#it is how we create shared meanings for behaviors and symbols
Note
Okay I'm back! Please share with us the lore on what the known kingdoms and lands think about and treat the reader in the self-aware au!
Oh boy did I skim through so much already known intel about the places and desperately trying to match things so that they would still fit into the TWST universe.
Do you agree with me or do you think differently?
Self-aware au
I do not take any responsibility for you reading this no matter which age group you are from!
WARNINGS: Yandere themes, religion, obsessive behavior, possessive behavior, war, violence, beheading
The different ways of admiration
Red marked places: Couldn't find any info about the place and if then only a tiny bit bc of characters (example Riddle) personality (aka cultural background.) Info will be added as soon as more is released.
Orange marked places: Some info is known but not much
Queendom of Roses
Role you occupy: Monarch/A person in a ruling position
The queendom of roses functions after the rules of the queen of hearts which were inspired by you (don't ask how)
There are many national holidays which are connected to you (or rather believed to be)
It is seen as a huge offense to break your rules and in court they swear upon your name and reign
There is actually a throne on which nobody had ever sat on. It's made for you if you ever were to appear
Is one of the most open nations towards religious believes like for example, missionaries from Briar Valley since the queendom is also very strict with their lives in you
There are eight churches in the queendom because of the import of the believes of the faes
Most do see you though as some kind of ruler instead of a god
Sunset Savanna
Role you occupy: Spokesperson for minorities/someome fighting for equality
You are often used as a symbol in protests
Especially the slums look up to you since you see them as equals
The nation is the least obsessed with you since they see you as one of them and not someone above them
The respect stems from a place of admiration
It’s a unspoken taboo to join a group which thinks religious about you
People which do think of you as a god are sneered upon
Equality is your most important trait here
That does not mean that people will see you just as another passerby
Except to be treated like a honored guest
Some go even so far to create poetry about you (look Rook)
Coral Sea
Role you occupy: Scholar/Uniter of the land and sea
The Coral Sea is strict but also not that much depending what we are talking about
If someone is thinking that they don't want to expand their knowledge and power then that's fine
But don't they dare to say that someone who claims to be inspired by you (aka Ursula) just saying this and not meaning it
It's seen as a huge offense since you inspired generation after generation which lead to the sea opening up to the land dwellers
They actually have a contract in which is written “In the name of the one that knows and sees all we shall honor the other and see them as equal as our own kin.”
They also have a fairly small population which believes that you are a God since the places that have those customs either don't seek contact or simply didn't have much to do with the merpeople
Although being separated by the water they are pretty open towards outside influences which is a mindset brought to them by saying that you were able to achieve that level of wisdom by having a open mind
Scalding Sands
Magician/Scholar of higher knowledge of the world
The residents of the Scalding Sands thank you daily since they believe they are still alive because of you
The idea of the water system is believed to invented by you, securing a better life for them
Green is seen as a colour representing you since it's the colour of nature unlike the colour of sand
The Sorcerer of the Sands was in awe when he imagined the powers you had to possess which lead to him trying to become as powerful as possible so that he could be worthy of your knowledge
Its being said that the first magic carpets had been a invention from you passed to them
About 30% is seeing you as a God due to them being a center of trade
The constant meeting of other cultures allows them to discuss you in many ways
This leads them to be the one nation knowing the most about you (small things like favorite food) but in the end you are still a mystery
Shaftlands
Role you play: Muse/Symbol of perfection
Since many cultures live there there isn't just one view on you
But they do gave things in common
There are also festivities connected to you
Most of the time they happen in spring because it's belived that with the season of blooming flowers you also rise
In fall it's said that you return to sleep until you awaken again
There is a lot of art and poetry about you
But, due to them not knowing how you look and behave, they are filled with more symbols than actual depictions
Religions about you are allowed but it's also looked down upon since you actually inspire them to reach your level instead of just cowering and praising you
This place is the most extreme nonreligious place
Saying that you might not be as perfect as said? Socially dead. Simply not being that interested in you? Shame for the entire family
You probably wouldn't want to experience that since it can get pretty lonely in a place like this
Island of woe (Spoilers for chapter 6)
Role you occupy: Overseer (God)/Inspiration for progress
If you had to pick probably the better religion
They see you, like Greek Gods, as flawed also as someone who is very similar to a human
They have temples for you but what separates them from the second religion about you is them worshipping you is a sign of respect and not absolute control loss
They also distance themselves from the cult in Briar Valley as it is too extreme for them
In their eyes you wanted them to press onward and create new things on their own
Though they are the less known religion since... let's not have too many spoilers (Japanese translations reader you know why)
It is seen as a huge offense when someone does not believe in you since it's such a fundamental part of their culture
Hades himself looked up to you whilst trying to recreate the advanced technology you had
The fact that they probably surpassed our world already is unknown to them
They will speak about their religion if you ever meet one of them though (except if you are from the Valley of Thorns)
If you are ever on the run from Briar Valleys possessive cultists probably the best place to hide
Briar Valley
Role you occupy: Overseer (God)/Ruler over everything
They are angry about other places not seeing you as they do but they are able to hide it well
Huge churches unmatched by the occasional ones in other nations are build there
In the morning, midday and evening there is a mass to which everyone attends
If you speak up against the church there can be consequences that are capable of making the life of three generations after you miserable
How dare they to question your gentle gaze which took away the loneliness of the Witch of Thorns
You are worth more than life itself and if they need to start a holy war to spread your word then so be it!
Everything being done is in your name
Laws are decided by your morals which makes the kingdom a place ruled deeply influenced by religion
That doesn't mean that religious leaders can do whatever they want
If someone is known to use your name to enrich themselves their life will be... shorter
The reason they haven't ripped the other places apart if because most allow them to talk about “you” there
There are sometimes more violent cults formed which are struck down very fast
Just don't talk bad and admire the overseer more than anything and then you should be good
#tw: yandere#tw: religion#tw: violence#tw: war#tw: obsessive behavior#tw: possessive behavior#yandere twst#yandere twisted wonderland#yandere twisted wonderland x reader#yandere twst x reader#self aware au
833 notes
·
View notes
Text
Hi everyone, and this is my post with theories and headcanons about John Titor because I love her so much and she is my daughter!! <3
❗The theories and headcanons were created with the help of my wife, who I told everything I know about this character so far (my knowledge may be incomplete). These are just our thoughts and guesses. We may be wrong on some points, sorry!!! But we have been doing a little research with John Titor's story and her voice lines in the game, and today I want to share it
John Titor's diary
In her diary entries, John Titor notes the weather on a particular day. e.g.: June 16, rain; January 29, snow, and so on. perhaps this helps her remember events better
She describes war and chaos in the world. There could be several possibilities here:
She has experienced violence in the past (abuse, abusive behavior, etc.), which traumatized her, and the war is a veiled description of her experience. This is how she conveys her feelings and perception of the world around her;
There was a war at the time (the diary does not give the year), she was a victim of warfare and violence (she was taken prisoner, sent to a concentration camp and had horrible things done to her). She kept a diary at the time or wrote about past events;
You probably know the story of John Titor, who called himself a time traveler. On a forum dedicated to creepypasta he wrote "predictions of the future", detailing events that he said might happen. Maybe John Titor (the character) was fascinated by this story and just made it all up, based on what the real John Titor predicted, because her personality was built on this mysterious person. Or...John Titor (the character) calls herself a time traveler for a reason. Maybe she really is one, and in diary she describes an event from her time (war, cancellation of the Olympics, chaos in the world) while predicting the future. These are the two reasons she has that name in the game
Fan fact: her badge looks a lot like the symbol of the existing "John Titor Foundation" that published a book about the "time traveler" that included his forum entries
1. Reverse: 1999 wiki, 2. Wikipedia
John Titor's voice lines
I was using other people's translation of her hexadecimal code phrases into words. I'm also making assumptions based on the theories i've previously described
Under "to the future" she says "crazy like me.". According to previous assumptions about her diary entries, it can be said that she is traumatized by her experiences of violence or war. she may have depression and PTSD, and this phrase is her idea of the future, which is typical of people with mental disorders;
Under "hobby" she says "Corvette 1966 black". According to Google, that's the make of the car. Why is she talking about it? Let's look at "bond: night", her phrase is "wanna go on a drive". I think these phrases are related. Maybe she doesn't sleep at night (she has bruises under her eyes) and it's at night that she can spend time doing her hobby: she's literally driving a car. Or it's in her imagination and she's just reflecting in this time;
In the "hat and hair" column she says "hey don't touch me". She may have experienced violence, it could have been bullying by someone or it could have happened during the war she wrote about in the diary. In any case, she is not tactile at all as a result of the traumatic events, she hates to be touched and doesn't let anyone touch her. You can also see that her hair is cut unevenly, which could also be due to the traumatic events;
Under "clothing and torso" she says "a soldier's physique". This description could mean that she witnessed or participated in warfare and/or, again, experienced violence. Either way, she notes her resilience. She was able to endure and survive horrific events as if she were a soldier. Or is this another reference to "time traveler" John Titor, who called himself a soldier
Why does John Titor only interact with everyone using hex code?
Given the theory that she is indeed a time traveler, we can make the assumption that code is the "language of the future," a way of interacting between people whose lives are entirely built on and dependent on technology;
Perhaps because of the traumatic events I wrote about earlier, John Titor no longer wants to associate herself with people in any way, to be like them, to speak human language. She decided to completely restructure her personality and become something like a mechanical machine
That's it for now! I hope this post is enjoyed by the likes of theory and headcanon fans in this fandom, I really tried hard to make it as good as possible. Again, I don't consider everything described above to be canon, it's just speculation and conjecture. I wanted to share my thoughts, and I'm proud of it because I love John Titor!! Also my knowledge may be incomplete and my views may differ. I welcome constructive criticism and reasoning <3
#fandom#characters#theory#theory about character#headcanon#research#reverse 1999#r1999#john titor#reverse 1999 john titor#r1999 john titor
33 notes
·
View notes
Text
Hecatia and the Lunarians
Blame/credit @sukimas for expressing interest in this...
