running marathons.” 2. Is preoccupied with fantasies of unlimited success, power, brilliance, beauty, or ideal love. Where is this hurtful? It’s in the “preoccupied” part. This is the “all about me” and “you don’t matter” way in which the narcissist thinks. They have to be on top, and win in all aspects. They value you in regards to how you can help them achieve this perfection, but if you rise above them, watch out! You can’t outshine them or they will take you down notch by notch. Their “preoccupation” with image takes a lot of energy that causes problems in relationships. Example: Bob has to jog every morning to keep his perfectly fit body and there are no exceptions including when his wife or kids are sick and need help. article continues after advertisement 3. Believes that he or she is “special” and unique and can only be understood by, or should associate with, other special or high-status people (or institutions). Frankly, understanding the significance of this one took some time. Again, it is easy to say, “who cares that they do this?” But, this thinking disregards the person and only represents the achievements of others. It is the mantra of the narcissist that you are valued for “what you do” and “not for who you are.” I see this frequently in high conflict divorce cases where one partner is a narcissist. For example, when searching for a therapist for the children, the narcissist will value the high level credentials and prestigious academic background versus the actual ability and experience of the therapist. It is also common for narcissists to reveal the achievements of their friends rather than who they really are as people. You can see that this does not highlight an intimate connection, but rather assigns value as “my friend, the attorney, consultant, or doctor.” Ask yourself with your own friends, why you value them? In healthy relationships, it is because of their wonderful character and personality traits, right? 4. Requires excessive admiration. Everyone I have worked with in a clinical setting, who has either been raised by a narcissistic parent, or has been in a love relationship with a narcissist, says they are EXHAUSTED! Why? It's because the narcissist has an empty emotional vessel that needs to be refueled constantly with admiration and praise. If you are in a relationship with someone like this, you are constantly filling up their narcissistic supply needs. It not only gets old, but it is tiring. And…your needs don’t get met. The relationship is not reciprocal. Give and take? Uh…no.   5. Has a sense of entitlement, i.e., unreasonable expectations of especially favorable treatment or automatic compliance with his or her expectations. The entitlement of the narcissist is difficult to deal with because it leaves out the needs of anyone else. The narcissists’ needs come first, no matter what. They feel they deserve that royal treatment and if you do not cooperate, what do they do? They take you down, make disparaging comments about you, try to hurt you, and withhold appreciation of you. This is a relationship killer! Do I need to say more? article continues after advertisement 6. Is inter-personally exploitative, i.e., takes advantage of others to achieve his or her own ends. Once again, to the narcissist, the other person does not matter. It is only about what the person can do to help the narcissist in whatever endeavor they are pursuing. The narcissist thinks nothing of taking advantage of others to meet their own goals. It is a given. And this is a warning to you. If you feel this in a relationship you are in, take a second look. One is not loved or valued by a narcissist for who they are. Example: Mary typically only calls her friend Betty, a professional event planner, when she suddenly needs help with her garage sale or some other event. 7. Lacks empathy: is unwilling to recognize or identify with the feelings and needs of others. The lack of empathy is really the cornerstone trait of narcissism. Without empathy, how can one love? How can one bond and attach to a child? The false acting of loving is possible but the narcissist cannot sustain it. Have you seen the person who seems to be empathetic and kind but as soon as things don’t go their way, they turn on you? Or the friend who cannot tune into your feelings but rather turns the conversation to themselves? Example: The mother, when you tell her you are going through a divorce, is more concerned with how it looks to the family and the neighbors, rather than your painful feelings and despair. The most difficult thing about having a narcissistic parent or spouse is realizing their inability to love. It is simply a crushing moment when this awareness hits. 8. Is often envious of others or believes that others are envious of him or her. Because the narcissist has to see themselves as larger than life, they assume others will be jealous of them. But, what we see more, is their own envy of others who may outshine them in any way. How do they deal with their envy of others? They make concerted efforts to take others down in constant criticism, critical judgment, name-calling, gossiping, while at the same time pumping themselves up. Example: Linda, is jealous of her coworker, Samantha. Samantha is beautiful and also physically fit and slim. Because Linda struggles with her own weight issues, she starts a rumor in the office that Samantha is likely anorexic and unhealthy to attempt to take her down a notch. article continues after advertisement 9. Shows arrogance, haughty behaviors, or attitudes. Again, this is the flashy cover-up for a fragile ego and low self-esteem. While it looks like narcissists’ have a high opinion of themselves, they really are self-loathing and have a need to take others down to feel better. While arrogant people are hard to be around, this trait seems less bothersome, unless the narcissist is using it to hurt someone with their constant judgment of others. It is important to understand that narcissism is a spectrum disorder ranging from a few traits to the full-blown narcissistic personality disorder. Everybody can display some of these behaviors at certain times of distress in their lives. It is when these character traits are consistent over time and are impairing relationships and hurting others that they become dangerous. When winning at all cost and needing to be better than others is at the central theme of one’s character, danger is in the air. Some additional traits seen in narcissists include the lack of accountability and therefore always blaming someone else, as well as projection of their own feelings onto others. Both of these are crazy making to the people around them. It causes crippling self-doubt and leaves the child, spouse, or friend on constant guard waiting for the next shoe to drop. The projections seem to come out of nowhere and are unpredictable because they are based on whatever is going on inside of the narcissist. There is a lack of impulse control and their own feelings get spewed out onto others. This is why we see such hyper-vigilance in victims of narcissists and a tendency to display many symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder. Is narcissism harmful and dangerous? Yes, it causes debilitating wounds that take years to unravel. Is a person with this disorder mentally stable and trustworthy? You tell me.

