i would honestly rather rewatch the same show with even half decent gay rep a million times than watch any lgbtq centric show where they all end up sad and traumatized at the end. i want the gay people to be HAPPY i get enough of how depressing is can be to be queer in real life i want the shows i watch to be a way to get away from that.

(disclaimer, this is coming from a heartstopper fan! i love heartstopper this is not hate!!)

i think at least part of the annoyance with heartstopper isn't just that isn't a light fluffy ya series, it's also that its another example of how the queer media that gets the most mainstream attention tends to be this kind of light fluffy ya stuff that focuses on two conventially attractive queer boys or men and it also tends to be written by people who aren't queer men on top of that, so not only can it feel very samey but it can feel like other queer people are relegated to side characters in the stories of cis gay men. and as someone who loves heartstopper i get that on some level.

btw by "written by people who aren't queer men" NOT saying that isn't not written by queer people. alice oseman is genderfluid and aroace, becky albertalli is bisexual, etc. and while i think the point is still valid there is a misogyny element in that a lot of the focus is put on things that are written by women or people they perceive as women while tumblr darlings like good omens and ofmd (written by presumably straight men) don't get the same treatment.

nah y'know what, that's fair, I can get how frustrating it can be for a lot of popular queer stories to feel samey, I've definitely gotten BL-fatigue in the past on platforms like WT and Tapas because many of them ARE the same and feel like they're just piggybacking off trends for the sake of clout (and this is a problem in the heterocis romance stories too, don't get me fucking started on how dark romance has turned into torture porn where vulnerable women are constantly being victimized by rich powerful men and we're just supposed to root for that ??), but it's one of those things where like, what might be seen as just more corny shit could very well be the revelation another person needs that they're gay / trans / etc. that the story helped them realize. there's just a point where i see these arguments against cheesy popular queer stories that teeter dangerously close to being queerphobic and, as you said, misogynist, simply because "it was written by someone who i perceive as a woman so that makes it BAD!"

and I didn't mention it in the original post because I didn't want to @ OP in any way but in the comment section they literally said "i dont think heartstopper itself is all that bad but it has pretty much aimed the direction of all mainstream gay comics towards wholesomeness instead of anything more interesting so i want to destroy heartstopper to destroy heartstopper clones" and that gives me massive ick because it implies their sole reasoning for including it was "chill and happy queer stories bad, if a character doesn't suffer enough then they're not interesting"?? why can't LGBTQ+ audiences have more 'vanilla' stories that aren't all sad and angsty all the time? are we not entitled to the same corny romcom vanilla shit that the heterocis are entitled to? why do LGBTQ+ characters - and by extension, people - have to suffer to qualify as being 'interesting'? You're already interesting, you're you! like i'm sorry, are we trying to scare people straight??? 😭 shit, that's even a plot point that's touched on in Heartstopper itself where Nick is questioning his sexuality and he starts googling shit and it's just ALL the terrifying news stories of queer kids being ostracized / bullied / murdered / etc. and as much as it's important to be aware of the ongoing issues so we can keep fighting for our rights, we ALSO need to find balance and remember to celebrate the stories that AREN'T that because we need something to be hopeful for, something we can find peace in. I don't think Heartstopper is some deeply profound piece of work, but it also doesn't seem like it's trying to be? It's a low stakes celebration of the LGBTQ+ experience that's very warm and comforting, especially for those who are the same ages as the main characters who are often being persuaded by the grown-ups around them that it's a death sentence to be gay / trans / etc.

and it's not like we HAVEN'T had popular pieces of queer representative media that explored things outside of cheesy BL, like are we forgetting about Nimona which explored both the gay and genderfluid experience in a very accessible and fun way while still being mature and not pandering to its audience over how society has made monsters out of queer people?