Okay, so, Hecatia gets to talk for a few paragraphs in Alternative Facts in Eastern Utopia about Hell's history, and by implication, her own. Eirin and Toyohime each get a full chapter in Cage in Lunatic Runagate and they convey quite a lot of things about the Lunarian mindset and worldview. One thing that's struck me recently is that, although Hecatia is explicitly anti-Lunarian on a far deeper level than any other character who's gotten dialogue (Yukari's probably equally anti-Lunarian but she's less talkative about why), Hecatia is also positioned as a similar kind of entity to the Lunarians.
Firstly, they both tell origin myths about their associated locations which are straightforwardly contrary to both the familiar mythology and a more secular historical analysis. Hecatia talks about Hell originating not as a place of punishment and rehabilitation, but as a construct by powerful people who were uninterested in living according to conventional virtues.
What Hecatia probably means by Hell here is the Greek Tartaros (or Tartarus), which undergoes a historical transformation from an abyssal realm where defeated godlike powers are imprisoned indefinitely (eg in Hesiod) to a place where mortals and some minor immortals who transgressed against the gods were condemned to ironic torments in the more Classical Greek mythological writings.
But Tartaros is just a primordial place in Greek myths at every point. Like Kaos, or Gaea, or Aether, or Ouranos, it's both a deity and a space, part of the early structure of the universe before there are really personalities. Nobody built it.
Similarly, Toyohime tells a story about how the Lunar Capital was created by the great sage Tsukuyomi and their* desire to avoid the spread of impurity and death, and also tells a story identifying the Lunar Capital with the undersea Dragon Palace of Japanese folklore. And this is, in its way, consistent both with the textual tradition in which Tsukuyomi is the killer of the food goddess Ukemochi out of disgust with how she vomits food out, and also the fact that Tsukuyomi is a god without much cultic presence, a figure mostly in primordial mythology, unlike their very active siblings Amaterasu and Susanoo. (There are a couple shrines to them, especially as subordinate parts of large Amaterasu shrine complexes. But not many.)
But it's also not really derived from the mythology directly, and it's not quite drawing upon a clear historical transformation- Tsukuyomi-no-Mikoto seems to have always been primarily a literary figure, distant from practical religion.
Now, the Lunarians reject divinity, in the sense of rejecting the obligation to humans that being a kami in a shrine requires, the interactions and subordination to ritual. Hecatia also describes her original Hell as a place where people reject rules they don't like. So we also have this interesting convergence- these two sets of figures who assert a separate history of their own existence, disconnected from what ordinary humans thought then or now, also share in this kind of symbolic disconnect.
So one way of looking at their alternate histories is to treat them as assertions about the world and the universe more than statements of plain fact, which is definitely workable within the fictional context as well- Hecatia is manipulating Aya in her interview, Toyohime doesn't know the full details of the "history of the moon" and is to an extent repeating what she's been told. There's been quite a lot of good meta about those worldviews you can go read.
But another similarity that falls out of this analysis is that both sides of this pair exist in a state of relative freedom within Touhou cosmology, because the Lunarians are figures of literary myths who don't have to be reconciled with their behavior at the shrine, and Hekate is a famously confusing and difficult figure within the Greek and later Greco-Roman mythological complex- Hesiod presents her as a kind of universal helpful figure, as does the Homeric Hymn to Demeter, but other sources from early periods present her as sketchy or hellish. Still later, she would become treated as a nearly-omnipotent goddess in some of the Greek Magical Papyri- but what we know about her cult and position today is limited and even contemporary writers seem confused.
Hecatia is thus free in the cracks, because human imagination and human history have left her with great latitude, just like the objects of her distaste, the Lunarians. I suppose in a way it's the contempt bred of familiarity- you have all this freedom and this is how you use it? etc.
*Tsukuyomi's gender is unclear, according to Wikipedia in English, even given early poetic sources that refer to them in masculine terms. So I suspect there's some real uncertainty going on in the scholarship too.
36 notes
·
View notes
Text
Atla The Rift comic sucks part 1
Comparing apples and zucchinis
The past vs future, change vs tradition is very interesting dilemma to explore. And they've chosen two good representatives for each side - Aang, the last of his kind and the avatar vs Toph who refuses to be bound, creates new style of bending utilizing modern structure, does what she wants really. Secondary are acolytes vs factory, same thing. And my God do they suck at pitting these two against each other. Both of these sides take everything in the world and go me. Like those Katara touches necklace memes "lets eat. my mother used to eat". Connecting things that have very little to do each other just so we can have a conflict. misunderstanding but it's unintentional. They just lost the ability to make comprehensive parallels.
100+ year old ritual = bad parenting
Rituals are rooted in tradition. We do them because they are symbolic, we do what we do because that's how it's done. We honor our roots, ancestors etc etc
The phrase triggers unhappy memories for Toph, particularly of her restrictive childhood. Fair enough. But. Some of these aren't even "tradition", her parents were just like that. "This is how it's done" is no logical response to "why can't I play with other kids". There have to be rich kids with friends out there. Blind kids with friends. This is solely Beifong issue. I despise forced parallels
The following statement is just incorrect:
He didn't forget (although 100+ years are justifiable excuse). He was 10 and wasn't paying attention in the first place, figured there is plenty more festivals to remember. It wasn't celebrated because the peeps are dead. A genocide if you will. The world wouldn't end even if there were no humans around, doesn't mean we should just cease all cultural activities
Also it was ESTABLISHED that we're doing this for AANG. You know, our beloved friend the last Airbender? He wants to honor his long gone culture for a special day. Also also past avatar has something important to say, what if something happens (and something ALWAYS happens)
Instead of addressing any of this Aang goes the air nomad philosophy route. just WHY? These are not insults just for the sake of insulting, they have opposing views and should talk about it maybe. Were not even in the place to have change vs tradition argument, we're just having a field trip atm. Simple "this is really important for me and I want to share this day with my found family" solves everything but noooo. Zen mode, it will sort itself out, I'm not actively getting involved (man. this is TOPH. you should know better. rock beats airbender etc etc)
Toph is mean just to be mean. Not the cuddliest character but when did she go around insulting your every move? Especially since they didn't really ask her to do anything. You don't have to actively participate, why are you complaining in every panel? OOC behavior just to keep that gaang rift nice and divided
I can't spend 30 seconds to explain why we're about to be pulverized but I can do ancient history 101
he doesn't deny this! why. to have aang vs toph and co that's why. the most pointless fight in existence. because we have time for that apparently
the spirit is just asshole in the end
I'm not pulling caps for this. Yangchen did everything to keep her promise, not her fault Sozin happened. And let's not forget people ran away in all directions from fire nation for a century, why wouldn't they inhabit this nice empty land? The spirit was angry about his friend's demise (turns out she did that herself and is very chill. And can manifest freely too). Spirit does not ask for balance in any way, shape or form, humans must die so that I can have this land to stare at. What if some spirits decided to reside in Ba Sing Se, we destroy entire city? I thought that refinery screwing nature was going to be the big plot point but nope. Cabbage restaurant -gone. Houses - gone. You can't even walk here, disrespectful, gtfo. Extreme situation that calls for stupid resolution - spirit dead. Although looking back I can find some appreciation for not managing to tie everything nicely, cookie cutter avatar style. But imagine how much better it would've been if conflicts were well written in the first place
We got another festival so all is well?
22 notes
·
View notes
Text
Undead Unluck ch.178 thoughts
[Legs for Days]
(Contents: Rip and Latla analysis, Sick/general UMA analysis)
...Wait, can't Rip turn off Unrepair? He cut Sean's gut open last loop AND implanted a third eye on him, and he explicitly told him that he could deactivate Unrepair to save him if he joined Under. So...there's no reason he can't operate on Leila in this loop! He just needs to learn how to turn it off first, I imagine, since obviously he killed Leila before when he didn't know he even had a power
Huh...I hope that revelation doesn't diminish the weight of any of the scenes to come
It certainly doesn't take anything away from the climax of this week's chapter: Rip AND Latla using Blade Runner in tandem! I knew Tozuka would find a way to make forcing Rip to use it again make sense without completely contradicting Latla's wish for Rip not to do so, but I never saw this coming! This is a really nice middle ground between Latla's statements last loop; "I don't want to see you wearing these dangerous things" and "Don't hog the spotlight, Rip, if it means saving Leila, I'll do whatever it takes, too"
Latla's issue with Rip's behavior wasn't just that he was self-destructive, but that he was leaving her behind while he did so, never allowing her to share any of the burden. By cutting off his legs and replacing them with Blade Runner, Rip walked onward without Latla, forcing her to always be trailing behind him. Now, though, they've taken that step together and will be walking side-by-side until they achieve their shared goal
Now, I do imagine that this will make using Blade Runner more difficult. Certain blade shapes may be more difficult to produce via coordinating between two users, and the flight ability may be harder to use since it won't be as easy to balance, but there are bound to be advantages too. For one, they don't have to be attached at the hip, so Rip and Latla could potentially do pincer attacks while also having more flexibility to make less conventional blade shapes. More importantly, this forces Latla to be on the battlefield more directly, so her prediction ability will likely come more into play like when Rip used her to create a scatter attack in the pre-Spring fight
I'll save any further discussion of Blade Runner for next week once we see it in action, though. I'm sure I'll have a lot to say about it
For now, I want to talk about Sick for a bit. Aside from Clothy, I think he might be the most endearing UMA thus far on the basis that he's shockingly human. Not only is he the single most human-shaped UMA we've ever met (Seal being a close second), he's also got a pretty well-defined personality. Not only was seeing him getting mopey over being ignored a novel reaction among the UMA, he also is one of only two UMA that we've met that's taken a direct interest in human culture, the other being Spring. Where Spring loved games, Sick loves music, and both wear human clothes
I wonder if perhaps this is meant to signify that they don't have the total disdain for humanity that God wants them to, with clothes acting as a symbol affinity with humans? That would certainly explain why Clothy was so easily endeared to Andy and Fuuko; as the clothes they wear, he is literally the closest UMA to humanity, so when other UMA follow that Rule that shouldn't apply to them, they also become closer to being human
Sick also says that he's the only Rule to make the world turn beautifully, which is clearly false considering that he's number 10 of the Master Rules, but that's also pretty reminiscent of Spoil's mentality. Spoil claimed that the world was ugly before he came into being, and that it's thanks to him that humans stopped taking their lives for granted
I think it's fair to say that every UMA views their Rule as necessary and beautiful, but it's really interesting that two Rules pertaining to death have explicitly called their abilities beautiful and noted how they help humanity survive. Sick is necessary for population control, and Spoil is necessary for both the nutrient cycle and for helping humanity appreciate what they have. It's ironic, then, that both of them have those viewpoints while having been ordered by God to make humanity suffer. Yes, they enjoy the sounds of agony and the sight of rotten bodies, but that's just them reveling in the negative aspects of their Rules because that's what God wants them to do; if it weren't for that order, how would they feel about the suffering of humanity? Would they be neutral to it, as a necessary step in regulating the Rules that allow humans to find meaning in their continued existance? Would it be like a human caring for a garden, tenderly caring for the plants that survive by preening those that don't? Would they have resigned acceptance of the death they cause, mourning the dead as an unfortunate side effect?
