something something aaron warner anderson being hyper alert of the emotions of every single person around him but forced to live a life where every expression of his own emotions results in punishment

A quiet part of me wonders (mostly because the oc I’m using in the place of Y/N for weak spot is… morally questionable in oc canon) how would the story change if Y/N was a villain themselves? Either former or current.

You got that John Krasinski joint inside you? 👀

Sorry couldn't resist 😂

Put those OC's in! Let's go! We love to hear it!

-cracks knuckles-

BET

So, I think my first immediate thought when I read morally questionable is that it changes nothing!

Anticlimactic, yes I know.

Why?

Because while I've never said such, reader is morally grey. I see comments about how reader is good or reader is becoming bad by being with Donnie. Reader has thought this themselves. Less we not forget, however, that reader is an unreliable narrator. We've seen this occur in a multitude of ways. This is my own personal philosophy coming out (and also plays in conjunction with the themes of Weak Spot, mentioned here) is that, on the whole, most people are morally shades of grey. Very few, if any, people are truly bad or good. It's part of why a good villain is redeemable and people love to see it. It's also why there's sometimes nothing tastier than a hero who's moral compass pushes them too far! Life isn't black and white!

But that's not reading your actual question, that's just me taking a chance to say that. You asked how the story would change if reader was a villain.

Now that changes everything!

First off, the story wouldn't be about if you're worthy of love, we would be playing with a tango! As we've seen, Donnie folds in players he finds useful, takes out those in his way, manipulates them if he finds them beneath him, or further yet, completely ignores them if they don't fall on his radar. He's sort of ambivalent in that way, but it's walking eggshells for another villain. Especially in his younger years, if you toed anywhere near his line, he'd be on your shit. This is a man of information. He is more connected than Big Mama without question. He'd know about you the second you committed your first petty crime. Now the real question would be if he would actually remember your name or if he'd drop it into the monitoring stack where 99.9% of all the other villains go.

As we know in general, he had never once trifled with love and I'm less inclined to think he would do so for another villain. He has his persona to uphold and no matter how much of a small fry you are, you are still another rogue and to him that will always be a threat.

Are you retired? You were weak and couldn't stay in the game. That speaks to your resolve.

Are you small potatoes? You're not hungry enough. Why should he waste his time on you?

Are you in the big leagues? You are an opponent and he will move his chess pieces accordingly.

Dang, here I go again coming up with only bad endings. i swear I'm not doing this on purpose, but this just falls in line with the goals of Weak Spot and how changing the parameters alters the whole thing. The story is meant to be an examination of what makes you worthy of love and if your job really defines you. If you are both evil, of course you are both worthy because there is nothing standing in your way, but from the way Donnie has been crafted and come to be, it's difficult to see him dropping any of that for a fellow villain. The exact same could be said about a hero except we have already have textual examples of that (the other turtles). The thing about reader is they needed to be a regular person, because at his core Donnie just wants a chance to live authentically and who better to illustrate living for the sake of living than the every man? They had to be someone outside his world to open his eyes, otherwise he'd be looking through the exact same lens. No one is driven to crime just for the fun sake of it (look back up to my earlier general consensus, this is simply a blanket statement stemming from that). I'm not saying someone broken or 'bad' couldn't have reached Donnie, if we shift Weak Spot, there is absolutely some hot hot tension to be had of going toe to toe with a villain (case and point chapter 49), but within the framing of Weak Spot, I would say, overall, we have yet another dead end.

Lovely exercise though! Thank you for giving me a chance to answer!

This is one of my longer meta posts (oof I don’t have many)

my mom’s told me about this (our family is way too invested in ted lasso) I believe in a tweet or something on instagram she saw but im going to say it here because it’s so true. the very first time we see nate and meet him what is he doing? yelling at ted and beard to get off of the stadium lawn. Its only when he realizes that they’re the coaches that he’s nice to them.

nate is such a fun and complex character (oh I hate him for sure) because he is power motivated, but he still has morals. His parents are dismissive of his interests and his career and they rarely compliment him. He’s always looking for validation. so on the lawn when he realizes that its people in power who can lift him up that he’s just been yelling at, he stops in his tracks because he wants them to like him and see potential. and when ted consistently compliments and lifts him up, he beams. it’s only when he begins to feel like the lame sidekick that he begins to turn, because he feels like ted is using him (although he isn’t.) so of course the slimy bastard rupert who has no redeeming qualities swoops in and takes advantage of this. he offers him a better job where he can get revenge on ted for making him feel like he was in the backseat. it makes me sad that he sent in the information to trent about ted’s mental breakdown because that was absolutely not his business to send, but i understand his motivation to do so: he thought perhaps if he could dismantle Ted’s power and charm to the media and team, it would probably make him feel less like a mess = he would have the upper hand. all those times we see him on Twitter, scrolling through his own name (to which I always said ‘you narcissistic piece of shit’) was really not narcissistic at all. Nate is so fucking deep into his own image of how people perceive him (i.e., the wonderkid). he is reliant on that sense of being a hero.