one of my million urls for the thingy bc u love me

[ ♛ ] SEND ME A URL AND I’LL TELL YOU THE FOLLOWING; // no longer accepting 

MY OPINION ON;

CHARACTER IN GENERAL: 

do i like have to pick one?? because I LOVE ALL YOUR GALS !!  okay, but lets start with hannah since ya send it from her. honestly ?? unpopular opinion bc it’s everyones thing to hate 13rw but actually, i love hannah baker, and it’s hard not too for me because i relate to her so painfully well -- she’s a messed up kid, who literally had so much shit throw at her in the space of one year && i think it’s different for me, because i am that little bit older that i can see the bigger picture and can see why she done the things she done ?? anyway, i love hannah baker, lets just leave it at that. as for your other gals, lets see LYDIA MARTIN IN MY QUEEN™ i have a thing for redheaded girls, and Lydia is UP THERE. FIONA GALLAGHER MY LOVE, MY PRECIOUS LIL FUCK UP. RORY GILMORE ACTUAL BABE & BIBLIOPHILE GOALS.Betty freakin’ Cooper ( low key pissed me off in canon ?? ) but i love your betty

HOW THEY PLAY THEM: 

MOTHERFUCKING QUEEN.  your ‘dia had me fallin’ in love with her for like a solid six months before i knew who the hell she canonically was lmao. I THINK THAT SAYS A LOT. Your MANDY && FIONA was pretty much WHY I GOT ADDICTED TO SHAMELESS.  I ADORE WRITING EVERYTHING WITH YOU. I love that we’re exploring all these au’s with lip && your gals ( low key promo @packgenius @sadblcnde @spctlessminds ) You manage to capture each and everyone of your muses so beautifully and uniquely && i heard your gal’s in your replies, and i lowkey stalk your other threads ( also for you amusement this auto-corrected to breasts LMAO , which y’know i am sure are fabulous also bby )     I love EVERY SINGLE thread we have together !! we are LEGIT SQUAD GOALS WHEN IT COMES TO SHIPPING ??

THE MUN: 

EMILY IS A BABE OKAY?? she’s funny af, and sweet, and adorable, and salty AF WHICH I APPRECIATE. we like a good bitch, fan girl, sob over out babies, and all that jazz. IF I COULD MAIL MYSELF TO YOU SO WE COULD HANG OUT I TOTALLY WOULD !! I love you & your girls A L O T.