(and even then I'm sure there are folks who would argue "actually, here are the issues with Nimona" , and that's fine tbh, we can like media and appreciate what it brings to the table while also discussing what it lacks in, such as what we're doing now with Heartstopper! progress is a never-ending journey!!)

and also okay, not me trying to be argumentative in the slightest BUT I don't really get the argument that 'other queer people' are being sidelined for the main characters? unless there's something I'm missing here lol (I will apologize for that because it's admittedly been a while since I've re-read Heartstopper so I should probably go do that to refresh myself on it). like i say that in the sense that Heartstopper is clearly meant to be about two gay male teenagers. just like how Nimona is about a shapeshifter who is not a girl or a boy (they're Nimona!) and a gay man who are both trying to change the system that's other'd them for years for the better. that is the story Heartstopper is trying to tell and it achieves that. it also has a trans character plotline that I could see people arguing feels sidelined but I think there's a massive difference between 'sidelining' and just having a B plot ? my honest take with that is not every piece of representative media is going to be able to cover every single topic, it's just not doable for one piece of media to be a monolith for everything, the same as how one person can't be a monolith for an entire community of people. BUT that doesn't mean works like Heartstopper and Nimona can't inspire others to also lend their voices into the medium and create that representation that's needed. That's why we need ✨variety✨ and Heartstopper is part of that variety by offering a more vanilla cutesy story full of good vibes for people who want that sort of thing.

IDK, I think there's just a lot of nuance that's being missed in that poll, and in the difference between Heartstopper inspiring more people to write happy cozy BL stories vs. implying that it's had an actual negative influence on modern art and media in the same way that series like Homestuck and LO have to the point that people think it needs to be destroyed, like wtf LOL Like they're not even comparable IMO and a lot of the arguments I see people making about why it is just feel a little backwards, and those arguments obfuscate the real issue which is just "popular thing is popular and people like to piggyback off popular shit". That's a fact for basically any niche and genre, these trends come and go. Even if the whole cutesy BL trend passes one day (which it will) it'll be replaced by something else that people will also inevitably find samey and boring after a while. This is not a concept that's unique to LGBTQ+ media, it's universal.

Balance is important and I think finding that balance is as much a responsibility on the shoulders of the consumer as it is on the creator. And I don't think Heartstopper deserves to be put into the same camp as stories like LO which literally straightwashes its canonically queer characters and gives those queer identities to nothingburger characters who are easy to shoo out of the plot to make way for the heterocis ones (while still parading itself around like it's actually 'queer rep' which... it really isn't.) Like all three of the comics in that poll are vastly different, serving different audiences, with different goals and intentions. It's comparing apples to oranges to pineapples.

The worst Heartstopper has to offer is just a low stakes plot that might not appeal to everyone or feel 'samey' which yeah, valid, but in the grander sense of whether or not it's had a negative effect on queer media just for being... cheesy? And inspiring other people to write stories like it? I don't get the argument, it feels like it's severely missing the point of what we're fighting for here - to live happy little unbothered lives - but that's just me ╮(￣ω￣;)╭ I'm definitely not trying to be a dick about it in any way and I don't want anyone to think I'm not open to the opposing points here, I do agree with you on the oversaturation of samey BL stories, but it just rose some massive red flags to see Heartstopper next to frigging Homestuck and Lore Olympus LOL

I think I've finally nailed down my biggest issue with the OFMD fandom.

It's important to represent queer joy and a struggle-free queer life in fiction, full of people who accept themselves for who they are. It's great to see queer characters living and loving happily, without self-hate.

Queer struggles are important too, and should be represented.

Those who struggled - often for years, while facing a horrifically repressive society that many of us young'uns cannot appreciate - to come to terms with their queerness have worth. Those who were afraid to come out, for whatever reason, deserve representation too.

Likewise, it's important to represent disabled joy and a struggle-free disabled life in fiction - for all sorts of disabilities, but especially for those who have congenital issues that they may not consider disabilities, as they don't inherently cause deleterious side-effects like chronic pain or fatigue (i.e., many d/Deaf folks and folks with facial differences. Not so much a 'knee brace' that is literally just fanon. Don't give writers credit for creating a disabled main character if they refuse to acknowledge him as such, and his 'aid' was literally a fashion accessory that he gives to his boyfriend at one point to complete his 'look' when they're dressing up as each other. Signed: someone who actually wears knee braces lmaooooo)

But guess what.

Disabled struggles are important to represent, too.