was the telling about ted’s mental issues a problem? absolutely, yes. was him ripping the believe sign a good thing? hell no. but when they showed the tape, i mostly just felt sorry for Nate. the others were laughing but it kind of just felt pathetic. he’s so after that pride that he’s victimized the one man who genuinely did lift him up and help him feel like a hero.

i do want to discuss the Rupert situation at length, too, because it should be said. rupert- lets be honest!! hes a manipulative cheating fuck! I will defend morally grey characters like nate to the end of my days, even if I pretend to hate them, but rupert- there’s nothing about him. he’s manipulative, what can I say. he brings nate up and makes himself seem like some heroic angel, and then does subtle things to make him feel less than. by taking him in he is painted as a saint to nate, who wants nothing more than to get petty revenge on ted for making him feel less, however inadvertently. but it’s the small things that get me. it’s the ‘call me rupert, nate,’ in episode one to the ‘mr mannion, please’ in the most recent episode. its the replacing his car, which he loves, with something that is shiny and fancy and fits ruperts image. it feels to me like he is making things seem like a kind favor when he is attempting to change who nate is at the core. its fucking manipulative!

and most recently. him telling nate not to say anything other than ‘hello’ to ted at the game. there are so many instances in this episode that you can see nate wants to go over and apologize for what he’s done (because he does have some morals, and he feels horrible!) but rupert always intercepts and tries to remind nate why he’s on his side.

it’s just so well done- it’s such a well done show. It demonstrates morally grey characters and the reasons they do things so well and I could talk about it for ages.

i’d love to hear your thoughts on qui gon?

Alright, this is the second part of answering that I mentioned earlier so I’m just gonna.. go into a breakdown of Qui Gon’s character and how I view him.

I haven’t fully watched the Phantom Menace since I was a kid (10-ish years ago), so I wouldn’t say take my word as gospel. I have, however, recently touched up on some other material to refresh my memory and I’ve also rewatched some of the scenes, so I think I have a firm enough understanding of his character to discuss it. Anyways, let me actually get to my breakdown.

Qui Gon is a weak character. Not in the sense that he’s physically weak, but in the sense that he lacks depth and we only see him onscreen for one movie before he kicks the bucket. Maybe it’s thanks to the fact that they only had one movie to make an interesting character which is why he fell flat (for me at least), but I’ve seen single movies do much better in the character development area, so it’s a bit of an iffy excuse. Regardless, looking at the Phantom Menace from start to finish, I think the first thing that comes to my attention is the fact that Qui Gon doesn’t change.

Why is that a bad thing? Well, ok, nobody changes overnight, we know this. And some people don’t change at all, aren’t open to it, but we know refusing to keep an open mind is detrimental. The thing with Qui Gon is that he doesn’t change because he refuses to see outside of himself, and this isn’t put into a negative light either. To be honest, I am unsure if Lucas was trying to paint Qui Gon as an objectively “good person” or “bad person” (Liam Neeson himself is deplorable, but that’s not my point at the moment). Of course, it isn’t just black and white, but I feel there is a certain way that “morally grey” characters should be done (it is broad, because you will still have nuance in that gray area) and Qui Gon does not really.. fit. He seems like someone who is meant to be seen as a likable character but he just isn’t.

Qui Gon clashing with the Council in itself isn’t bad. My character, Ko, harbors a strong dislike for the Council and I think it is an interesting point to explore, the difference between various Jedi and their relationship with the Council. That being said, when it leads to direct butting heads without progress and/or a willingness to see the other side, it becomes less of a “difference in opinion” and more of a “overgrown man child refuses to look past his own beliefs”. And don’t get me wrong, I have my own problems with how the Council functions, but the way Qui Gon handles it is pisspoor.

Going onto my next point, Qui Gon is very manipulative. I mean, Obi Wan had to get it from somewhere (and I would not entirely say that Obi Wan is a manipulative person, but he is not above using manipulation), but if we look at how Qui Gon interacts with Shmi (along with Padmé and the rest of the handmaidens), he takes advantage of his charisma in order to establish himself in her family setting. He knows that he isn’t going to free her—which actually leads into the whole problem of the Jedi ignoring the slave trade in general, but once again, not something I am going to delve into here—which is why he needs to show himself as someone who can be a “father figure” to Anakin in order to effectively distance him from her. Anakin doesn’t get the choice of being a Jedi; it’s either that or he remains enslaved.