DO I;

FOLLOW THEM: YES, A MILLION TIMES YES ON ALL BLOGS !!RP WITH THEM:  LOLOLOL YES WHAT A STUPID QUESTION !WANT TO RP WITH THEM: FUCK OFF WHAT D U THINK?? YEEEEEESSHIP THEIR CHARACTER WITH MINE: LMAO, CAN I JUST ... YEAH OKAY * LEAVES THIS HERE * 

WHAT IS MY;

OVERALL OPINION:

multi muse goals, writing bad ass, ACTUAL QUEEN, I JUST I cannot get enough of writing with emily, she is FABULOUS && YOU SHOULD ALL FOLLOW HER. Also lowkey her Lydia Martin is the love of mine and lips life OKAY BYE LOVE UUUUU !!!

**note: mun’s answer are all to be completely honest. don’t send url if you don’t want brutal honesty.

// I hate you, I love you // Jughead x OC

For some unknown, illogical reason, Olivia cannot stand Jughead. Whilst the rest of the group believe there to be a hidden meaning behind O and J’s hateful relationship, the pair believe it to be real.

Look at Jughead. Look how he just sits there thinking it’s cool to be loner. Just catching a glimpse of his stupid crown hat angers Olivia, though she can never pin point why. When they first met, Betty introduced the two when Olivia moved to Riverdale in 5th grade trying to form a “Super Group of Friendship”, she was overwhelmed with an emotion. Which emotion she couldn’t tell. So, being the already-moody child, she decided it was hate. It’s not like Jughead had ever done anything to her, nor had Olivia done anything to Jug, they just never seemed to click. The pair fell into a pattern of always throwing around ever classic sarcastic comments towards each other, which they are now both famous for now. Luckily it never seemed to tear a rift in the group, everyone else just accepting that’s how things were, (even though it did eat at Betty for a short while, relaxing after Archie reassured her everything will be fine within the Super Group of Friendship). Even Veronica accepted their behaviour without question.

           “Hey Liv, come sit with us!” Olivia was pulled from her reminiscent thoughts by a crazy-armed Betty waving her over to join their booth in Pop’s. Just a regular day.

            “Move over Queenie,” Olivia directed towards Jughead, throwing a sarcastic smile his way.

           “Hat insults? Wow strike me where it hurts Oli, totally original too,” replied Jughead, whilst holding up two thumbs and making room for Olivia. Jug knew Olivia hated that nickname, as much as he hated Queenie. Olivia sat down with a scowl on her face. She thinks her friends do it on purpose, sit opposite to Jug so Olivia has no choice but to sit next to him (which she could easily avoid by just getting there on time but she likes to be fashionably late).

           Jughead always gets a smile on his face whenever he has a comeback, Olivia often finds herself wanting to knock it right off his face. Not in a violent type of way, in a way that will shock him. Let’s say if Olivia kissed him, that would seriously put Jug off his game and render him speechless. However, that though scares Olivia so she tends to push it back in her mind and not think about it.

           “Any new brooding thoughts of how life is meaningless and one day we’re all going to die that I should know about? Or have you taken a break and decided to think like a regular person for a change?” Olivia chose her words carefully, she was originally going to say normal instead of regular, but she knew Jughead was unique and she always respected him for that. The only positive feeling she’s aware to have thought towards the boy.

           “And have you decided which day you’re going to become a decent, thoughtful human being? Oh wait - guess not.” Jughead rolled his eyes.

Choosing to ignore Jughead, which he hates, Olivia returns to the rest of the group, finding them sat staring trying to suppress their obvious grins. “What?” Olivia knew her friends were up to something.

Betty, deciding to change the subject, spoke up. “So, me and Ronnie have decided to throw a party before summer is over with the lovely Ethel Muggs offering up her pool house! How exciting right?” Everyone nodded around Olivia, who loved Betty’s enthusiasm so couldn’t help but agree also. She had never been to exciting about pool parties, only because she couldn’t swim. Large bodies of water scared her so why enter one willingly? Much preferring to just sunbathe or take naps whenever they visited Ethel’s in the past. Olivia just didn’t want to disappoint B or V so she agreed to go, promising herself she’d enjoy it.

Part 2

Part 3

~

  I’m taking the world of Riverdale and making it my own. I’m not one to copy the original show or have most of my writing be the lines taken from the show. I will have the same characters, the same descriptions, settings, and personalities but different plot line. I’m writing this without the murder of Jason Blossom because nothings clear yet within the episodes and I don’t wish to divulge into that murder world when there are very little facts clear. I’m just ignoring J altogether because I love Cheryl, she’s too good to rely on having a twin. She’s an independent bitch and I love her.