I think that's the case, given Spring's tears at the revelation that there were humans who could accept him in the end
Something I've always wondered was what would happen to the UMA once God is defeated. The Earth and humanity will remain in the end; people will still be able to live and die as they choose, allowed to make their own mistakes and seal their own fates without the aid or interference of the Gods, but will the UMA themselves all be killed with their Rules left behind with no one to oversee them? It's become abundantly clear that while they aren't human, the UMA are people too, crafted in God's image just as humanity was. In a sense, I suppose the UMA are a sort of angel, which now that I think about it is a perfectly apt comparison since we first met Spoil disguised as an angel statue
Will it be fair to them to cull the UMA as monsters when the truth is what they really want by their nature is to shape the world for the better? They hate humans because of how God nurtured them, but they want to create something beautiful, and it's quite clear to me that, if you ignore their devotion to a cruel master, they've actually done exactly that. The world is a fascinating and beautiful place, ever-changing and spurring its people to grow, and as Fuuko says herself, the Rules aren't really punishments, they're just something that bad people can take advantage of like anything else. The goal shouldn't be to kill off and destroy the Rules, but to craft the Rules in such a way that they benefit people instead of oppressing them
Look at that, once again Undead Unluck has me worrying about the wellbeing of the enemies, but this time it's about the monsters rather than the people. Just another thing that cements UU as one of my favorite series; I never really cared about what would happen to the Hollows in Bleach or the Akuma in D.Gray-Man, but I honestly really do hope that the UMA get just as happy an ending here as the Negators
13 notes
·
View notes
Text
What I Use Animal Archetypes For
To start this off, I want to make something very clear. Animal spirits are not the same as spirit animals, and animal archetypes should not be treated as a spirit animal concept. Spirit animals are specifically a North American Indigenous concept, and not all tribes believe in such a thing. This is a closed practice.
There are similar concept among other religions and cultures, such as the Norse Fylgja (plural Fylgjur), but ultimately none of these concepts should be treated the same.
Animal spirits, literally, refer to the spirits of individual animals. I venerate animal spirits and even work with a select few, but animal archetypes (while they can give you an idea on how the spirit can be) aren't entirely about animal spirits.
What are animal archetypes?
When we look at the definition of archetype it is defined as "a very typical example of a person or thing" and "a recurrent symbol or motif in literature, art or mythology." This is exactly what animal archetypes are: symbolism of an animal based on their behavioral patterns, as well as how different cultures and religions view the animal from a folkloric or spiritual standpoint.
Animal archetypes have little to do with actual animal spirits. Venerating and working with animal spirits are different than animal archetypes, but that will be discussed in a different post.
What do I need to know before working with animal archetypes?
In order to understand animal archetypes you must research two things: the natural behaviors of the animal + how different cultures and religions view the animal. You can come up with your own personal correspondences for an animal archetype, but understand that this would be something along the lines of UPG. There is a reason animals are viewed a certain way from a cultural or religious perspective, and it's best not to disregard that.
How can I use animal archetypes in my magic or spiritual practices?
In magic, you can use animal archetypes to represent something specific relating to the results you're seeking. This doesn't require you to venerate or work with an animal spirit. It's merely symbolism, though if you're into thoughtforms or egregores then you could do that too. If you choose to use animal remains while also working with animal archetypes, pay respect to that animal's spirit. Give that animal spirit some sort of offering, ask for its consent and go from there (or don't, if the animal spirit wants its remains to be left alone).
For example; if you're doing a protection or warding working, you could use (or create) a doll of an apex predator or an animal known for having few predators that can take it down. Something strong and with great endurance. A wolf, bear, shark, rhino or lion would work well. This would be a more offensive working, since these animals are more likely to fight back.
In divination, animal archetypes can represent an individual. When I say "represent the individual", I mean from a personality, behavioral and spiritual standpoint. My personal belief is we all have that one animal archetype that best represents us throughout our entire lives, perhaps one that we've been attached to since we were children, and anything after that is meant to help guide and teach us depending on where we are in life. Not the spirit of that animal, but the symbolism behind it. I created my own spread for this type of thing and after thinking about it, I decided to share. This spread is best used with an animal oracle deck (1st question) and a secondary divination deck, such as tarot (2nd and 3rd questions). If you use this spread when doing a reading for others, or posting your own reading you've done online, at least give me credit for the spread.
From a spiritual standpoint, we can always learn from animal archetypes. When using the spread I provided, really pay attention to the second and third question. It can help with introspection and deciding what you need to change. This isn't limited to divination, though. Sometimes we can find animal archetypes in our dreams. Sometimes dreams are connected to our mental health and physical health, so if an animal shows up in a dream don't assume it is a sign from some sort of deity or spirit. If you didn't ask for one to send you a sign, don't already venerate or work with a spirit or entity... then it likely isn't a sign from a spirit or entity.
For example; grizzly bears are commonly associated with power, but also aggression. If you dream of being chased or attacked by a grizzly bear, then there are a few questions to ask yourself. What have I been afraid of recently? What has been giving me anxiety recently? Have I felt threatened by somebody recently? What am I really running from? Asking these questions after having a dream like that can help you analyze yourself and the current state of your life.
I hope this was helpful to some of you. If you have any questions feel free to ask and I'll do the best I can to give you answers.
389 notes
·
View notes
Note
🦁🐻🦒 anon here again
Firstly, what happened to you for 2 days? What crazy hiatus was that? I'm sure not only me but others were worried too! Could you explain what happened, if it's not too much trouble?
Second, to answer the question: yes, I am neurodivergent. I don't talk about this so much with anyone because: you know this has become something commonplace in today's world (everything is autism, everything is ADHD, sometimes there isn't even a diagnosis, and often the individual uses the clinical case to justify his own failure and defects) and also by my family who, well, I'll summarize: they are all very alienated in everything (spirituality, behavior in general, how things work, etc.) and I was always different from the others (a "boy" who doesn't like cars, football, or being shirtless) (and making it clear that the quotation marks are because they didn't consider me normal, not because I'm not a boy or anything like that) (and I think I'm writing too many parentheses and this is getting ambiguous) (and oh my God, I looked very cult and edgy saying "I'm different from the other kids"😭😭), so, in this case, my family, kind of not accepting the uncomfortable truth that I was normal, but different, they created this generalized idea that I was abnormal and were incessantly looking for something that would validate this, which is why I had many exams throughout my life (a good part of the physical body, brain, ears, nerves) and nothing ever resulted, much less the psychologist's report, which not only revealed that I was normal but that I was even MORE than normal. In this case, I have AH/SD, which in my language is "Altas Habilidades/Superdotação", in English, well, I'm basically gifted, which explains my behavior (precocity, taste and high level of reading and interpretation; varied interests and differentiated; tendency to associate with older people; asynchronism; preference for doing certain things
alone; independence; autonomy; acute and refined sense of humor, filled with irony, sarcasm, mockery and abuse of dark, morbid jokes and acidic comments, extending even into other spheres of coexistence other than humor; highly developed aesthetic sensitivity; high observation capacity; leadership; atypical tastes and preferences, wide vocabulary and use of it; ability for: complex, symbolic thinking and reasoning, abstract concepts, relationships between different things, situations or facts; early physical and social development; great sensitivity; high creativity; spontaneity; tenacity; difficulty in relating outside the comfort zone (new environment, new people, tastes different from yours that he doesn't understand, etc.), quick ability to adapt and create intimacy, competitiveness) and because I don't fit into other cases, such as ASD, ADHD, ODD and the like. In this case, I don't comment much because I'm afraid of giving the wrong impression, of people thinking I'm a victimist or an exhibitionist or something like that, and also because of my family dramas too, and because that's who I am, right? 🤨 Isn't it ridiculous to see these people on the internet (and sometimes in real life) basing their entire personality on their gender, ethnicity, sexual orientation, ideology, social class, damn, I'm much more than neurodivergent, I don't need to keep talking so much about this, there are so many more interesting things to talk about me…
And about the failure in communication, I think it's because of the geographic barrier: look, I assume that you are anglophone, and therefore, from a low-context culture, since most countries that share Anglophony were British colonies, then share this characteristic. But I am lusophone, but, unlike another country that shares Lusophony, my culture is high-context. This means that we don't just analyze the type, but how it is said, the moment, the manner, the intonation, we capture the emotion in speech and writing, while low-context countries are more literal, they don't have as many idiomatic expressions, figures of speech, so they end up causing some confusion sometimes (that's why people in my country are known for not saying "no"). For example, when you said "You're treating my ask box like it's an entire Tumblr - and also, it's not questions" Idk what you really mean by that, really, but in my head that sounded a bit like "you don't belong here, can't you see you're using my ask box wrong?"