He views people as tools. If we breakdown his relationship with the Force, it can basically be summed up as “he believes it will guide everything that happens” (which actually reminds me of very religious people who attribute everything to their Maker) to a point where he isn’t really.. putting in the effort to get there. For example, he does not worry himself with figuring out a way to get off Tatooine because he thinks that the Force will sort that out for him. With Anakin, he believes that the Force has led Anakin to him so that Qui Gon can train the kid. His freeing of Anakin does not come from a place of good will, but more so the fact that he thinks the Force is telling him to.

This also bleeds into him betting on podraces and loaded die, which also ties into the fact that he knew he wasn’t going to free Shmi. Once again, he is not freeing Anakin because he believes that them being enslaved is wrong (in fact, earlier he states that he is not going to free them), but because he believes the Force is telling him that he needs to train Anakin. He tells Anakin that he is the chosen one—I mean, imagine the weight of that status on a child? I honestly believe that if anyone but Qui Gon had found Anakin, like Plo Koon for example, things would have gone differently. Anakin did not need that weight on his shoulders at such a young age—and views him as that. He makes it clear when he is speaking to the Council.

Which becomes another thing where he literally brushes off the fact that he already has a Padawan. He is very willing to toss Obi Wan aside in favor of training Anakin, and he states so with indifference. This ties back to an earlier part in the movie where he says something along the lines of “stop focusing on the future, focus on the present” because, thanks to his inability to think about the future for just a moment, he has condemned his Padawan and put himself in a predicament that is the result of him getting caught up in the moment. His blind trust in the force does not account for the actions and opinions of others, nor does it account for the fact that he still needs to treat things with tact/put the effort in himself.

Then, kind of looping back a little bit to my statement about how he views Anakin, he does not bring up Anakin’s former life to the council (if I remember correctly Anyways). It is just “this boy is the chosen one. He needs to be trained”. This also ties into my earlier points about how he refuses to see issues outside of his own, and how he is very “it has to be my way”. He has tunnel vision; he does not see outside of that. There is a reason that Xanatos fell, and it is not just because of Xanatos’s own actions. Yet, even after having a Padawan that has fallen, Qui Gon does not change his ways. Yoda guides him to Obi Wan as an attempt to heal Qui Gon, and I can only imagine the emotional stress that would put on a literal child.

Running off this point, the most insight we see of Qui Gon (?) is through Obi Wan/how Obi Wan sees him. Because Obi Wan grieves for Qui Gon, we are sympathetic for him, yet Qui Gon abuses Obi Wan’s attachment to him in order to ensure that Anakin is trained. Obi Wan should not have been taking on a Padawan at that age, certainly not when he had just been knighted, yet he does because of Qui Gon. It’s deeply problematic, and while I do thoroughly enjoy watching Anakin and Obi Wan interact, Anakin needed a parental figure, not a brother.

So that is my brief? Analysis of Qui Gon’s character and how I specifically view him. I went more into why I personally dislike him since that is what I had talked about before, but also because if I am being honest, his negative traits outweigh this redeeming qualities. Anyways, I am going to create a tag for my general Star Wars thoughts since I have made a couple of posts and it is probably time I organize a little bit.

I kind of love that Liam made it clear that while Caleb still cares for Essek, Astrid and Eodwulf he still doesn't trust them, because that makes way more sense. For him to trust them just based on those feelings would be wildly out of character for him. Let's be real, right now they aren't trustworthy.

Astrid and Eodwulf are still very much enigmas and Caleb doesn't know what their true end goal is. It could be good, but he also remembers what they were like as teenagers. Maybe back then their ambition outweighed the love they shared. What was that ambition geared towards? Right now it's 16 years later and he doesn't know them anymore. Eodwulf seemed happy with what Trent gave them magically, and Astrid seems very much a 'means justify the end' person atm though that could be changing. They still probably hate or dislike Trent but that doesn't necessarily mean they want to change the system he came from. Caleb hasn't interacted with them enough to fully give that trust, and a couple instances of help won't change that. Remember, the three of them were trained in manipulation something Caleb knows well. So while Astrid and Eodwulf do seem to care for him he can't be sure there isn't something going on behind the scenes.