For many of us in the (incredibly diverse and varied) disabled community, disability hit us like a truck of bricks. I went from being an incredibly fit and active young person, to being a young person who often literally cannot move their legs, because they're stuck partially out of socket at the hip and any movement is agony, or because my spinal problems mean they're spasming so hard that walking is impossible, or they're simply unable to hold my (very light) weight. A lot of us are in a significant amount of pain that able-bodied people cannot even imagine, day after day after day. A lot of us were traumatised by our disabilities. A lot of us took a long time to accept and love ourselves.

Our disabilities aren't loved. They're horrific. They're hated. They're something we continuously will be struggling with throughout our lives.

And we deserve rep, too.

And we will be upset, when that rep follows an arc that greatly mirrors what a lot of us go through, only to still say they want to die.

When a show has lots of queer rep and disabled rep, that's great. But you have to ask: what types of queer and disabled rep are they showcasing? What types are they allowing to live? What types of queer/disabled rep do they consider to have 'served their narrative purpose' when they finally attain a stage of queer/disabled joy and self-love that the other characters are on? What message does that send?

Your fave show is not above criticism, especially from the marginalised groups it is trying to represent.

Aren't you worried that another billboard will result in even more people harassing fans which will cause a significant decrease in people engaging with the fandom. I think you guys are shooting yourselves in the foot here in terms of morale and you should probably stop and just refund the money. I don't want an influx of people in my inbox again and I think that is the general consensus among fans. the first billboard was a pr nightmare the second one will have even more diminishing returns. Please if you are involved in the save ofmd crew reconsider your plans and if not reconsider shilling for them

Hi Anon! I appreciate you writing in! As I've mentioned in my previous post, I'm mostly here for supporting the renewal effort by spreading information. I realize it probably looks like because I'm forwarding information from saveofmd that I'm a decision maker. The SaveOFMD team does vote on various initiatives (for example I'm currently on a Taika Appreciation project, and helping suggest charities to support) so it's not just the billboard going on in there. They are one of the initiatives going on in the SaveOFMD Crew. To address your question:

"Aren't you worried that another billboard will result in even more people harassing fans which will cause a significant decrease in people engaging with the fandom"

To be honest, I'm not, but that's just me. If that's something you're concerned about, that's entirely valid. For me, what I've found is that, nothing I do online, in any fandom is going to be accepted by every person. I choose to continue discussing things with people who are willing to be positive, or at least have constructive and are willing to work through things (like I try to). The way that I like to look at it personally is, there are always going to be people who harass us. Being a queer woman, I've had that problem my whole life. What matters is how we as a fandom, or individual deals with it. If I go out on the street in mens clothes because they're comfortable, and I get made fun of by someone, or called a slur (which has happened many a time) does that mean I stop doing what I'm doing? For some people, they choose yes, for me, I don't. If someone is harassing you friend, 1. I would recommend looking for support in your other fans. 2. Block them if they aren't willing to compromise, or you don't have enough spoons to deal with them. No matter what we do, someone is not going to like us, that's just the way the world works.

In regards to:

"I think you guys are shooting yourselves in the foot here in terms of morale and you should probably stop and just refund the money."

I'm happy to pass on this suggestion to the billboard team (again, I'm on the server for other purposes so I don't usually get involved in that) but I'm more than happy to recommend it for you on your behalf.

In regards to:

"I don't want an influx of people in my inbox again and I think that is the general consensus among fans"

I 100% understand the want for not having your inbox flooded. Might I recommend you set some boundaries on your blog? (This is coming from a place of love, I promise I'm not being sarcastic). If you don't want people talking to you about this, or continuing to ask, I'd just recommend stating that in a pinned post (and/or turning anons off-- I've had to do this before to set a boundary) To the second part of your statement: "I think that is the general consensus among fans". I would have to respectfully disagree. I've heard much more excitement than I've heard hate regarding it (and I have heard some negative feedback for sure, but I'd say it's 10% concern and 90% for that I've run into), but perhaps I'm not following the right people (so it could be a bias on my part). If you'd like to send in another anon request and forward me to some places where I could find more people who are upset, I'd be more than happy to read through to see what the concerns are.

I try to be sort of a liaison between the fandom and the various renewal efforts going on (including save ofmd crew), so I'm more than happy to pass on information and provide the concerns to people who are headlining that particular initiative.