I think I understand what is being said when using emojis, camelcase, and slang, because that way I can capture the humor of the writing more easily 🥰🥰
one -> hiya! and oh my god you're the second person to mention that I've been gone for two days... I didn't mean to disappear!!! I was just in... hm— I guess I was dead? 💀 And not like ACTUALLY dead, but more so, dead to the world. On Wednesday something major happened and I was in disbelief for a bit. (My student loans got paid off in full eventhough there was $20k USD in debt, I didn't do anything aside from my usual affirmations) Then the next day another thing happened and I was still in disbelief. (I manifested something overnight involving my job after affirming that I can manifest anything I want overnight) And Friday was my day off of work so I went outside and spent a bunch of money on stuff I wanted. I had no idea I hadn't posted on Tumblr in a couple days, I'll be honest. Time got away from me 😓
two -> ahhHhhHh so my spider senses were right! we're more alike than I thought. and yeaaaaaah, it is pretty weird how much more 'common' autism and adhd seems to be in the eyes of social media. HAHAHAHA no no no, I didn't think that was edgy at all!!! being 'different' is what makes people interesting, after all. and yeah, I can understand where you're coming from when it comes to people using their superpowers/handicaps/gifts as an excuse to do bad things. sometimes I find myself doing that, but only when I'm trying to explain to others why I don't get certain jokes that they say or I have trouble with telling the difference between sarcasm and the truth.
three -> ah yes, the language barrier. I had a sneaking suspicion that may have been an issue as well. WAIT NOOOOOOOOO 😭 I would never say that you do not belong!!!! You will always belong here!!!! I— gods I wish I could explain what I meant in a cohesive way. 😫 I love it when you send me your words in my asks box! Your words of wisdom should be shared by YOU!!! and when you share your words of wisdom to me, and I make posts with them, it feels like I am stealing your words of wisdom!!! I do not want to take credit for your beautiful words! I don't know how else to explain it, I'm so sorry 😭
9 notes
·
View notes
Text
The Firebending Masters Re-watch
THIS EPISODE!!!!!!!!!!!!! I LOVE IT SO FUCKING MUCH!!!! AHHH!!!
[id: Zuko & Aang back to back looking around at the rainbow fire created by the dragons, Ran & Shao. end id]
Toph's story about learning earth-bending from the badger moles - the original earth-benders - was amazing! I just think that's so fucking cool, that animals were always the original benders, & that Toph learned that way. I Just Love This Show A Lot.
[id: a gif of Toph being kissed by a badger mole. end id]
+500 iconic behavior points for Toph for this story.
There is something so narratively beautiful in Zuko deciding to join the Avatar in a mission to restore peace & balance to the world & learning in the process that his fire-bending doesn't have to come from rage it can come from love - fire is life, not just destruction. This lesson is truly what Aang needed too, in order to learn fire-bending. This episode serves as such a beautiful contrast to the episode "The Deserter" where we see only the violent & destructive nature of fire, & how Zhao defeats himself with fire fueled by rage.
I have seen this episode referred to as a "power up" kinda thing for Zuko & Aang but that's not how I see it at all. I think that this episode was about learning the true nature of fire-bending, for both Zuko & Aang, who have only ever known about fire fueled by anger & created for the purpose of destruction. Both boys still had to actually practice their forms after this & continue learning & improving, with this very important newfound knowledge.
I also love that it was a dance. It's just kind of beautiful that in a show about the horrors of war & lost childhood & what it means to regain peace & balance, the answer to understanding the element that's been the symbol of the enemy this whole time is dancing, not fighting. I don't know, I just really like the message behind that. +1000 iconic behavior points for Zuko & Aang each for being deemed worthy by freaking DRAGONS. love that for them.
I'm just gonna pepper in also that this episode REALLY said Zukaang rights. I mean aside from the fact that they're narrative foils, former enemies working together to master the final element - fire - they literally dance surrounded by rainbow fire. C'mon.
And I mean, Zuko & Aang's dynamic is just great & fun in this episode. I cracked up when Aang was trying to get Zuko to share his flame & Zuko was like "quit cheating off me!" they're such....children lol (another great moment was "I don't care what anyone else says, Zuko, I think you're pretty smart" as well as "what do you want to do now?" "I don't know, contemplate our place in the universe?")
Also, this scene was hilarious & also meaningful - I really do love the writing of this show --
Zuko: Yeah. It's like the Sun, [He curls his hand into a fist.] but inside of you. Do you guys realize this?
Sun Warrior chief: [Smiling.] Well, our civilization is called the Sun Warriors ... so yeah. Zuko That's why my firebending was so weak before. Because for so many years, hunting you [Turns toward Aang as screen zooms out to show Aang.] was my drive ... it was my purpose. [Aang turns toward Zuko as well.] So when I joined you, I lost sight of my inner fire. But now, I have a new drive. [Cut to Zuko's face as screen zooms in.] I have to help you defeat my father and restore balance to the world.
The ending with Zuko & Aang demonstrating their moves & Sokka & Katara teasing them cracked me up. Another great episode!
19 notes
·
View notes
Text
Magic, as it is often understood in various spiritual and mystical practices, is closely tied to the stories and narratives we create for ourselves. These narratives can shape our beliefs, perspectives, and even our actions. Let's delve into how these narratives and the concept of magic intersect:
Narrative Creation: Magic often begins with a story. This story might revolve around deities, spirits, energy, or other supernatural elements. People craft these narratives to make sense of the world or to give themselves a sense of purpose. These narratives can be deeply personal and may vary from person to person.
Belief and Imagination: Once the narrative is established, belief and imagination come into play. People believe in the elements of their magical narrative, and they imagine their interactions with these elements. This is where rituals, spells, and practices are infused with personal meaning.
Self-Fulfilling Prophecies: The power of belief cannot be underestimated. If someone truly believes that a spell, ritual, or intention can change their life, it can influence their behavior, attitude, and choices. This, in turn, can lead to self-fulfilling prophecies, where their belief manifests as actual changes in their life, even if it's just in their perception.
Placebo Effect: Much of what people attribute to magic can be explained by the placebo effect. When people believe in the efficacy of a spell or ritual, their minds and bodies respond accordingly. For example, if they cast a "healing spell" and truly believe it will work, they might feel a boost in their mood and even experience a sense of healing, even if the underlying medical issue remains unchanged.
Self-Identity: Belief in magic and participation in magical practices can become an integral part of one's self-identity. It shapes how they see themselves in the world and their role in the grander narrative. Some may identify as witches, shamans, or other magical practitioners, and this identity can influence their behavior and worldview.
Community and Ritual: Shared narratives and magical practices can also create a sense of community. People with similar beliefs and practices often come together to reinforce their shared narratives through group rituals and ceremonies. This sense of belonging can be powerful and enhance the magical experience.
Symbolism and Meaning: Magic often uses symbolism and meaning to give power to rituals and spells. The choice of specific herbs, crystals, or words in a spell is symbolic, and it's the belief in these symbols that gives the ritual its power. This is why different cultures and belief systems have their own unique symbols and correspondences.
Personal Growth: For many, magic is not just about external change but also about personal growth and development. The narrative they tell themselves through magical practices can serve as a framework for setting intentions, focusing on self-improvement, and overcoming personal challenges.
In summary, magic is not about altering the laws of the universe but rather about the power of the human mind to shape our reality through belief, imagination, and the narratives we create. The story we tell ourselves can be a source of inspiration, empowerment, and personal transformation, even if the supernatural elements remain a matter of personal belief rather than objective reality.
#witchblr#witchcraft#witches of tumblr#spiritual growth#psychology#self care#self awareness#healing#human behavior
6 notes
·
View notes
Note
Oh I have to disagree! Hear me out… I don’t really think that Tom is a psychopath, at least not entirely. 1/6
Jo said in an interview that if merope had survived and raised him, he would’ve been normal. Neither the gunts genes nor the love potion had any effect on him. At all. It’s just a misconception in the HP fandom. Jo said that The love potion was just a symbolic way of showing that he came out of a loveless union. And that he would’ve been completely fine if his mother raised him. His loveless upbringing in the orphanage is what stunted his emotional growth and twisted him. 2/6
There’s actually this interesting bit about Children in orphanages written by Jo herself: “Another day, another children’s institution and I was shown into a room full of totally silent babies. They had learned that crying brought no comfort and their lack of interest in eye contact was eerie. The photographer wanted me to smile; I wanted to cry.” 3/6
“He hardly ever cried.” Is how miss Cole describes Tom as a baby. ring any bells? 4/6
Just think about it. It’s his forever wound. his downfall is a mother’s love, starting from Lily to end with narcissa. That’s why his relationship with Nagini is so fascinating to me, Merope can speak to snakes, Nagini can turn into one. Miss Cole wonders if Merope came from a Circus. while Nagini actually works there. 5/6
Both were abandoned by their love interest..Nagini by Creedence, and Merope by riddle senior. Not to mention that both of them were the same age when Tom was born. Nagini helps rebirth Voldemort in goblet of fire, Pettigrew literally had to “milk” her venom for the ritual. Need I say more? 6/6
-----------------------------------
Thank you for sharing your take! I loved some of your ideas, though I have to disagree back on some. What the creators say about their work can be illuminating, but it's always an addition to canon. In canon (and by canon I mean 7 books, though some might disagree), there is nothing definite about Tom's condition. So it's not a misconception to say he's a psychopath and to believe the continued Amortentia use might have contributed to his inability to love - it's one of possible interpretations. There is nothing in the text to outright confirm or deny it.