As for Essek, like Liam said it's only been 2 months since they found out everything he's done and he's only just started on his path to redemption. Before they met in Eiselcross Essek didn't seem to regret any of his actions apart from those that hurt the M9. Even then though he says he still would have done them. Currently there's a man in the Empire, who may have been executed for all we know, who went down for Essek's actions. He's never seemed to show remorse for that, it's more of a general regret. Plus his way of redeeming is similar to what Caleb originally wanted, which he now recognises as incredibly selfish and narcissistic. Caleb was burned by Essek, and it's going to take more than one speech and offer of help to regain that trust. I mean he thought Trent of all people might come to help against the TT so I don't think Essek coming along is a massive sign of improvement to Caleb. Stopping the end of the world is something hopefully anyone would do. It's a start but it isn't enough quite yet. So yes, he doesn't trust Essek and he has very valid concerns as to why that is.

The thing is though that makes his relationships with them so much more interesting, and makes their characters so much more interesting too. It's so complicated and there are still so many facets of them that we don't really know, including Essek. There are so many shades of grey and different directions they all could go down. A sudden switch from morally grey intentions to good intentions is not a compelling narrative to follow. Caleb is only just coming to a place where his goals are good and based on the needs of others, and this is after months with the M9. Realistically it makes no sense for his fellows to be at the same place he is. And I don't want them to be. After all the time and effort Caleb has put in to reach that place it seems cheap for his fellows to just suddenly have that too. None of them have been in an environment for that to start or develop sufficiently. I'm not saying they're irredeemable, evil beings. I'm saying that currently they're three people who have complicated backgrounds and their road to redemption is going to be as equally complicated, which is much more enjoyable. We break trust with people we care about all the time, and it takes time for that to be restored. We can work with people we don't trust when other things take precedence. Why would it be any different here?

Edit: Also should probably add that I do think the three of them can reach the place Caleb is. With Astrid and Eodwulf coming from the same place and background Caleb has there's always hope for them. They were abused and brainwashed to become who they are, but they do have the ability to move past it. It's just going to be incredibly hard for them. Essek too had a father who he disliked and wasn't good to him (it may have been abuse but i don't know too much about it). Either way he has the capability as well, but will similarly be hard. Their background doesn't define them and won't always, but what Caleb knows about them and their actions means they can't be implicitly trusted right now.

More about my morally-grey heroines and their messed-up relationships

I wanted to elaborate on this post I wrote about D&F and BFS, but it turns out that adding readmore links to reblogs is a PITA, and I just now that this is gonna turn into a fucking novelette. 

So here we go.

Time to go into some detail about this!

Let’s define our terms:

“Decline and Fall” is my 120K+ series of loosely chronological, interconnected short fics, set in a tiny fandom for a visual novel that’s been in alpha development since 2015. For the record, the word count disincludes unfinished drafts, and stories that I’m holding back because they’re based on canon spoilers.

“Blood from Stone“ is my 100K unfinished Skyrim WIP, which began as a response to a kink meme prompt, and is not so much a rarepair as a non-existent one.

Both of these stories centrally feature young female protagonists and their sexual relationship with a much older man. Both heroines are... “grey” to say the least.

Let’s compare our fandoms, shall we?

Skyrim is a juggernaut fandom for a super-popular RPG which is part of a 30-yo franchise. The setting is moderately dark and casually sprinkled with murder cults, cannibalism, secret police death squads, and the prison industrial complex. The player character can be a thief and a murderer and everyone just learns to be okay with it because the only alternative is a fiery apocalypse. They also rob graves for the lulz.

Seven Kingdoms: The Princess Problem is a pinkie-toe-sized fandom for a hybrid RPG and dating sim where attractive young people flirt and date for the purpose of brokering world peace. The setting is one where you can actually broker world peace effectively. The player character can perpetrate a fair amount of proxy violence, but maintaining a good reputation dishonestly is legitimately difficult.

Now, let’s compare our heroines:

Corinne is a 24-year-old bounty hunter who became a folk hero, a soldier, and a cult assassin. She’s living alone and working for a living since she was 18. She’s never been in love, but she’s had multiple sexual and romantic relationships in the past. I deliberately wrote her as being very sexually confident and self-assured. She also has combat training, magical training, her special Dragonborn powers, and an incalculable amount of social clout. By every metric, she’s a powerful character. Though she can talk her way out of a tight spot (all my favorite characters can), she can also fight her way out.

Verity is (at the beginning of D&F) not yet 18 years old. She’s a princess from a very conservative kingdom who was raised to become a barter bride in a diplomatic marriage. The values that were passed to her were duty, tradition, and absolute obedience. Her primary skills are social, charisma, eloquence, and persuasion. Then she was dropped into the deep water of a diplomatic summit and had the weight of future history put on her shoulders, without ever having been taught how to make her own decisions or live with her regret.