In regards to:

"the first billboard was a pr nightmare the second one will have even more diminishing returns."

Can you please provide me with a little more information regarding this? From what I saw in every platform online, the billboard was a PR success in terms of getting noticed by studios and media. There was some backlash among fans / other efforts around the world that thought "the billboard was a waste of money" but the specific purpose was to raise awareness and did get us (the fandom) recommendations from David Jenkins on where to focus efforts. And that's not to say that bad PR didn't happen. Specifically I know a lot of people were upset because "why pay for a billboard when you can help palestine". I will continue to repeat myself in this particular situation because I think it's important. 1. We are allowed to have things we love (everyone in the world is) 2. We are allowed to fight for those things if we feel the need/ability to do so. 3. Just because a fan supports a billboard, doesn't mean they aren't supporting Palestine, or any other efforts going on around the world. 3.5: Many of us don't show what we donate to for privacy reasons, and because we don't feel the need. The purpose of donating to Palestine for example is very different than the purpose of donating to a billboard (the billboard is meant to get attention) and Palestine is too, but my/anyones donating to help people in Palestine doesn't get attention because the attention is already there. The problem is in the leadership in all our countries literally not doing anything to stop the genocide happening there, despite constant reminders. --- BUT THATS A DIFFERENT STORY FOR ANOTHER DAY. 4. We are allowed to have silly little things that make us happy because otherwise life isn't worth living. <TW: Death/Trauma>: I grew up in VA during 9/11 the DC sniper all within my high school years (and one of my friends parents were murdered by the dc sniper). </end TW: Death/Trauma> I say this not for pity, but to point out that I've lived through enough trauma in my life, and gone through enough to know I have to have my silly little things in my life that make me smile, and WE ALL NEED THOSE for our mental health. If someone else doesn't like that, that's their problem, not ours. Please don't let their inability to cope affect your ability to do so.

"Please if you are involved in the save ofmd crew reconsider your plans and if not reconsider shilling for them"

I made a post earlier tonight regarding this situation. Here's the post so I don't have to repeat it again (and other people dont have to read it again here!) Just like any fundraiser, or watch party, or really anything in this fandom, if people choose to be a part of something, that doesn't mean you or anyone else has to. There are people who put money towards cameos, and I know some people think that's wasteful, but that's not up to them, it's up to the people who want to put in for cameos. I'm not a huge fan of EdIzzy fanart (I know, gasp) but if I see it on my tumblr I just scroll through it. I don't tell people not to make it, or make them uncomfortable for doing it. If I may, I would suggest, since the billboard is something that you dont support (and anyone who feels this way)-- 1. feel free to provide feedback, which you have, and I'll forward that on for you, and then 2. move forward and scroll past. The Save OFMD Crew, just like anyone asking for people to join on cameos isn't demanding you help, it's offering it in case you want to join in-- the answer to that can totally be, "No".

Alright anon, thank you again for the feedback. I appreciate you reaching out, and I'll bring these concerns up with the team in the A.M. (for me). Hope you have a good night and things end up being a little calmer for you in your inbox. To others: I will probably get more asks tonight (I already see the numbers going up in my inbox lol) but I'm gonna wait til tomorrow to answer them because I still have to finish the recap AND do another hour work (and its already 10 PM here) so if I don't get back to you tonight---please know it's not because I don't want to talk, it's just cause I'm running out of hours in the day :)

!!SPOILERS FOR OMFD S2 FINALE!!

I want to talk about the finale of OFMD, and specifically about why exactly Izzy's death makes me feel so despondent.

So I usually try to stay out of discourse, especially when it has a fandom as divided as this one seems to be now. And I sincerely don't want this to be taken as me being JUST ticked off or anything. But I feel like Izzy's death, while upsetting on it's own, speaks to a larger problem this season struggled with.

Season one, to me, was a gem. My mom's the one who discovered it and told me to watch it, we ended up watching it together and I was hooked (no pun intended) and flat out thrilled to be watching a show that so lovingly showcased positive queer rep and had a tight, hilarious, and touching storyline front to back. I was a wreck (why all the accidental puns today??) when it was over and couldn't wait for season two.