Tom meets almost all criteria to be classified as a psychopath: ego-centric, lacking empathy, capable only of shallow emotional connections; charming, with low frustration tolerance, impulsive, pathological liar, prone to violence. If Merope had raised him, he could have indeed been different, although I can see several ways of development. From how we see her in canon, she doesn’t seem likely to be able to provide Tom with a healthy environment, but some people transform drastically when they give birth to a child, so maybe this could have happened to her. Having a healthy influence, love, and attention since childhood could stir Tom in the right direction. Many psychopaths lead satisfying lives and never hurt anybody. In canon, though, Tom's circumstances played a big role as well, I agree with you here.
What you said about children not crying in orphanages + what Mrs. Cole said to describe Tom seem to contradict each other to me.
Mrs. Cole: He was a funny baby too. He hardly ever cried.
Mrs. Cole makes an accent on it, implying that Tom differed from other children and that he was the only one to show this kind of behavior, even though they were all raised in a similar way.
Basically, there can be different interpretations about what Tom is, how he came to be the way he is and what could have been done to make him different. I explained mine, you explained yours - there can't be a right or wrong view here because canon is ambiguous in this regard. I do love the parallel you mentioned with mother’s love being Tom’s downfall, this creates a sense of beautiful and tragic poetry.
24 notes
·
View notes
Text
Your name is "Equius Zahhak", you are currently involved in yet another brawl against your robots while awaiting the avril of an acquaintance you gained over a shared interest in machinery, she has recently asked you for favor concerning an object belonging to her moirail, so she is bringing it to you for a thorough examination... as you finsh the last robot your butler trots in with a fresh towel and news that your guests have arrived and, are waiting for you down stairs...
"D--> E%cellent,escort them here so I may be done with this swiftly as possible"
You command as you walk towards thr near by work bench to assure your tools and supplies are all I'm order. After a small amount of time your butler returns the two trolls following behind, they both look to be around your age, you at first recognize your acquaintance "KATIAT PYERIM" shes a jade troll with whom's decorated with a pair of goggles, a scaf and matching jacket all displaying the color of her blood, the next is a new troll a gold blood her left eye is teal while the other is a sade of violet, a gray sweater ,a gold skirt, and she appears to be clutching a covered object close to her chest.
"}|{ Greetings highb/ood we thank for a//owing us a moment of your precious time."
She then gives you a small bow, the proper behavior is a slight shock to you as more often then not those of lower caste lack such manners, your acquaintance gives an odd look to her moirail as she begins to speak
"Equius This is My Moirail Musiqa,Musi, This Is Equius. I think he can Help You Out much Better than I can Concerning Your Problem”
She says while gently placing a had on the other trolls sholder, you cough to grab their attention,
"D--> Now that the 100se introductions have been handled what e%actly 'IS' the problem the requires my superior e%pertise?"
Musiqa is still for a moment, she gently unveils what she was holding, and as it is reviled you find its a violen ,a white and broken violen, you scoff at this and then return to your work bench, snapping you fingers.
"D--> Bring it here so I may access what must be done!"
Musiqa places the violen gently next to you l, then steps away, you begin to study the instrument..
"D--> Honestly it 10dicrous that I..."
You pause to you notice a small ingraved symbol on the side
"D--> What is..?"
You quickly recognize the symbol to match your own and by the age of the instrument it could only mean one thing.
"D--> HOW DID YOU AQIURE THIS?!
You shouted angerly at the gold blood
"D--> THIS VI01EN HAS CREATED BY MY ANCESTOR, HOW DID A 10WB100D LIKE YOU AQIURE SUCH AN OBJECT!!!??"
Musiqa was clearly frightened but you where to far angery to care...
"Watch Yourself Zahhak, if You Don't Chill the Fuck Out real Quick, I'll do it For you."
Before you able to respond to her remark you here a nosie that you know all to well, one of the less damaged robots has reactived and was charging straight towards Musiqa, in moment of pure instinct you shove her out of your way and attack the rouge bot, it takes a few hits, but youswiftly destroy the robot. You turn you attention to your guests, Katiat appears to be looking over Musiqa for damage no doubt a bruise is now froming where you had shoved her. You approach the two while preparing to apologize, but you stop, the area where you had made contact with her was spot less not a bruise in sight.
"D--> It...It can't be"
You wisper in shock, you move katiat away from the other troll and examine her yourself, your eyes where not deceiving you, this lowwblood this complete stranger was some how Immune to your strength.
18 notes
·
View notes
Text
Huge ass disclaimer: I am not a psychologist— I will cite sources at the end, but parts of this come from my own personal experience with dissociation and my knowledge on certain topics. This will be focusing primarily on structural dissociation and how John experiences it (bearing in mind the source of this dissociation is from BPD) rather than the broader topic of BPD, as I lack enough knowledge/personal experience to delve deeper into that. However, if you have any insight whatsoever that you would like to share, please do! Anons should be on if you want to do so anonymously.
Anyway, long post ahead, this is probably just part one of many. We’ll see. Hope you enjoy this!
Glossary
ANP (Apparently Normal Part): Part or parts of the un-integrated personality that focuses on day-to-day life; chores, job, social situations, connections, rest, so on. This part remains mostly in “front” (in control).
BPD (Borderline Personality Disorder): Personality disorder characterized by emotional intensity, frantic behaviors and fear of abandonment, chronic feelings of emptiness, suicidal thoughts and ideation, difficulty controlling anger, identity disturbance, unstable personal relationships, impulsivity, and/or paranoid ideation.
Comorbidity: The likelihood of two or more disorders occurring together.
CPTSD: A complex form of PTSD that has numerous traumatic events happen over a lifetime and compounds on itself. Differs with PTSD in terms of having more emotional parts and being higher on the structural dissociation scale.
EP (Emotional Part): Part or parts of the un-integrated personality that focuses on trauma responses (fight, flight, freeze, fawn) and memories regarding traumatic events or high-stress situations. These parts can appear during moments of recurring stress or similar trauma to the one they endured, but remain mostly or wholly separate from the ANP.
Structural Dissociation: works off of the assumption that no one is born with an integrated personality, and via factors like abuse, neglect, and trauma, disorganized attachments are developed and the personality fails to integrate. Due to this, there is a division between the apparently normal part (ANP) and emotional part(s) (EP)— the primary level sees one ANP and one EP (commonly seen in PTSD), the secondary level sees one ANP and numerous EPs (commonly seen in BPD, OSDD, and CPTSD), and the tertiary level sees numerous ANPs and EPs (commonly seen in DID and, on occasion, certain OSDD cases).
—————
Parts
In this sort-of introductory post, I want to focus on the presence of John’s parts, mainly the ANP (that I have dubbed ‘orange’) and EP(s) (which collectively create what I call ‘purple’). Note that the parts are not hugely elaborated (meaning separate in mannerisms/outward identity), so there is some overlap between each part. The more elaborated a part is, the more separate it is from the rest of the parts— this is mostly seen in DID and OSDD, not BPD. Here is a very bleh diagram of how I think John’s parts work, using the color symbolism I provided:
Purple is a blend-ish of two EPs, but because of the game, I’m unsure of the distinction between the two. (There is one, I’m just kinda dumb.)
ANP
The apparently normal part (ANP) of John is the one we see primarily throughout the game, and the part most people are familiar with. The plans, the schemes, that one time with the LSD— that was most likely this part. As the ANP, “orange” deals with the normal day-to-day life, and most likely handles the stressors of being a CIA agent as well as whatever happened in 1968. There is some nuance to be had here, as we the players see some of the characteristics of BPD;
Impulsivity
Difficulty controlling anger
Erratic anger outbursts
Unstable personal relationships (primarily Connor Aldridge)
Hostile responses to stimuli (caca dau scene, anyone?)
But bear in mind, every part shows signs of BPD, though some parts might show different signs than others. “Orange” seems to primarily keep things under wraps, though his own emotional distress tends to come out sideways as anger. (Note: anger is a secondary emotion, it’s very rarely the root.) The only time(s) we really see “Orange” slip is in the ‘River’ scene, where he goes on a tirade about the similarities between the river in Vietnam he worked near and the bayou of New Bordeaux. We also see the agitation manifest physically in his rubbing of the scarred hand, presumably trying to keep the emotional parts at bay and to keep control. This is also seen with his hatred of communists, which actually goes far deeper than a political poster or movement. This phenomenon has a name— hyperarousal (and vehement emotions). Read below for context:
“Psychic trauma is related to the presence of “vehement” emotions, such as panic and emotional chaos, during and after overwhelming events... This hyperarousal probably manifested in elevated heart rate shortly after the overwhelming event… and exaggerated startle, two predictors of PTSD. Vehement emotion involves maladaptive substitutes for adaptive action; that is, reactivity rather than reflective thinking through and careful action… Not all individuals become hyperaroused during overwhelming events, or they may be hyperaroused at first and then experience a serious and involuntary drop in level of consciousness (hypoarousal). When individuals are extremely hypoaroused they may not encode much of what is happening, may feel the event is not real, and may experience emotional and bodily anesthesia. To the extent that individuals nonetheless recall the events, all of these experiences make it more difficult for them to eventually fully integrate the experience” [Pages 39 & 40].*
I won’t get too technical here, but the big takeaway I want to point out the reactivity. John as a whole can be reactive when it comes to his trauma, and tends to lash out without much thought. That doesn’t mean he is reactive, however. Part of it is the BPD in terms of emotional outbursts, but not solely. In most circumstances, the most reactive part is “Orange” when he feels that he’s losing control over the other parts— he wants control not because of some sort of weird, malicious ploy for power (I’m looking at the dumbasses at TVTropes right now), but because he fears failing at his job of keeping John as a whole safe. This also explains that though he has intense emotions, he’s mostly ambivalent towards traumatic events like his service in Vietnam. On the whole, John isn’t too reactive, it’s mostly “Orange”, who seems to hold the most symptoms of BPD.