To sum up, we have one hyper-competent, confident, and independent badass, universally recognized as powerful and dangerous, and then we have someone who’s basically a deconstruction of a traditional fantasy princess.

Okay, what about the more specific setting within the game world?

BFS is set in Markarth, arguably the most corrupt city in Skyrim, and the site of a localized war, on top of the 2-3 other wars that Skyrim has going on. The city is controlled by the cartel-like Silver-Blood family, and their enemies are swiftly and brutally eliminated. The rule of law is a joke. When the player character arrives at Markarth, they witness a chain or murders and are drawn into a conspiracy that sees them sentenced to life in prison for a crime they didn’t commit. The ruling elite suppress the native underclass by a variety of inventive methods. The roads into the city are controlled by the remnants of a violent but failed uprising, and this uprising is actually the origin story of Skyrim’s entire civil war storyline.

D&F is set in Revaire, explicitly the most violently war-torn of the seven kingdoms. Once the epicenter of a conquering empire, it was a country full of arts and culture, until a bloody coup slaughtered the entire royal line and instituted a new and more brutal regime. The new regime is on shaky grounds and foresighted people predict its imminent fall to rebel forces. So much, so canon. In D&F, I made a point of developing the new royals and their small coterie of supporters, as well as illustrating their constant struggle to conceal how widely reviled they are by the populace, and most of the former nobility. Their apathy to the plight of the common people is underscored in contrast to Verity’s compassion, which is ridiculed as a sentimental feminine affectation.

I’m attracted to certain themes, as you might have noticed.

Now, we get to talk about love interests.

Thongvor Silver-Blood is rather anemically characterized in Skyrim’s canon, so much of the information that I include in BFS is inferred. From his limited number of dialogues in the game, we know that he’s politically ambitious, a Stormcloak supporter, easily angered, and that he has one legitimate friend in the city. Like most Skyrim characters of his age bracket, he served in the Great War. He’s defined by his relationship to his generational cohort. In BFS, he’s def8ined in contrast to his brother. Thonar is comfortable being thought of as a villain. Thongvor still needs to believe that he’s the good guy. And I’m gonna get more into that in later chapters, too.

As a love interest, he’s initially in awe of Corinne, and always genuinely adoring, but more than a little jealous and possessive. BFS is not a story about love redeeming bad men (don’t get me started), but Thongvor shows different sides of his personality to different people, and the side that Corinne gets to see is much nicer than what most people do.

Hyperion Asper is a character of my own devising, whose existence in 7KPP canon is purely implied. We know his children, Jarrod and Gisette, and we knew that he organized a coup to seize the throne. I posit him as a tyrant and unrepentant child-killer (not directly stated in D&F, at least not yet). He’s ruthless and manipulative and his sole purpose is maintaining a sense of personal power. I structured him as the bad example that Jarrod tries -- and fails -- to live up to.

As a love interest... look, he’s a man who’s cheating on his wife with his son’s wife. He seduces Verity and manipulates her, and takes a special delight in pushing her buttons. All his compliments to her are mean-spirited and back-handed. He’s also jealous and possessive... which is especially pathetic, since he’s jealous of his own son, whom Verity doesn’t even like. His rage is a constant implied undercurrent in the narrative.

And the relationship dynamics themselves?

Corinne kisses Thongvor, proposes marriage to him, and then sleeps with him before riding off into mortal danger. She’s fond and affectionate, but she shies away from intense emotions, whether negative or positive. Since they spend most of their time apart, their marriage has been defined by Thongvor yearning like a sailor’s wife, while Corinne ran around doing violence and crime. They only just had their first fight. It will change when they get to spend some more significant time together... but on the whole, their marriage is fairly happy, and the emotional dynamic favors Corinne -- so far. It’s not a pure gender reversal, but that element is definitely dominant.

Hyperion starts seducing Verity on their very first meeting, and relies on a combination of magnetic attraction and Verity’s inexperience in life to keep her coming back, against her better judgment. Their relationship is mutually defined by a combination of attraction and resentment of that attraction. The danger of the situation is an essential element, to the point where it’s hard to imagine their affair would survive without it. It’s a puzzle and a battle, a source of fascination but not of comfort. There’s lust involved, and curiosity, but not a shred of love or even like. The closest thing to genuine affection is when Verity briefly imagines that there could be a version of Hyperion she actually liked, cobbled from his various, hidden good qualities. Any trappings of a genuine relationship are deliberately discordant.