I really like the whole enemies-to-lovers concept because that how most of my relationships start, so decided to write about it. I also named the OC after me (because I love myself,) but I’m not sure how similar we are. We shall see… Turns out I’m writing about myself sorry not sorry.

THE CHAPTERS WILL GET LONGER I JUST DOUBT MY WRITING AND NEED YOU TO SAY ITS OK BEFORE I GO ON WITH MYSELF thxs

Young Briony

February vacation is over and I’m back. Today I am going to explore the character of Briony in Part #1 of Atonement. It seemed today in class like the vast majority of people seemed to really dislike her. But when I read the novel I didn’t hate her at all, in fact I think I actively sympathized with her for a lot of it. This is probably I feel like I was a whole lot like Briony when I was 13 and it was easy for me to see why she might have acted the way she did. So in this blog post I am going to explore some key passages relating to Briony and see what they tell me. 

“But hidden drawers, lockable diaries and cryptographic systems could not conceal from Briony the simple truth:she had no secrets. Her wish for a harmonious, organized world denied her the reckless possibilities of wrongdoing. Mayhem and destruction were too chaotic for her tastes, and she did not have it in her to be cruel. Her effective status as an only child, as well as the relative isolation of the Tallis house, kept her, at least during the long summer holidays, from girlish intrigues with friends. Nothing in her life was sufficiently interesting or shameful to merit hiding; no one knew about the squirrel’s skull beneath her bed, but no one wanted to know. None of this was particularly an affliction; or rather, it appeared so only in retrospect, once a solution had been found. 

At the age of eleven she wrote her first story—a foolish affair, imitative of half a dozen folktales and lacking, she realized later, that vital knowingness about the ways of the world which compels a reader’s respect. But this first clumsy attempt showed her that the imagination itself was a source of secrets: once she had begun a story, no one could be told. Pretending in words was too tentative, too vulnerable, too embarrassing to let anyone know. Even writing out the she saids, the and thens, made her wince, and she felt foolish, appearing to know about the emotions of an imaginary being. Self-exposure was inevitable the moment she described a character’s weakness; the reader was bound to speculate that she was describing herself. What other authority could she have? Only when a story was finished, all fates resolved and the whole matter sealed off at both ends so it resembled, at least in this one respect, every other finished story in the world, could she feel immune”(7).

I think this passage is the first place where we get a sense of who Briony is. She is a relatively privileged thirteen year old girl, yet she kind of longs for something more in her life. She is fascinated by the mysterious and unknown but she has the distinct impression that no one cares about what she has to hide. The way she finds excitement in life and is able to garner attention from others is through writing. Writing allows her to shape her own mysteries, and to turn her perceptions and values into cohesive narratives. She also sees writing as an intensely personal act, a reflection of self-hood. To write is a story is in some way to put a part of yourself on the page. Briony is unwilling to share this type of vulnerability with others, at least until the piece becomes finished and seemingly disassociates itself from the author. 

“Briony stared at her, unable to keep the horror from her expression, and unable to speak. It was slipping away from her, she knew, but there was nothing that she could think of to say that would bring it back....How could she tell them that Arabella was not a freckled person? Her skin was pale and her hair was black and her thoughts were Briony’s thoughts... She wanted to leave, she wanted to lie alone, facedown on her bed and savor the vile piquancy of the moment, and go back down the lines of branching consequences to the point before the destruction began. She needed to contemplate with eyes closed the fullrichness of what she had lost, what she had given away, and to anticipate the new regime. Not only Leon to consider, but what of the antique peach and cream satin dress that her mother was looking out for her, for Arabella’s wedding? That would now be given to Lola. How could her mother reject the daughter who had loved her all these years? As she saw the dress make its perfect, clinging fit around her cousin and witnessed her mother’s heartless smile, Briony knew her only reasonable choice then would be to run away, to live under hedges, eat berries and speak to no one, and be found by a bearded woodsman one winter’s dawn, curled up at the base of a giant oak, beautiful and dead, and barefoot, or perhaps wearing the ballet pumps with the pink ribbon straps ...” (18)