And season two WAS good! It was funny, I loved Buttons arc and Calypso's birthday and all the other great moments this season had. But to me, the biggest problem is that the pacing was really rushed and the writing too convoluted and crammed full of plot points that didn't fit together in the time allotted.

I've seen people on Twitter saying that the episodes never gave the story room to breathe, to let the audience finish reacting to One Thing before moving on to The Next Thing. They introduced new characters, villains, big monumental moments, and I never once felt like I had time to take any of it in with the love and appreciation I would have liked to because things just kept happening.

I don't know if this was a product of the writing itself being flawed on it's own, or HBO not giving OFMD the amount of episodes it deserves, or both. And just to be clear, I do not condone or agree with anyone harassing the creators for answers, or telling them they're dicks or whatever, because that's wrong.

But in my opinion, this season just didn't work. Season one did a great job of balancing it's episodic shenanigans with it's ongoing storyline, and while nothing is perfect, it was very well written and paced.

And that is why I have a big problem with how they handled the death of Izzy Hands being the completion of his character arc.

Here we have a very repressed, battered and broken man RELUCTANTLY coming back from the brink of death, struggling with his handicaps, damaged relationships and purposelessness on The Revenge. And we slowly see him begin to rebuild himself from the ground up. He creates meaningful emotional bonds with the crew he outright hated throughout all of season one, finds a place for his years of experience again when teaching Stede how to be a real pirate, and comes to terms with his relationship with Ed, and Ed's relationship with Stede. He makes peace with all of it and lets the love of the crew, of family, drive him forward for what little time he has left, because he was always on borrowed time by this point.

Ending a character arc with having said character die sucks, because it hurts when it's a character you care deeply about. But it can work, and it HAS worked. That's why writers keep torturing us by doing it.

The problem for me comes back to pacing.

It's the fact Izzy died by a random gunshot wound because he was standing in the wrong place. It's the fact Izzy died for what reads very much as a way to progress Ed's character arc, not end his own. It's the fact Izzy died and the reaction of the rest of the crew was shown so minimally, with nary a word said about it in the aftermath. It's the fact Izzy died and we were immediately swept off into the wedding scene and the introduction of the inn, without giving us, the audience, a quiet moment to grieve as well.

I'm not saying he necessarily needed a bombastic death scene, or for the season to end on an exceedingly somber note. But I feel like Izzy, for all he'd done this season and the growth his character attained, more than deserved a heroes death and clearer acknowledgement by his family. Not to give Ed, who's just kind of existed this season to me, a pep talk with his dying breath and for everyone to just move on immediately.

If there had been time given for this story to breathe, as much as it would have saddened me, I think this could have worked. I think Izzy could have died and it would have had more meaning, the meaning I'm sure they'd hoped it would when they decided to kill him off.

But it didn't work. Not to me at least, and I'm sad about it. A lot of us are sad about it, and will continue to be. Because we still need time to grieve before we can move on. I know it's just a show, and he's just a character in it, but it's a show that's meant so much to so many people, made us feel seen and accepted in a world where that's harder to come by than it should be. And to see a character so beloved get treated as a plot device to an extent at the end of his journey... I would have just loved better for him.

R.I.P. our brash, loud, exceptional unicorn, Izzy Hands.

OFMD Spiral Parallels 19: Ed and Izzy Sing

Intro: What I love most about how season 2 builds on season 1 of OFMD is the spiral narrative structure. Ground is repeatedly and explicitly re-trod from season 1 to season 2, but in season 2 everything goes deeper than season 1. Meanings are shuffled, emotions are stronger and truer, and transformation is showcased above everything. The first season plucks certain notes, then the second season plucks the same ones--but louder, and then it weaves them together to create a symphony.

---

In both seasons 1 and 2, a person the crew of the Revenge knows very well turns up, wearing an unexpected and gender-non-conforming outfit, and starts belting out a heartfelt song. The crew initially reacts with some confusion, but that soon shifts to encouragement, and even participation.

In season 1, Ed is reeling from his breakup with Stede. Rather than retreat into his Blackbeard persona, or running away, he tries to sit with his pain. It's wallowing, it's undignified, and it's emotionally healthy. The result is a rather terrible but entirely heartfelt song about trying to accept the "death" of that relationship.