I have tried, more than once, to imagine an alternate universe in which these two could be happy. It can’t be done. they are a study in dysfunction.

So where’s the similarity, with all these differences outlined?

Corinne’s choice to marry into the Silver-Blood family makes her complicit in their rule of the Reach, corrupt and reactionary as it is. Her reluctance to accept being called by their name reflects a reluctance to confront unpleasant truths that’s fundamental to her character. Choosing to be one of them affects and will continue to affect how other people see her, mostly negatively, and mostly without her being aware of it. Being Thongvor’s wife has gained her enemies. The fact that she doesn’t share his more reactionary views is something that they’ve both chosen to elegantly ignore, but the rest of the world won’t be so generous.

Verity’s choice to marry into the Revaire royal family makes her complicit in their violence against the forces rebelling against them, albeit in a more subtle way. Her personal dislike of Jarrod and the fact that their marriage was purely political will not absolve her in anyone’s eyes. Neither will her compassionate and charitable character, which can only be seen as a fig leaf to the Revaire royals’ general brutality. She has lost at least one good friend -- who will never see her the same way, since she chose to throw her lot in with his enemies. She will go down in history as an Asper wife -- but if she’s lucky, not just as that.

Both Corinne and Verity choose to accept some of the violence of the system that they live under, in order to serve their own lofty, long-term goals. Both of them are more image-driven than they care to admit, and though they are genuinely caring and compassionate, they will readily sacrifice compassion in service on their goals. They are queens (or queen-like figures), one-degree-of-separation members of the ruling class, implicated but not directly in control.

And their relationships serve to highlight what they are willing to accept, even though it goes against their conscience.

Is there a conclusion to be drawn here?

Sort of. I want to write about power, compromise and complicity. For whatever reason, it turns out that yw/om relationships are... a really good vehicle for exploring that. I can’t really explain why that is, just yet. I just... have had these thoughts floating, unstructured, in my head for months on end. I needed to get them out on paper, and give them some semblance of order.

I don’t even know why anyone but me would read this, as long and meandering as it is. But having it accessible might be of use to me.

Hey, I wanted to ask if you'd be willing to say more about Akiren's grey morality with darker shades! I love it and your analysis of the game is always amazing!

Hello! Wow, thank you very much… And I can try, I suppose. I’m not sure what you’re interested in hearing specifically!

His Awakening is pretty dire in tone. All the PT have very grim, violent Awakenings, but Akiren’s is specifically about brutal rage, heresy, defiance, even if it means blasphemy itself. This is foreshadowing of his future destruction of a god (and him fusing Satanael, the rebel angel of heaven), and I think it also sets him apart as a Trickster Wild Card, and as a rebel among the other PT.

Yaldigor is constantly reminding Akiren that he has to use his Confidants and the deals he makes to (1) stop oncoming ruin, and (2) redeem himself through rehabilitation. This frames Akiren as an anti-hero, which is an interestingly judgmental take for a Velvet Room master and attendant(s) to have. We already know that VR’s take a form based on the Wild Card’s heart, so Akiren already feels bound to the idea of imprisonment (both literally and figuratively). Adding in the threat of avoiding ruin and serving time in some interstitial reality that grants him power is… a lot to put on a teenage boy’s conscience.

Basically, Yaldigor does not grant Akiren any reprieve from his anger at being wrongfully accused and convicted; if anything, he feeds into the prejudice and this fuels Akiren’s spite. He isn’t the hero to be praised and welcomed. He’s the Trickster. (Trickster gods and figures are heroic in their own way, but that’s another post for another time.)

Akiren’s behavior as Joker versus his behavior in reality is starkly different. Joker is cocky, confident, suave. He fights and moves with ease. He’s commanding and fearless with the taunts and shouts he directs at his enemies. He takes risks, delights in the risks, and can’t help but showing off a little bit. This is all a boy reveling in his status as a trouble-making thief and supernatural vigilante. Vigilantes seek justice, sure, but Akiren never struck me as purely justice-focused. What little personality we can glean from his dialogue choices (and his in canon choices that we can’t control) frame him less as a goody two-shoes, hardline black and white thinker the way some of the PT can be, and more someone who is not afraid to take risks, play a long con, and even go behind his friends’ backs to indulge in some questionable behavior (see also: his Confidant with Goro).