-> An important note: “Orange” might better suit the name “mixed part” (MP), which doesn’t hold the exact same ambivalence as a normal ANP and can have similar fight-flight responses to an EP, but conducts the same way as an apparently normal part would. There is a whole lot of nuance here, so for the sake of simplicity, I’m sticking with ANP. I just wanted to bring this up in the event someone reading this is already aware of structural dissociation.
EPs
In my opinion, here are the two main instances of the EP(s) appearing in-game:
Stones Unturned, primarily “No Dominoes”
Ending scene
Stones Unturned is a very interesting case in my opinion— we see “Orange” still trying to keep control via deflecting his emotional attachments to Aldridge via the patriotic rant (which Lincoln very quickly sees through) until he finally gives up and “comes clean”. This won’t be the last time John uses patriotism to hide emotional pain, nor is it even the first time in-game. It’s in here we see “Orange” and “purple” somewhat distinctly, both with the hand-flexing and general sadder, almost calmer tone. “Orange” is more sarcastic and aggressive than usual, whereas “purple” is just showing up. “Purple” seems to have more control over thoughts and speech, whereas “Orange” is the main one controlling the body. Specifically, there’s a voice line that sticks out to me that goes something like this; following one of Connor’s taunts, Lincoln says, “You know he’s full of shit, right?” John sounds like he scoffs after this. “Yeah. Sure.”. This is, in my opinion, “Purple” talking.
It’s in the confrontation with Aldridge we see solely “purple” for the first time. Being the parts that’s attached to the trauma of what Aldridge did (which most likely ties into childhood trauma, but that’s not explored in-game), they’re obviously going to be more present than “Orange”. This is shown primarily in the emotions and responses. “Orange”’s response is fight— one of “purple”’s is freeze and the other is (I think?) fawn. John as a whole wants Aldridge, a symbol of past mistakes/fuck ups and who he could become, gone— purple seems to be the parts that desire the why, as many abuse victims do. I do find the small action of giving Connor a cigarette and a chance to talk interesting, but that’s more of an indicator of John’s empathy rather than anything to do with dissociative parts. I blame bad writing on this; Aldridge really doesn’t give much of an answer to John about his motives. He just preaches at him, or at least at the parts he knew of John, and tries to use his last moments to make a point about some grander thing that really doesn’t fully make sense, minus a few points. “Purple” is tired of it. “Are you finished?” “…I believe so.”
We see John being interviewed by a senate-committee a few years after the event of the game. Most of the cutscenes show him as unashamed, even proud of his actions in New Bordeaux— he feels justified in what he did, both because he cares deeply for Lincoln and because he views the KKK and its satellite organizations (and anyone who willingly affiliates with them) as a threat to all Americans. He justifies his action both to the council and himself as needed for Americans to flourish and live up to its ideal of “truth and justice for all”. That cockiness ends in the final section.
“Senator! Where were you when President Kennedy was assassinated?”
He tried to defend a nation he cared about just to see its ugly, fundamentally flawed face show up. He loves the American people, but he can’t reconcile the evil with the good anymore. And so, “purple” appears again, explaining the traumatic event in-detail and exactly what he was doing— cutting up an old woman for a nation he wanted so desperately to believe in that ended up being no better than any other nation. The very thing that gave him hope, that motivated him, that most likely got him through his darkest times; that illusion just shattered. And more than anything, he’s hurt. He’s hurt by America, by the CIA, by Aldridge, by all of it. “Purple” collectively holds that pain and guilt and misery, and just spills it to the committee. John is not proud of his actions or his service; he once had justification, but now there’s nothing. There’s no real patriotism, no hope, nothing. It’s just him and his emotions that have been buried away or launched out sideways. So, he shoots a senator to make his point. In a way, I think this was an interesting show of both “parts” agreeing on something— it’s implied that John isn’t used to this, as he immediately goes back to humor and leaves. And that’s where the story leaves us.
Comorbidity
The comorbidity rates of BPD and dissociative disorders is pretty high; according to DID-Research.org (linked in Sources section), “It's been found that between 48.5-70% of those with DID also meet the criteria for BPD, that 26-76% of those with BPD meet the criteria for a dissociative disorder, and that 2.5-27% of those with BPD meet the criteria for DID.” I bring this up due to the overlap of symptoms when it comes to dissociation. There is a large difference between BPD and DID/OSDD, but the overlap can make it confusing.
Also, though I can’t find much academically on the comorbidity of ADHD and BPD, it shouldn’t come as much of a shock that’s someone who is considered fundamentally “bad” due to mental processes would probably develop trauma from it. (Yes, I do think John also has ADHD, but that’s unrelated to the main discussion at hand.)
—————
Extra Notes- Historical Context
1960s
Structural dissociation isn’t a new concept necessarily, but it’s definitely not old enough to stretch into the 1960s either. The DSM-II was actually published in 1968, fun fact! Assuming he would get the most up-to-date diagnosis (for whatever reason- it’s not likely he would), John most likely would’ve been diagnosed with “epileptoid personality disorder” (also known as explosive personality). It’s more or less proto-BPD diagnosis, from what I can find. However, due to the stigma of the time, John would not have pursued a diagnosis, nor would he really acknowledge it outside of “yeah, I’m a little fucked, so what?”. Which frankly wouldn’t be a shock, considering his characterization.
CIA Being Cunts
This is more of a side-fact than fully relating to John’s condition, but it’s still worth mentioning. The Central Intelligence Agency, from what I can find, did and does have a psychological examination that every agent must take before even getting the job. Now, I couldn’t find what this constitutes in the modern-day, nor in the 1960s, but I did manage to scrounge up some weird articles (that I can’t find again, which is… odd) on the usage of psychological tests to study the faults of each agent for a variety of reasons. My guess here would be that John was able to maintain enough emotional stability to seem “normal” enough to be allowed in, or at the least, his other criteria passed with enough of a boost to allow some of John’s “neurosis” to slip through the cracks or at least not be too concerning.
In modern-day, the CIA claims to be a “place for all people from all walks of life”, but that’s complete bullshit. I am deeply fascinated however on whatever their policies on mental health and disorders might be, though my search hasn’t turned up much yet. Not like I want to join the CIA anyway (If the title “CIA Being Cunts” didn’t already give that away), I’m simply curious.
—————
Sources
*The Haunted Self, Onno Hart
DID-Research.org
DSM II pdf, DSM IV, DSM V
—————
Note
Yes, people can have more than 2 disorders Reddit.
Author’s Note
So, you made it this far! Good job. Hope you liked my more-or-less thesis on this topic. This is not meant to be a proper academic paper by any means, more so a collection of semi-organized thoughts based both in research (shown above) and personal experience of having a dissociative disorder and CPTSD myself. I can still be wrong, and if I am, please correct me. Again, I’m not a professional, I’m a high-schooler on summer break with a special interest for a goddamn historical-crime game. Still, kudos on getting this far. Have a cookie or something. Thanks for reading!
13 notes
·
View notes
Text
Midterm
Introduction:
I have chosen the following theorists and their essays to analyze: Louis Althusser, “Ideology and Ideological State Apparatuses”, Stuart Hall, “Encoding, Decoding”, Roland Barthes, “Mythologies”, and Jean Baudrillard, “Simulacra and Simulations”. In Louis Althusser's essay "Ideology and Ideological State Apparatuses", he introduces the concept of Ideological State Apparatuses (ISAs) and Repressive State Apparatuses (RSAs) as mechanisms through which ideology is transmitted and enforced by the state. In Stuart Hall's essay "Encoding, Decoding", he introduces the concept of encoding and decoding to analyze the relationship between producers of media messages (encoders) and their audiences (decoders). Hall argues that media producers encode messages with specific meanings, values, and ideologies based on their own cultural context and interests, the audience then decodes the messages based on their own cultural backgrounds, experiences, and social contexts. Roland Barthes' "Mythologies" is a collection of essays that analyze contemporary cultural phenomena and uncover the underlying myths or ideologies embedded within them. Barthes explores how everyday objects, practices, and events are imbued with symbolic meanings that reflect, reinforce, and universalize dominant cultural values and ideologies. In Jean Baudrillard's "Simulacra and Simulations" essay, he argues that in the postmodern era, reality has been replaced by simulations or copies that bear no relation to an original reality. He suggests that in the hyperreal world of contemporary culture, simulations have become more real than reality itself, the simulated version taking precedence. In the scene in Barbie (2023) where Ken discovers patriarchy, he encounters the simulacra of patriarchy through encoded messages in books. As he decodes the titles and narratives, he utilizes the myth of what he has equated with respect, his own importance and desires. The real world is a hyperreality for him and is constructed by governing institutions that convey dominant ideologies and societal norms. I will synthesize these sources and find the commonalities and differences between them. I will then apply this to a discussion they would have about this particular scene in Barbie.
Section 1: How we receive messages: The Myths within Simulations.
