Propaganda:

1. No one has managed this yet at this point in the story. The Homunculi are always listening, always knowing what the heroes are up to, always one step ahead. The only thing that has surprised them is Roy killing Lust, but that was only because she got cocky and left him to die instead of killing him outright. Olivier, in the middle of a massive attack on her fort by a creature behind her comprehension, finds a way to get the truth from Ed -- who has refused to tell her on the basis of Bradley's threat to Winry, and who we all know is a stubborn little bastard. She gets the answers, and she gets them without the Homunculi or the high brass guessing that she now knows their entire plan, and is high enough in the hierarchy of power to seriously damage them. For once, she puts the heroes a step ahead of the Homunculi.

2. Note that this is not Ling holding his own against Bradley (that's not underrated at all) -- this is the compassion and loyalty to his people that leads him to severely hinder his own escape because his servant is critically injured and he absolutely will not, under any circumstances, leave her behind. "A king is no king without his people", indeed.

3. Like Olivier above, Riza manages what has up to now been nearly impossible from right under Bradley's nose. She devises a perfect code with every name she needs and knows how to make sure Roy is getting it. Her intelligence and ingenuity absolutely shine, and she manages to also put them a step ahead of the Homunculi, from right under their thumbs.

4. Winry is a teenager who hasn't seen any medicine beyond what it takes to attach automail in years, but she draws on the textbooks she read -- which, aside, she was reading, comprehending, and remembering medical textbooks as a child -- delivering a healthy baby with no complications, alone.

5. Gluttony's belly is supposed to be inescapable, an entirely different plane of reality, and Ed looks at all of this surrounding him, says "I'm not dying here" and concocts a wild plan to get them out by repeating the ultimate taboo and throwing himself back through the Gate of Truth -- and it works.

6. Scar's brother is a scholar who has lived his entire life in a culture that despises alchemy. He knows only what he's read of it, and he not only recognizes that Amestris is a massive transmutation circle but also devises a circle that will counteract it, and hides that behind layers of code and the physical shape of the papers, so that only his brother can find it.

7. Riza cannot speak. She can barely breathe. She is bleeding to death. And she still refuses to allow Roy to betray himself. No words, no breath, no reason to believe she may yet live -- but she tells him do not save me at the cost of your principles.

8. Like Ling above, Roy's loyalty to his own people drives and commands and powers him. He never forgets about Jean, and the first chance he gets, he sends someone to heal him, even if it means staying blind for longer. There was no need to wait, except that he refused to put his people second to himself.

Jonathan Harker: This door I was told not to open is jammed shut

Jonathan Harker: [bodyslams] Though I shan't let such a small matter stop me

caught a cold yesterday so I rewatched a good old childhood fav of mine, which also included another robot buddy I love! here’s data with wall-e cus why not :D

5 times Apple hugged Raven…

————————

…and the one time Raven hugged back.

(see my previous eah comic here)

doodles of my fav sillies

anton belongs to @poicyss

yeah overthinking prophecies is the mind killer but i have to say my piece re azor ahai, that is, if it's really meant to be one character, then the best narrative choice is dany. not only because she fulfills every word of the prophecy an entire book before we even learn of its existence. but also "no one ever looked for a girl," aemon tells us. in-universe her gender precludes her from being imagined as the saviour figure and on a meta level even the readers don't think the 16 year old girl with this much power (dragons) will be allowed to keep that power and fulfill an important narrative destiny as a hero of the story. the expectation is that the character will be brought low and/or surpassed by the classic warrior hero archetype of jon. which is why i think dany being AA is the most subversive choice. and would actually make jon the red herring.

Bestie Deficiency

[First] Prev <–-> Next

so those of us who've been writing for and discussing the Toymaker have found it a little tricky at times to discern the Toymaker's characteristics, given how often he changes up his accent, appearance, and temperament!! so, we developed a very silly solution 🙈💖 what's more fun that arbitrary categorisation? these are the different 'facets' of the Toymaker we've noticed - or rather, the characters he plays - and the shorthand names we use for him!! each name corresponds to a particular presentation of the Toymaker, largely tied to changes in voice, appearance and personality. there are moments where these distinct characters bleed into one another! we have:

1920s German Toymaker: the playful, teasing, pseudo-German speaking Toymaker who sells Charles Bannerjee Stooky Bill, and who menacingly juggles at the Doctor and Donna. this is the Toymaker at his personal best: fully invested in his character and thriving in a toy-themed performance. 🧸