Akiren’s Confidants are all framed as beneficial to his work as a Phantom Thief, no matter how they begin (except for Goro; that one is all personal). That’s not to say that Akiren isn’t emotionally connected to these people–he is, clearly; he can gain significant social skill increases from bonding with them–but they all also have a root, core benefit of being useful to Akiren. The impact he has on their lives are personal, yes, but the fact that they all start with the concept of making a deal with each other is an indication of how Akiren views his current goal as a Trickster and how he sees himself. He’s viewed and treated as a criminal. He is on probation, an outcast in society. Therefore, any bond he makes with someone has to have a reason to be made besides the sheer pleasure of it.

That isn’t necessarily gray morality, of course. But it does paint him in a darker light than some of the other Persona protagonists have been (at least, not since Tatsuya).

I spoke in the other post about how eagerly he agrees to Mona’s deal, and how he left it up to Ann whether or not Kamoshida was going to die (something he didn’t really bat an eye about, unlike Ryuji). It’s his word that usually pushes the PT into their Awakening, words of rebellion, words coming from righteous anger. This is a kinder way of ripping the mask off the PT’s hearts, the same way he does to the Shadows (”Show me your true form!”).

Now why do I call Akiren an antihero? Because he doesn’t really have standard hero traits. He’s brave, yes. He has a moral code, sure. But he’s not out to be the savior of humanity, or saving the country for the saving’s sake. He’s doing it to punish, to snatch back society and tear it free. He’s also the Trickster, the one who stands out, defies, condemns, and ultimately controls the group of outcasts of which he’s a part.

Other antiheroes in fiction are: Hamlet, Geralt, Lucifer, Macbeth, Jaime and Tyrion Lannister, Maleficent, The Punisher, Han Solo, and John Wick. What all these characters have in common are convictions that center around personal moral codes and personal goals no matter how it sets them apart from society, no matter if it defies common law or codes of justice, no matter what consequences it brings down on them. They are scheming, clever, and occasionally violent people who also have a code of honor and loyalty. They are all darker shades of the idea of a heroic character, complex and commendable.

Perhaps no better example of Akiren’s gray morality is seen than in the third semester when you can take Maruki’s deal and damn your friends to the false reality all because he doesn’t want to give up Goro. He doesn’t hesitate to drag his friends from their dreams to bring them along to the Palace infiltration, and while he does reflect on whether or not it was the right/kind thing to do, he never has the option of not doing it (presumably because the devs didn’t want you not to have your whole cast–so I’m not sure I’d put much weight on this idea I pitched).

Regardless, even after he went through the trouble of waking them all up, he can put them all back in that lie when given the chance. This is his most antihero trait of all: when asked and given a chance, he will choose what he thinks is the right thing to do (keep Goro close, taking the short road to fulfilling their promise) over what is the fair thing to do (upholding his principles of rejecting manipulation and control). Incidentally, he’s still acting as a Trickster here. Tricksters can and do act in their own self-interests (see: Loki going to a dinner party with the other gods and telling them all how much they suck just to start some shit; Loki killing Baldr for a lark). So this isn’t even out of character for Akiren. It’s merely one of the darker ways he can turn.

The final glimpse of his Joker form in the train window makes me think that there’s always going to be a part of Akiren that is the Trickster, that will always be able to tap into this awakened “darkness” (or rather, gray complexity) that wasn’t present when he first arrived in Tokyo. All the other PT went their ways to a brighter future, taking control of their lives and reclaiming the goals and happiness that were taken from them, and what does Akiren do? Besides go home with his new cat (yay!), he catches an inkling hint of his rival’s presence, and sees his alternate self: the cocky, debonair, ruthlessly charming Trickster that lurks in his heart. That is his “future.” That is what he’s “claimed” during his probationary period in Tokyo: the will and spirit of a god-defying Trickster, an essential element of society that exists to shake it up, tear it down, challenge it, and refuse to bow to it.

Akiren wasn’t rehabilitated to be a good boy, redeemed and now on his best behavior. He is a law-defying young man who was exonerated of his wrongful conviction and revealed that Japan’s “justice” system was more of a legal system, both of them corrupt, both of them bested by him.

Not sure I talked much about gray morality here. I’ll have to pay closer attention to stuff when I do my NG+ run.

Welcome (again) to the Order of the Phoenix, Gina!

You have been accepted for the role of SEVERUS SNAPE with the faceclaim of Aneurin Barbard! We particularly loved Severus’ ambiguous motivations and how he’s playing spy as a double agent for both the Order and the Death Eaters! He’s not all good - he’s not all bad - and that fits our morally grey theme within this roleplay. So glad to see you playing him again! 

Please take a look at the new member checklist and send in your account within 24 hours! Thank you for joining the fight against Voldemort!