In this passage Briony seems to have the first major upset of her young life. She has envisioned a starring role for herself in the play she has written and her cooler older cousin has just managed to manipulate it out of her. Now this in the scope everything that happens in the novel and life in general this inconvenience is really quite minor. Yet it seems to deeply affect Briony. She is watching her perfectly ordered plans fall to pieces. Arabella a character in which she has implanted personal vulnerability is being given a different form. Briony is watching her art (and her chances for adoration) slip out of her control and her immediate desire is to go escape the world. She wants to hide somewhere far away and then die to show everyone just how beautiful and perfect she is and how much she should have been valued. This is clearly a tremendous overreaction and very much dramatized. Yet the reaction is quite realistic, something I know from personal experience. I am guilty of writing more than a few sibling-centered plays and then having the fall through due to lack of interest. And often my thoughts didn’t stray far from Briony’s, “This is a disaster! I need to go hide in the woods! Everybody should love me more than this!” I don’t think readers are supposed to feel any sort of positive emotion for Briony in this moment, but I feel as if I can understand her emotions and actually empathize a bit. 

“These thoughts were as familiar to her, and as comforting, as the precise configuration of her knees, their matching but competing, symmetrical and reversible, look. A second thought always followed the first, one mystery bred another: Was everyone else really as alive as she was? For example, did her sister really matter to herself, was she as valuable to herself as Briony was? Was being Cecilia just as vivid an affair as being Briony? Did her sister also have a real self concealed behind a breaking wave, and did she spend time thinking about it, with a finger held up to her face? Did everybody, including her father, Betty, Hardman? If the answer was yes, then the world, the social world, was unbearably complicated, with two billion voices, and everyone’s thoughts striving in equal importance and everyone’s claim on life as intense, and everyone thinking they were unique, when no one was. One could drown in irrelevance. But if the answer was no, then Briony was surrounded by machines, intelligent and pleasant enough on the outside, but lacking the bright and private inside feeling she had. This was sinister and lonely, as well as unlikely. For, though it offended her sense of order, she knew it was overwhelmingly probable that everyone else had thoughts like hers. She knew this, but only in a rather arid way; she didn’t really feel it” (44).

This passage reveals Briony’s thoughts and another sort of layer to her character. These are pretty complex and philosophical thoughts for a thirteen year old to have, and they show how deeply Briony thinks about the world. She is striving to understand herself and wonders if there are others as complex as she is. Both options are upsetting to her. If everybody has similar thoughts, have such a deep inner personality, then she lacks the uniqueness and the sense of being a cut above the rest that she craves. But if she is the only one like this than she is alone and fundamentally different than those around her. Ultimately she accepts that everybody is just as complex as she is, but only on a surface level, for she likes this idea of being special. Thoughts like this certainly have invaded my mind, and they were a definite fixture when I was Briony’s age. I have always felt a bit different than everyone else and wondered if the way they see the world mirrors mine. If their private thoughts skim the same surface matter. It’s an interesting parallel. 

“None of these three was bad, nor were they particularly good. She need not judge. There did not have to be a moral. She need only show separate minds, as alive as her own, struggling with the idea that other minds were equally alive. It wasn’t only wickedness and scheming that made people unhappy, it was confusion and misunderstanding; above all, it was the failure to grasp the simple truth that other people are as real as you. And only in a story could you enter these different minds and show how they had an equal value. That was the only moral a story need have” (51).

Here is where Briony discovers the answers to her questions in the previous passage. Watching Cecilia and Robbie engage in an interaction that her mind cannot parse she is forced to recognize the complex realities of others. She becomes fascinated by this idea of complicated understandings and they become the new focus in her writing. Stories seem to her a chance to reveal the secrets of others, to explores the blended patches of what cannot be known. 

“The cost of oblivious daydreaming was always this moment of return, the realignment with what had been before and now seemed a little worse. Her reverie, once rich in plausible details, had become a passing silliness before the hard mass of the actual. It was difficult to come back. Come back, her sister used to whisper when she woke her from a bad dream. Briony had lost her godly power of creation, but it was only at this moment of return that the loss became evident; part of a daydream’s enticement was the illusion that she was helpless before its logic:forced by international rivalry to compete at the highest level among the world’s finest and to accept the challenges that came with preeminence in her field—her field of nettle slashing—driven to push beyond her limits to assuage the roaring crowd, and to be the best, and, most importantly, unique. But of course, it had all been her—by her and about her—and now she was back in the world, not one she could make, but the one that had made her, and she felt herself shrinking under the early evening sky” (98).