French Cabaret Toymaker: the charming, lipsticked, French-accented dancer who accosts the Doctor on the street and sways amid the mayhem of The Giggle. this is a Toymaker who revels in chaos and destruction, and who is equal parts stunning and disquieting 🕺

Marionettist Toymaker: the frightening and severe puppeteer who grows to an impossible size, pulls marionette-Charles' strings and speaks in rhyme. this Toymaker feels the most similar to the original Celestial Toymaker played by Michael Gough! although superficially similar to other Toymakers, his hair is noticeably different and his demeanour is far more sinister 🧵

Showman Toymaker: the volatile ringmaster whose emotions shift on a dime, and who seems equally torn between performance, play, and injustice. this Toymaker is marked in contrast to Marionettist and 1920s German due to the occasional appearance of his American accent, and the apparent sincerity with which he delivers his show for Donna. 🎪

British Card Dealer Toymaker: the cool, calculating cardician whose respect for the game overshadows any desire for drama. much like with Showman, little glimpses of the Toymaker's other characters peek out here, but this Toymaker has a marked seriousness about him that's only knocked by his excitement upon gaining an advantage or winning. 👑

Band Leader Toymaker: the impossible menace with a distinctly feral energy. this Toymaker is a sadist: causing wanton pain, destruction and murder and loving every moment of it. Spice Up Your Life indeed 🌹

WWI Pilot Toymaker: the furious child who refuses to lose. this Toymaker is one who has grown frustrated with those around him who won't play his games, and these frustrations make him unable to maintain his previous playful persona: instead, we see lashings of anger coupled with violence, and the notable sadism of Band Leader 👨‍✈️

(Bonus) Flat Toymaker: the loser, and the lost little boy. i will admit, this was originally because i wanted an even set 😂💖 however, there's an intriguing moment of vulnerability from the Toymaker here, when he begs the Doctor for mercy. for a moment, we get a look into that 'vastness that will never cease' beneath all of the Toymaker's pomp and frills, and we see how truly frightened he is 🎁

they girlbossed Sally Jackson

insects of inferno

eric foreman is representation for deeply repressed weirdos who are clinging to normalcy with splintered nails and blistered palms. representation for people who lost something fundamental along the way. for people who want to go home, to be the person they thought they were. representation for people who can’t face what they’ve become because it’s who they’ve always been

Not a huge fan of recent Marvel comics forgetting Magda and her importance in Magneto's life and history in favour of focusing only on Charles.......

do you have any thoughts on zelda not staying as a dragon? me personally I like it and am very cool with it mostly because I think zelda should get to be happy forever (and because I'm smart enough to know she changed back because of recall and not some ambiguous power of love lmao) but a lot of people seem to dislike that it made the draconification inconsequential?

i think there's like. some valid concerns surrounding inconsequentiality/"curing" the physical problems characters have as a way of giving them a "happy ending" but I think those concerns don't necessarily apply to totk in the way people seem to be applying them, especially irt zelda's draconification and link's arm.

most of the time when the criticism of this "magic cure" trope is applied to media, it's because the trope is used as a cure-all to erase a character's suffering or trauma and make them "normal" again, and often ignores the character development or themes of the story in favor of giving the character a happy ending. I don't think that applies to totk, though, because the "curing" link and zelda experience is both within the realm of possibility given the worldbuilding present in the game (recall could easily have done it, as you mentioned) AND thematically consistent with the rest of the game. One of if not the most important central themes of totk is the idea of failure and second chances. we see a hyrule that has been given a second chance after link's initial failure with the calamity brought it to the brink of destruction. we see characters who were deeply unhappy and entrenched in the shame of their precalamity mistakes like purah and zelda become active, beloved members of their communities. we see the people of lurelin village take back and rebuild their destroyed home. we watch this kingdom and its people make an unprecedented comeback after a century of struggle and ruin.