In season 2, Izzy is reeling from his "breakup" with Ed/Blackbeard and the loss of his leg. Rather than wallowing in self-pity though, he's using the leg offered by the crew to participate fully in a group activity.

When Ed sings, the Revenge crew are confused and a bit uncomfortable about how personal he's being (and how obvious the bad breakup behind it is, there's a reason Olu is very firm telling Stede "you dumped him" later), but they don't question Ed's choice to do this or come close to laughing. That said, Ed is essentially forcing everyone to participate in his pain, so this could easily have gone to a dark place. But then Ed, with a combination of earnestness and obliviousness, almost immediately acts to create emotional space for others. He's turning his own poisoning into positivity, into a chance for everyone to deepen their community--even to stop being pirates.

In contrast, when Izzy sings, he's joining a pre-existing group activity. He's not the only one in drag, he's enhancing something that's already there. It's a very different community act from Ed's: while Ed was creating a safe community around him, Izzy is just adding depth to a community that's already safe.

Which brings us to the reactions Ed and Izzy each have to the other singing. Because each is present at the other's debut, and the reactions each has to the other's singing sets a tone for the entire relationship going forward.

In season 1, Izzy is baffled and horrified by Ed's singing, and how he acts after singing. Ed is very clearly changing in front of all their eyes, embracing a side of himself that he previously buried deep. Stede's gone, but Ed's growth triggered by that relationship is actually continuing. Izzy thought the "problem" with Ed--the reason he wasn't into being Blackbeard anymore--was Stede (and Izzy still thinks that as late as S2E1). But he was wrong that "no Stede" would lead to Blackbeard again, and he's realizing that, and he hates it. Unable to deal with this directly, he instead tries to regulate the way the crew treat Ed, to make them act as re-enforcers of the "Blackbeard" persona. This fails, because Ed himself is no longer interested in living like that. The next time Izzy tries to intervene in this, he does so in private.

And then there's the queerness of it all. Ed's gender expression here is very different from his normal presentation. Sure, the silk robe is technically men's clothes, but it's also pink and covered in flowers. On top of that, Ed's mannerisms in this scene are noticeably more "gay"-coded than at just about any point in the past. Yet, despite his pain, he seems comfortable in his skin as he presents like this. He's not performing a persona, he's "laying himself bare."

Izzy shames Ed for this. In their next scene, he calls Ed being like this "a fate worse than death." He then displays maybe the most overt homophobia ever to appear on the show, mocking Ed as "namby-pamby," shaming his clothes, and tying all of that to Ed's sexual preferences. It's frankly an evil thing for one human being to do to another, and done when Ed is just starting to feel better about being himself again. The relationship between Ed and Izzy never really recovers (til the very end), it just morphs from one kind of toxicity to another before exploding.

Which is why it's important that Ed doesn't say anything when Izzy comes out in drag. Now it's Izzy who's moving outside the traditional bounds of gender, flirting with a drag queen and singing a love song (written by a woman, to add to the nonconformism). And Ed, like Izzy did, keeps his distance from this. KHe's a bit confused, like Izzy was, but his reaction to this confusion isn't to attack. It's to offer approbation. He raises his drink to toast Izzy, confused but not remotely hostile.

And crucially, the reason all this was able to happen was Ed himself. This party is how they're turning Ed's poison into positivity: Ed's own actions, his desire to correct the very mistakes that Izzy once pushed him to make, have helped create a space for Izzy himself to be vulnerable.

On a personal level, Izzy and Ed just weren't any good for each other. When they tried to hang on to each other, one way or another, they dragged each other down. But when they step back from each other, each is finally able to grow.

Over the course of season 2. Ed is accepted back into the crew--but as Stede's boyfriend. He never goes back to the same emotional place with the crew as when he was singing. He even forgets that there was supposed to be a talent show at all.

But despite the interruption of Ned Lowe, Izzy gets to finish his song. He gets to lead the crew in humming along. And he even has a chance to sing another.