While Louis Althusser, Stuart Hall, Roland Barthes, and Jean Baudrillard each belong to different theoretical frameworks, they share common ground in their exploration of the mechanisms through which symbols, signs, and representations influence societal meaning-making processes. According to Althusser, ideology refers to the system of beliefs, values, and ideas that shapes the way individuals perceive and understand the world, reinforced by institutions around them. Ideology shapes not only individuals' ideas but also their behaviors and practices within society, leading to ideologies material existence (1). Althusser introduces the concept of The Ideological State Apparatus, which is made up of a number of distinct and specialized institutions such as religious, educational, political, cultural, family, etc. The Ideological State Apparatus’s spread and teaches ideologies that help maintain the dominant structures and ways of doing things in society. This relates to Barthes definition of myth, as within myth there are narrative stories and messages that we keep returning to, with structures in place that keep them alive. Althusser defines the structures that keep them alive in his essay. Beliefs of the ruling class are kept strong and alive in the institutions, where people learn and share these ideas (3). Stuart Hall defines this process of the exchange of ideas through Encoding and Decoding. Encoding is the operation where producers or communicators create messages. They select signs, symbols and language to convey meaning while incorporating certain ideologies and cultural assumptions into the messages using codes. He states “The ‘object’ of these practices is meanings and messages in the form of sign vehicles of a specific kind organized [...] through the operation of codes within the syntagmatic chain of a discourse.” (4)Decoding is when audiences interpret or create an understanding of the messages for themselves, based on their own backgrounds and perspectives.
Similarly, Roland Barthes mentions other ways that meanings are created through signs. Barthes states that myth functions as a constructed system of signs and signifiers that have reinterpreted and recontextualized existing signs to convey ideological meanings, beliefs, and cultural narratives. He argues that myth is created from a semiological chain that came before and calls it a second-order semiological system. He states “ That which is a sign (namely the associative total of a concept and an image) in the first system, becomes a mere signifier in the second.” (5) The original meanings associated with signs are reduced, and they now serve as components in constructing new meanings within the myth. Mythic narratives are not inherent but shaped by historical events and cultural factors, “Myth does not deny things, on the contrary, its function is to talk about them; simply, it purifies them, it makes them innocent, it gives them a natural and eternal justification.” (6) This means that myth has the ability to simplify and present things in a way that makes them appear as unquestionable natural facts, even though they may not be a truthful representation of reality. Baudrillard extends upon the idea of an untruthful reality as introduces the concepts of simulation, simulacra, and hyperreality. Within a hyperreality, traditional notions of truth, authenticity, and judgment become obsolete. The simulation begins with the system of signs which provide meaning. Baudrillard states that in this hyperreality “When the real is no longer what it used to be, nostalgia assumes its full meaning. There is a proliferation of myths of origin and signs of reality; of second-hand truth, objectivity and authenticity.” (7) Baudrillard is telling us that narratives of myths are heavily embedded within simulations, as well as created. He explains how nostalgia gives rise to an abundance of myths that have no real relation to reality. Furthermore, Baudrillard states that the concept of ideology does not fall within the boundaries of simulacrum. He states “The transition from signs which dissimulate something to signs which dissimulate that there is nothing, marks the decisive turning point. The first implies a theology of truth and secrecy (to which the notion of ideology still belongs).” (8) Baudrillard is suggesting that there has been a transition from an earlier form of ideology, where signs concealed or obscured certain truths or realities, to a newer form where signs no longer conceal anything tangible but instead conceal the absence of reality itself- marking an era dominated by simulacra and simulation. Overall, these theorists offer insights into the complex interplay between ideology, representation, power, and culture, shedding light on the ways in which society is structured and maintained.
Section 2: Difference in relationships to reality and in the process of signification using signs and symbols
While all of the theorists use signs to talk about message conveying- the process of signification is different. In addition, concepts such as ideology and simulation have different relationships to the representation of reality. Althusser and Baudrillard delve into the complex dynamics between representation and reality. Althusser posits that ideologies, like religious or political beliefs, represent the imaginary relationship of individuals to their real conditions of existence. He states “that these ‘world outlooks’ are largely imaginary, i.e. do not ‘correspond to reality’.” (9) By labeling ideologies as "largely imaginary," Althusser is asserting that they are not directly grounded in or reflective of objective reality, however by saying this he is still recognizing a reality that is real. Similarly, but going a step further, Baudrillard's concept of simulation goes beyond mere representation, emphasizing the generation of a hyperreality that blurs the distinction between the real and the simulated. Baudrillard’s introduces the concept of simulacra as signs or images that bear no relation to the real world but create a reality of their own. Buadrillard describes the four phases of image: reflection of basic reality, the mask which perverts reality, masking the absence of reality, and no relation to reality. In ideologies, particularly the initial two stages, this progression is mirrored, but does not go further and create a hyperreality. The simulation becomes fully different from the original with no "Origin or reality; a hyperreal"(10). This hyperreality leads to a state where representations of reality become more significant and impactful than reality itself. As articulated by Althusser, The imaginary nature of the relationship between individuals and their representations of reality forms the basis for distortion in ideological portrayals. Differently, the theorists emphasize the imaginary nature of the relationship between individuals and their representations of reality. However, Barthe, while defining myth, does not talk about the variation or stages within myth that correspond to reality. He does not mention a hyperreality, instead he highlights the literal and immediate presence of the mythical signifier, giving it material and linguistic existence within reality. He states “ In myth, the first two terms are perfectly manifest (unlike what happens in other semiological systems): one of them is not 'hidden' behind the other, they are both given here [...] myth hides nothing: its function is to distort, not to make disappear. [It’s] form has a literal, immediate presence. ”(11) Myth does not hide anything, instead, its purpose is to distort reality, presenting it in a certain way rather than making it disappear entirely. The mention of form having a literal, immediate presence underscores that myth serves as a visible and tangible representation of reality, albeit one that is distorted or manipulated to convey specific meanings or ideologies.
When comparing the perspectives of Hall and Barthes on how certain narratives are perceived and interpreted, a difference arises. While Hall delves into the intricacies of coding and decoding, Barthes emphasizes a more universal understanding of knowledge. Hall's exploration of the term myth would involve his various modes of decoding. He identifies three primary modes: dominant, negotiated, and oppositional. In the dominant mode, audiences accept and reproduce the intended meaning of the message as encoded by the producers. In the negotiated mode, audiences partially accept the dominant meaning but also interpret the message through the lens of their own beliefs and values. Finally, in the oppositional mode, audiences reject or resist the dominant meaning, decoding the message in ways that challenge or subvert the intended message. Hall's framework shows how the interpretation of myth can vary depending on the knowledge and perspective of the viewer or listener, making the significance of the myth not universal. Overall, although all theorists discuss the transmission of messages through signs, their perspectives diverge when it comes to the process of signification. Moreover, they offer distinct insights into how concepts like ideology and simulation relate to the portrayal of reality.
Section 3: Ken’s discovery of patriarchy through encoded messages
In the scene from Barbie (2023) where Ken is introduced to the concept of patriarchy, he is thrust into a world where signs and symbols shape his understanding of reality. Encountering a plethora of encoded messages within books like “Why Men Rule (literally)” , “Men and Wars,”, “The Origins of the Patriarchy”, and “Horses”, (Gerwig, 2023, 42:21) Ken internalizes a myth where he associates respect, importance, and fulfillment with male dominance.
This is seen in the moment when a woman asks him the time and he states “you respect me.” He tells her that his understanding of patriarchy is “where men and horses run everything” (Gerwig, 2023, 42:40). This myth becomes his lens through which he perceives the world, transforming the real into a hyperreality constructed by dominant ideologies and societal norms. Althusser would observe that these books function as instruments of the Cultural Ideological State Apparatus, disseminating dominant ideologies that shape individual perceptions and beliefs. He would say that individuals are perceived as free subjects, that they have their own ideas and act based on them, but really the ISA’s are where the ideas are extracted from. Hall would say that Ken is positioned in the dominant mode of decoding, as he doesn’t have any previous knowledge and simply accepts the intended meaning of the signs and messages as encoded by the producers. Barthes would concur, asserting that through this process of decoding, Ken constructs his own myth of patriarchy, wherein male dominance and control are equated with power and respect. When confronted by a woman seeking the time, Ken's instinctive response, "you respect me," underscores his internalized myth of patriarchy. Barthes and Althusser would both agree upon how Ken's interaction with the woman reflects the operation of myths in transforming historical phenomena into timeless truths that serve the interests of dominant social groups, or, the ruling class. Driven by his newfound understanding of patriarchy, Ken embarks on a quest for a "high level, high-paying job with influence," believing that being a man alone is sufficient to secure such a position (Gerwig, 2023, 42:53).
Here, Althusser would note how Ken's ideologies manifest materially through his actions, demonstrating how deeply entrenched beliefs influence real-world behavior. Another example of the materiality of his ideologies that Althusser would note is when Ken goes to try and perform a surgery and when the woman doctor does not allow him he says “But I'm a man” (Gerwig, 2023, 43:11). Ken's lack of respect towards the female doctor becomes apparent when he dismissively asks her to fetch him a coffee, among other demeaning requests, after she asserts her credentials as a doctor. This behavior reflects Ken's beliefs about gender roles and power dynamics, where he perceives himself as entitled to assert dominance over the female doctor despite her professional qualifications.