This passage continues to underscore Briony’s desire to be seen as praiseworthy and unique and the role that her imagination plays in this yearning. Reeling from the disaster of her play she recedes into her own fantasies, a place where she has an integral role in important events, where she is a figure known and renowned to others. But as this daydream fades, Briony is forced to recognize the reality that her presence does not confer this much status in the real world. She is a tangential figure, someone who has not yet received a starring role in life. This desire of Briony’s, to be special and important outside the confines of her imagination, explains in part her stubborn desire to incriminate Robbie later in the novel. This might also be where I relate to Briony most. I have always used my imagination to recast myself in different roles, created scenarios where I was a figure of heightened importance. Imagination is a tool to escape the confines of reality, but it looks like Briony is searching for more than an escape.

“They were safe, Cecilia was with Leon, and she, Briony, was free to wander in the dark and contemplate her extraordinary day. Her childhood had ended, she decided now as she came away from the swimming pool, the moment she tore down her poster. The fairy stories were behind her, and in the space of a few hours she had witnessed mysteries, seen an unspeakable word, interrupted brutal behavior, and by incurring the hatred of an adult whom everyone had trusted, she had become a participant in the drama of life beyond the nursery. All she had to do now was discover the stories, not just the subjects, but a way of unfolding them, that would do justice to her new knowledge. Or did she mean, her wiser grasp of her own ignorance?”(204).

Here Briony is reveling in becoming an active participant in the drama of life. She no longer has to hide behind fantasies or live life completely in her books. Real things have now happened to her and she can now work on fitting them into her framework of life, broadening her perspective of the ways of the world. She has decided to herself that today is the day she leaves the realm of childhood and starts working towards being an adult. One can see how the previous events rather than frightening or even confusing her have instead excited her, given her the role she craved innately, and almost made real life into one of her stories. 

“She would never be able to console herself that she was pressured or bullied. She never was. She trapped herself, she marched into the labyrinth of her own construction, and was too young, too awestruck, too keen to please, to insist on making her own way back. She was not endowed with, or old enough to possess, such independence of spirit. An imposing congregation had massed itself around her first certainties, and now it was waiting and she could not disappoint it at the altar. Her doubts could be neutralized only by plunging in deeper. By clinging tightly to what she believed she knew, narrowing her thoughts, reiterating her testimony, she was able to keep from mind the damage she only dimly sensed she was doing. When the matter was closed, when the sentence was passed and the congregation dispersed, a ruthless youthful forgetting, a willful erasing, protected her well into her teens” (218)

Here we can see how all of Briony’s childhood innocence and her desire to feel special and important led to her accusing an innocent man of rape. She wasn’t forced or especially compelled to confess anything, but neither was she entirely free from outside pressure in what she said. Her initial accusation sprang from the fact it matched her cyclical view of events, a version where she took center stage. Later on when she might be compelled to alter evidence, the love, support, and expectations of those around her kept her from changing her story. She got to be the center of attention and she didn’t want to disappoint those she loved. Her fantasies of uniqueness and importance got to be a reality and altering chronologies would bring that crashing down, in fact it would incur actively negative consequences. This and the true consequences of what she was doing weren’t apparent, her youth shielded her from contextual details and her imagination painted a narrative that was easy to believe. True honesty after the initial recounting would have required a significant amount of courage, to defy both the prevailing expectations of those around her and the story she had created in her own mind. And it seems Briony was not capable of being that brave, preferring to envelop herself in a cocoon of denial and ignorance. Knowing all of this what Briony did can be understood far better. It was by no means “right” and she certainly bears a heavy load of responsibility. But the paths that lead to her action reveal motives far more complex than jealousy or confusion. For all her flaws I really don’t consider her a bad person, more of a complex human being, carried down a tide of events where her flaws manifested themselves in the worst possible way.