There's a post going around talking about how much people appreciated Blackbeard's leg brace as a mobility aid in a character like him and it got me wondering how many people watching the show are familiar with Mad Max beyond the most recent installment. I know that there is a general awareness that Blackbeard's outfit is an homage to Mad Max but like...is everyone APPRECIATING what a brilliant choice it is on multiple levels???

Mad Max's Road Warrior look is an iconic bit of 80s action movie nostalgia. It comes from the second Mad Max movie and is, in and of itself, a brilliant piece of visual storytelling (a hallmark of Mad Max movies as a whole) because it sums up Max as he is at the end of the first movie: a man in mourning whose physical and mental trauma is made explicitly visual by the knee brace that alludes to the climactic showdown of the first movie.

However, because the broad cultural understanding of any character will always sand off the details of that character, the popular read on Max is that he's a cool action hero. So, Blackbeard's clothes are pretty instantly recognizable and immediately give the viewer, at the very least, an idea that Blackbeard is supposed to be an ass-kicking bad-ass. So far so good - we're tapping into the persona that Ed wants to present as Blackbeard.

What people tend to forget is that Mad Max is pretty explicitly a series of stories about a man who does NOT want the role he's been given in the story. Max is not mad-as-in-angry, he's mad-as-in-crazy (there's a whole other conversation to be had about how those movies handle mental health but that's another kettle of fish). Trauma breaks Max and the rage-fueled revenge bender of the first movie leaves him at his lowest point, providing no catharsis. It actively makes him worse in every way and the movies never suggest otherwise. He doesn't even begin to heal or move past that until arguably the third movie, but more realistically the fourth. Throughout all four movies, Max is defined as a character who is trapped in the role thrust upon him and largely cannot form close connections with the people around him because of that. He is not a person, he is violence personified and he hates it.

The Mad Max movies have always been, at their core, about masculinity and its relationship to violence and heroism. Part of the reason Max is read so incorrectly in pop culture is that the movies do have a lot of blood and violence and Max dishes out his fair share. These are the parts that stick in the mind long after the movie is over. The problem is that every other moment in the movies makes it clear that doing these things is harmful to Max. After the first movie he goes out of his way to avoid violent confrontation. In fact, he even actively avoids helping people who are presented as "good" because he knows that the weight of their problems will fall solely on him, without regard for what it does to him.

Ed's entire arc in OFMD is about his relationship to his own masculinity and his relationship to violence, the latter being something that is explicitly performative for him. He embodies a persona of toxic hyper-masculinity but claims that he's never killed anyone since killing his father. He's willing to utilize violence but it's clear that he doesn't enjoy it the way people's mythologized conception of Blackbeard would make it seem like he should. He sheds some blood, lets other people do the killing and no one notices the slight of hand involved there - the fuckery, if you will - because he's so good at presenting himself as the kind of man they want him to be.

Not for nothing, Mad Max is also a series of movies that is very interested in gender, sexuality, and queerness. Not necessarily always in a positive way, but certainly it is a central theme through all of the movies, because sexuality is inextricably tied up in white, Western views of masculinity. I've long felt - and I think the text does support this, albeit perhaps more through accident than intention - that one way to read the original Mad Max is as a movie about a man struggling to accept that he may not be straight. I personally read Max as bisexual but that's a whole other post to make.

All this to say: I don't think Blackbeard's Mad Max look is just a funny gag and the visible mobility aid is just one part of a broader context that it's working in. It's an incredibly astute allusion to another piece of media that has grappled with the central themes of Ed's character and provides us with a ready-made visual to signal exactly what we need to know about Ed as a person.

“historical accuracy”

yesterday i read an article about ofmd and the author guy (after praising the show’s historical accuracy up to that point) mentioned several times “this is where they veer from historic events” or “in reality” or something along these lines. my favourite is: “in season 2, they’ll have to really abandon all the real-world events... or don’t include blackbeard at all!”

and god... i mean, there’s so much to say about how these kinds of critiques pop up so much more around queer characters and relationships... but i’m starting to get more and more annoyed that we’re talking about “historical accuracy” at all.

don’t get me wrong, of course, there’s a time and place for historical accuracy, getting the facts right and everything, even in fiction. i like long-winded youtube essays about historical clothing as much as the next person, sometimes it feels good to point out every mistake, and sometimes these mistakes are actually harmful to real-life people, especially minorities who are only now being listened to when it comes to their own stories and histories.