Previously, after his first attempt to get a "high level, high-paying job with influence," does not work, he tells the man “ you guys are clearly not doing patriarchy very well.” The man working then says “ No, we’re doing it well, yeah, we just…hide it better now” (Gerwig, 2023, 43:02). The acknowledgment that patriarchy operates covertly speaks volumes about the pervasive power structures ingrained within society. Althusser would note how these mechanisms serve the interests of the ruling class, ensuring their continued dominance over societal structures. Hall would agree and add that these ideologies of the ruling class are incorporated into the messages using codes, as the authors of the books Ken read selected specific signs and symbols to convey meaning. Hall would interpret Ken's statement as an instance of decoding based on his own understanding and perspective of patriarchy, which is based upon myths, as Ken interprets the situation of him not getting a job just because he is a man as a failure of patriarchy. Hall would also emphasize that the man's response reflects an encoding of patriarchy that seeks to maintain its legitimacy and authority. The man's acknowledgment of "hiding" patriarchy suggests an attempt to frame the situation in a way that preserves the existing power dynamics. Baudrillard would likely interpret the exchange between Ken and the man as a commentary on the shifting nature of patriarchy within contemporary society. Baudrillard would relate this exchange to his concept of simulacra, wherein representations of reality become disconnected from their original referents, leading to the creation of hyperrealities. In this context, the "hiding" of patriarchy represents a form of simulation, where the semblance of patriarchy is maintained through concealed mechanisms rather than overt displays of power. Baudrillard would say how it is an example of his argument that postmodern society is characterized by a proliferation of simulations that obscure the distinction between reality and illusion. He would also note how the representation of patriarchy through these books creates a hyperreal version of reality for Ken, exemplifying how the real world has become a hyperreality because the representations of reality encoded within the books holds more precedence than the reality they are meant to represent. Finally, Baudrillard would suggest that Ken's costume which includes a cowboy hat, bandana, cowboy shirt with fringe, as well as Ken's association of patriarchy with horses and men is a romanticization of the past. Barthes would agree and say it is a nostalgia that is formed from an abundance of myths about the wild west, where, as Ken suggests “Men and horses run everything”. Ultimately, the scene offers a space for analysis by Althusser, Hall, Barthes, and Baudrillard of how dominant ideologies, myths, encoded messages, and social interactions converge to shape individual perceptions and behaviors within a hyperreal world.
Conclusion:
Reviewing the literature and applying various theorists to the film "Barbie (2023)" has illuminated the interconnectedness of the fields of theory of ideology, culturalism, structuralism, and postmodernism in shaping the production and interpretation of meanings. Althusser's concept of ideology as a system of beliefs and values that perpetuates dominant social structures is evident in the film's portrayal of patriarchy. Hall’s definitions of encoding and decoding shows how ideologies and meanings are encoded within texts and decoded in different ways based on the individual. Structuralism, as exemplified by Barthes' theory of myth, highlights how meaning is constructed through the process of signification. Postmodernism, particularly Baudrillard's concept of simulacra, offers insight into the hyperreal nature of Ken's perception of patriarchy.This interplay underscores the significance of cultural apparatuses in disseminating dominant ideologies and the ways in which individuals construct meaning within these frameworks.
Footnotes:
Althusser, Louis. “Ideology and Ideological State Apparatuses (Notes towards an Investigation.” Essay. In The Anthropology of the State A Reader (Blackwell Publishing Ltd, 2006), 102.
Althusser, Louis. “Ideology and Ideological State Apparatuses (Notes towards an Investigation.” Essay. In The Anthropology of the State A Reader (Blackwell Publishing Ltd, 2006), 93.
Hall, Stuart. “Encoding, Decoding.” Essay. In The Cultural Studies Reader, 2nd ed., (Routledge, 2001), 508.
Roland Barthes, Mythologies, trans. Annette Lavers (New York: The Noonday Press, 1972), 111.
Roland Barthes, Mythologies, trans. Annette Lavers (New York: The Noonday Press, 1972), 143.
Jean Baudrillard, “Simulacra and Simulations” in Modernism/Postmodernism (New York: Pearson Education Unlimited, 1992), 153.
Jean Baudrillard, “Simulacra and Simulations”, 153.
Althusser, Louis. “Ideology and Ideological State Apparatuses (Notes towards an Investigation.” Essay. In The Anthropology of the State A Reader (Blackwell Publishing Ltd, 2006), 100.
Jean Baudrillard, “Simulacra and Simulations”, 153.
Althusser, Louis. “Ideology and Ideological State Apparatuses (Notes towards an Investigation.” Essay. In The Anthropology of the State A Reader (Blackwell Publishing Ltd, 2006), 101.
Roland Barthes, Mythologies, trans. Annette Lavers (New York: The Noonday Press, 1972), 120.
0 notes
Text
WEEK 3 - Semiotics
This week, we explored semiotics, a field that examines how signs and symbols impact communication, culture, behavior, and design, highlighting its pivotal role in understanding these aspects. (Semiotics, 2024).
There are 3 types of signifiers: linguistic signs, iconic symbols, and indexical cues, all shaping meaning in communication and culture. (Bradley, 2016)
Let's take a look at René Magritte's "The Treachery of Images" (1928-29). This painting is a representation of a pipe, not a real one, challenging the viewer's perception of it. It emphasizes the arbitrary nature of language and the constructed nature of reality, urging contemplation on the relationship between words and images. (The Treachery of Images, 1929 by Rene Magritte, n.d.)
I'm acknowledging the significant role of semiotics in my design process, highlighting how consciously incorporating these principles has enhanced my projects' meaning and audience resonance.
In Studio, my trading card project exemplified semiotics in action. Through deliberate use of symbols and imagery, I effectively communicated complex ideas, albeit unconsciously. Similarly, in Craft, crafting characters to represent emotions and developing fonts from these characters showcased semiotics' power in design, enhancing both visual appeal and communicative depth.
Nowadays, Semiotics are widely used in marketing and media fields. Here are some examples:
Nike's "Just Do It" campaign effectively uses semiotics in media to communicate messages of empowerment, determination, and athleticism. (Maheshwari, 2023)
Another exemplary advertisement that effectively leveraged semiotics is Coca-Cola's "Share a Coke" campaign effectively utilized semiotics by replacing its logo with common names and phrases, highlighting the cultural significance of personalization and identity, fostering connection among consumers. (Energizer, 2023)
In conclusion, Semiotics is crucial for design, helping us understand how signs and meanings interact. I'm eager to use semiotics to create designs that deeply connect with viewers.
(288 words)
References:
Energizer, G. Y. G. (2023, October 18). “Share a Coke” campaign by The Coca-Cola Company: Analyzing the Impact and Success of Brand Storytelling. Medium. https://graetzelkaiser.medium.com/share-a-coke-campaign-by-the-coca-cola-company-analyzing-the-impact-and-success-of-brand-5da176d27c8b
Bradley, S. (2016, March 17). Icon, Index, and Symbol — Three Categories of Signs. Vanseo Design. https://vanseodesign.com/web-design/icon-index-symbol/
Semiotics. (2024, March 22). Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semiotics
Maheshwari, N. (2023, February 21). The Power of ‘Just Do It’: A Comprehensive Analysis of Nike’s Iconic Marketing Campaign. Medium. https://medium.com/@nehalmaheshwarie/the-power-of-just-do-it-a-comprehensive-analysis-of-nike-s-iconic-marketing-campaign-8e4adf4a4d0d
The Treachery of Images, 1929 by Rene Magritte. (n.d.). https://www.renemagritte.org/the-treachery-of-images.jsp
0 notes
Text
The Power of Color: Understanding Its Psychological Impact in Art
Color is more than just an exciting visual experience; it’s a powerful tool that artists have been utilizing for centuries to evoke emotions, convey messages, and captivate audiences. From the vibrant strokes of Van Gogh to the subtle hues of Monet’s water lilies, color plays a central role in helping to shape the psychological impact of art. Understanding the psychological underpinnings of color can deepen our appreciation for artistic expression and enhance our ability to interpret and connect with artworks on a profound level.
At its core, color psychology explores how different colors elicit emotional and behavioral responses in individuals. Red, for instance, is often associated with passion, energy, and intensity. It commands attention and evokes strong emotions, making it a popular choice for artists seeking to convey themes of love, desire, or urgency. Think of the fiery reds in Picasso’s “Guernica,” symbolizing the horrors of war and the suffering of its victims.
In contrast, blue exudes calmness, serenity, and tranquility. It has a soothing effect on the mind and is frequently used to evoke feelings of peace and introspection. Consider the tranquil blues in Hokusai’s “The Great Wave off Kanagawa,” which captures the sublime power of nature and invites viewers to contemplate the vastness of the ocean.
Each color carries its own unique symbolism and cultural associations, further enriching its psychological impact in art. Yellow, for example, is often associated with sunshine, joy, and optimism, while green symbolizes growth, renewal, and harmony with nature. Artists strategically leverage these associations to convey specific themes or narratives within their work, creating layers of meaning that resonate with viewers on a subconscious level.
Moreover, the psychological effects of color extend beyond individual hues to encompass the interplay of color harmonies, contrasts, and saturation levels within a composition. Analogous color schemes, where adjacent colors on the color wheel are used, create a sense of harmony and unity, while complementary color schemes, where opposite colors are paired, generate dynamic contrast and visual tension. Artists adeptly manipulate these color relationships to evoke different moods, highlight focal points, or create visual narratives that guide the viewer’s gaze.
Furthermore, the psychological impact of color can vary depending on cultural, social, and personal contexts. What may evoke feelings of warmth and celebration in one culture could symbolize mourning or sorrow in another. Similarly, individual experiences and associations with certain colors can influence how they are perceived and interpreted. This dynamic interplay between color and perception underscores the complexity and subjectivity of artistic expression, inviting viewers to engage with artworks in a deeply personal and introspective manner.
In the digital age, where art is increasingly consumed and shared online, understanding the psychological impact of color has become even more pertinent. Artists and designers harness the power of color theory to create captivating visuals that resonate with global audiences across diverse cultural and linguistic backgrounds. Whether through striking advertisements, immersive virtual experiences, or interactive multimedia installations, color serves as a universal language that transcends barriers and communicates on an emotional level.
The power of color in art lies not only in its visual allure but also in its profound psychological impact on the human psyche. By understanding the nuances of color psychology, we gain insight into how artists harness color to convey emotion, tell stories, and provoke thought. As we immerse ourselves in the vibrant tapestry of colors that adorn the world of art, let us appreciate the depth and complexity of this timeless medium and the profound ways it enriches our lives.
0 notes
Last Seen Blogs
batman-soup
KB
girlonadancefloor
FEELS LIKE HOME
macuaine
MacUaine's dusty corner
mixtapemag
MIXTAPE MAGAZINE
dhrumil11
DHRUMIL