Similarly, totk's gameplay is LINK's second chance, his comeback from the initial mistake of losing zelda, of specifically being unable to reach her with his injured hand when they fell. The consequences of that--the master sword's corruption, the loss of his arm, and zelda's draconification, are all supposed to SEEM irreversible, because that's how LINK initially sees them. he believes that he doomed both himself and zelda all because of that SINGLE moment in which he wasn't enough, a viewpoint which is obviously left over from the pressure he experienced to perform to an impossible standard of perfection pre-calamity. The story of totk is about deconstructing that belief and proving it wrong. the mistake he made caused harm, but it's never too late to repair things. he can fix the regional phenomena ganondorf causes and rebuild those communities. he can revitalize the master sword. he can GET ZELDA BACK, with his own arm, uninjured and able to reach her this time. no matter how impossible those things may initially seem, no matter the perceived finality of his mistakes and their consequences, there is always hope. there is always a second chance. no one person's single mistake can doom an entire kingdom for eternity. the fate of hyrule was NEVER resting on link's shoulders alone. he was never their final hope. there was always going to be an after. the whole POINT of the draconification and the loss of link's arm is that they AREN'T final. they ARE inconsequential, because they were born of one mistake and ONE MISTAKE IS NOT THE END ALL.

I want to make a longer post about this someday but: I think Arya's TWOW arc is going to include her coming to terms with her identity as a Lady. This has been an ongoing conflict with her since her first chapter and I think her flowering in winds is going to mark a turning point. The theory of her having an apprenticeship with the courtesans holds a lot of weight and the idea of Arya going through puberty among a group of unconventional women she's fostered a positive relationship with is just too perfect. It would really have an impact on Arya reconciling her personal idea of what a Lady should be. There's also a lot that she could learn from them in terms of courtesies, communication, appearances, body-language, etc. that would elevate her current skill-set and ways her relationship with them could push the plot.

Not to mention she will undoubtedly reclaim her identity as Arya Stark, and her being a Lady is inseparable from that. Arya Stark is a Lady Stark and being a Lady is a social position, not a measure of how well someone preforms feminine tasks. She shouldn't have to relinquish her position because she doesn't fit patriarchal standards. That's not to say that she's ever going to be the perfect example of a traditional Lady but what I think will happen is that she becomes capable of playing the part. She plays several identities throughout the series but she's always been Arya underneath, so I think it's appropriate that she learns to adopt a "persona" that's part of her. Her remembering Ned putting on his "Lord's face" (+ the various examples of other characters being separate from their ruling persona) makes me think that Arya will be donning her "Lady's face" when she makes a return to Westeros.

no matter whether ppl are trying to make zk's canon relationship out to be sibling coded or associative friends or whatever else ppl make up i feel it all comes from this place of people that don't ship it being unable to handle zuko and katara's canonically deep and intimate friendship at the end of show without (whether subconsciously or not) perceiving it as some kind of threat to whatever katara or zuko ship they DO ship (usually either k/a or z/s or m/z)

they don't know how to acknowledge/write zk (and i don't think them being a m/f ship is divorced from this) having their canonically close friendship alongside whatever they ship because that closeness, no matter how platonic, can't supersede the romance of their own ship. so they just lazily write it off as "siblings" or convince themselves they weren't ever that close in the first place or that katara still secretly hates zuko or something in order to get out of the bind of allowing them to be close friends even if you ship them with other people 🤷‍♀️

I'm so tired. And Frustrated.

I'm tired of characters needing to be "in love" every time they love each other. Especially when the media goes out of the way to make it clear that they love each other without ever trying to define that as "in love". They love each other. That is just as valuable. That is Just as worthy. They can be partners without romance. They can be partners without sex.

They Can Be Partners Without Romance.

I am so Sick of not only the idea that for some god forsaken reason, Every single queer relationship needs to be labeled and categorizable to "count" as explicitly queer, but the idea that it needs to be romantic. The notion that characters and stories cannot be queer until you get to see a kiss or people are declared "boyfriends" or something else like that. We are Woefully shy of queer representation on the whole— I'm not saying you can't interpret media however you like. Do what you want.

But I am so sick of characters that Clearly mirror aromantic stories or stories about queerness that just don't focus on romance be called "not good enough" or "homophobic". Not every story is about romance. Not every partnership is romantic.

That doesn't make them not queer. That doesn't make them not important. I can promise you, those of us who don't or can't center romance in our lives? We Are living a queer experience. We are antithetical to amatonormative allonormative expectations for how life "should" be lead.

We get to see ourselves in those stories you're calling "not queer enough". Queerness is complex and weird and Fucking Queer. It's not an analog of straightness or cisness. We're not playing opposite to straightness or cisness. We're not operating in the same Framework— that's what makes us so goddamn queer. We aren't easily definable, and when we try to force ourselves to find one definitive way to be queer, we leave community behind.

So yes. We need more queer stories. We need more queer stories of all kinds that are messy and weird and romantic and aromantic and trans and ace and nonbinary and all over the place because every single story about queerness is going to be different. And that's good.