and look, i also sometimes like to hate on artists’ biopics, just because i’ve read too much about these artists and some movies just suck the life out of art. i realize i do that, too, okay?

however. i’m really fed up with “historical accuracy”. especially when it comes to shit that happened a couple centuries ago. and double if we’re talking about queer comedies, ya know, where stuff is changed for the narrative. or because it’s supposed to be fucking funny.

i want to stress this: i have seen not one article complaining about mary bonnet basically inventing expressionism and cubism, about 200 years ahead of her time. to me personally, this is the biggest in-your-face anachronism in the show. and it’s because of the narrative, because audiences today wouldn’t look at a conversation piece from 1750 or whatever and think “oh yeah she’s really ahead of her time!”, so we need the anachronism, and also it’s fucking funny. mary bonnet is basically picasso. what the fuck. i love it.

but i did see articles where the author guy talks at length about all the pirate-y details the show changed, specifically where biographies don’t line up. (as a personal note, i do think that’s a lot to do with the pirate setting because some settings just hit the wannabe historians/history nerds more than others. imo if they’d set the story in ancient rome, it would’ve been worse. i’ve never met a bunch of people more annoyed by “mistakes” than ancient rome (wannabe) historians.) and the biographies never line up when there’s a queer romance involved. BIG SURPRISE.

and i think this is where my actual complaint comes in: history itself is just a story. we don’t know what happened with blackbeard and bonnet. sure, we have some records. but none of us were there, so we can’t know. just as an example, you could find edward teach’s personal diary tomorrow (or does that exist already, i have no idea, whatever, roll with me here) and you still wouldn’t know what really happened. because it could be completely made up to invent a persona for him. it could literally be a self-insert fanfiction. it could be forged. and even if none of that were true, we still wouldn’t know because first person accounts will always be unreliable to an extent.

and then we still have the problem of interpreting this text, this historical source. you could give this diary to 100 historians and get back 100 different opinions, told in 100 different voices with - and this is important - 100 different intentions. because when we’re telling history, our narratives always serve a purpose. this is why, sometimes, historic interpretations change over time. we change our views on the world as a whole, we let new voices be heard, we discover new facts, we disregard some blatant lies, we change the narrative over and over and over again. we never get any closer to the truth, we just start looking at our own time differently.

a historian could write a paper on why stede bonnet was gay, another historian could write another paper on why he wasn’t, they could both get an equal number of equally respectable sources, get peer-reviewed and published, and i still could read these papers and go “eh, but have you considered...”, and we could all be right in the end but we would all say these things, our opinions, with intention. so, the important part isn’t what the paper says but why the author says it, and when. “stede bonnet was gay and here’s why” sounds awesome in a paper from 2022 and is probably meant to discredit him in 1952. “stede bonnet wasn’t gay and here’s why” sounds exhaustingly ordinary coming from an author in 1952, but makes my eyes roll back into my head in 2022.

i’m not saying we should disregard facts when telling stories based on historical events. or that we should stop researching history. or that we shouldn’t get annoyed at inaccuracies. like i said in the beginning, that can be fun!

what i do want to say, though, is that we should ask ourselves (and i’m not only talking about wannabe history nerds here) why we find these things annoying. what purpose does the inaccuracy serve? am i only annoyed because it alters the way i see this historical figure and i don’t like it? am i annoyed because this inaccuracy actually hurts people now? why am i annoyed at this inaccuracy and not another one? can i even say it’s an inaccurate telling of the story or is this just inaccurate based on the facts that i have? maybe someone else has different facts? or different opinions?

and then, lastly: am i just annoyed because i, personally, don’t relate to this version of the story?

and to top it all of: does this change they made in the telling of this story serve a narrative purpose, and is this narrative purpose sometimes simply a way of saying “wouldn’t it be fucking great if...”, and is this something i should let other people enjoy while i go away to have my own opinions?

THE END. (except it isn’t because the telling of history doesn’t end and will forever change depending on the Political Mood of the Day and maybe these thoughts will be obsolete by next week. thanks for coming to my ted talk.)