OUT OF CHARACTER:

NAME: Gina AGE: 25 TIMEZONE: MST-Arizona ACTIVITY LEVEL: Weekends are usually when I’m on the most 😊 I’ll try to get on during the week – especially on my early days. All that being said, I’ll definitely will be able to post at least once a week! As long as writing is still fun, and doesn’t feel like a chore, I’ll be on the dash frequently (and I’ll keep y’all informed if there’s ever going to be an issue with an activity check)! ANYTHING ELSE: trigger: non-con.

CHARACTER DETAILS:

NAME: Severus Snape AGE: 21 GENDER, PRONOUNS, and SEXUALITY: Cis-Male, He/Him, Heterosexual. BLOOD STATUS: Halfblood HOUSE ALUMNI: Slytherin ANY CHANGES: Request FC change: Aneurin Barnard.

CHARACTER BACKGROUND:

PERSONALITY:

Generally, Severus is seen rather than heard.

The mind of Severus Snape is complex – to be sure. Filled with calculations, fragile threads of truths and lies he’s told and webbing them all together, and innovations for many different forms of magic. To keep all of these thoughts collected, Severus keeps a journal that he has heavily bound to keep secret. There, he states the deepest parts of his soul, creates new potions, spells, and whatever else he deems worthy. It is protected by a blood spell that only he knows the enchantment to. Like him, everything is kept very private and close to his chest.

While Severus has plenty of thoughts coursing through his brilliant mind, he does not initiate conversation. In fact, he says much more with his eyes. Even if they can be cold. However, this does not mean Severus will keep silent – nor is it out of shyness. When Snape graces others with his opinions or ideas, they should not be taken lightly. Every single word uttered has meaning.

Being around Death Eaters and the Dark Lord, he’s kept a keen eye – finding everyone’s tells and when it is best for him to speak his true sentiments. As well as this, if he feels provoked or given an opportunity to speak freely, he will not cower. Often, his retorts have a bite to them, thick with sarcasm or bitterness; or both.

Severus Snape is profound in potions – and dare we say even more skilled in the Dark Arts. Books were a comfort for him growing up, finding company with leather-bound pages and becoming well-versed in their contents. A strength he chooses not to boast about is his ability to create new spells, new magic, even. Most of these, however, were being saved to get a slight revenge over his old school enemies. And therein lies the rub. Snape’s insecurities are tightly bound to Hogwarts and being bullied – not to mention his inability to reveal his true feelings toward the one girl who showed him kindness all those years.

BRIEF OVERVIEW OF FAMILY:

A broken family. That was the home of Tobias Snape and Eileen Prince.

A Muggle father and a Pureblood mother. Such parents didn’t give Severus an opinion on blood purity – but rather if an individual could prove themselves. While his parents may have had married for love at some point, something shifted their feelings.

For Snape’s father, nothing seemed to please him. Except for, perhaps, a bottle of gin. This instilled a primal instinct for Severus to do better; be better. Strive for power.

As for Snape’s mother, she grew sickly and thin. Her grief taught him empathy. It also made him value any comfort, starving for any sort of love and affection. This was, most likely, the cause for Severus’ immediate interest in Lily Evans – and the roots of his near-obsession with her.

Both of his parents were unhappy, and let it affect both their home and their son. Living near-destitution, the Snape house was filled with hateful words, arguments, loud shattering of priceless heirlooms or objects, and other things that still haunt Severus to this day. When thinking back on his past, Severus prefers the memories of when they both neglected him altogether, rather than any other aspects of his upbringing.

OCCUPATION: Potions Apprentice to Professor Slughorn.

Invaluable to the Dark Lord, the talents of Severus Snape brought him closer to his inner circle. For Voldemort, it also meant he could manipulate the young man’s talents to foil any plots that the Order may have against him. Knowing his passion for potions, Voldemort encouraged Snape to take on an apprenticeship with Professor Slughorn – while also peeking behind the curtain at Hogwarts and keeping an eye on the Headmaster.

ROLE WITHIN THE ORDER/THOUGHTS ABOUT THE ORDER:

Walking a thin line between hero and villain had never once crossed Severus’ mind. Yet, here he was. An Order member. At first, in a plot for the Dark Lord, carrying out the order to spy on the organization; find out how it could crumble. The young wizard had already grown steadily in their ranks, garnered enough trust, and was even listening to Voldemort’s other requests like his employment. All for the sake of war. It was a task daunting enough for anyone; however, Severus knew pretending to be an Order member would bring him closer to Lily. That, and potentially erase any suspicions Frank Longbottom might have if he thought he saw the Slytherin’s face during the arrest. At first, it was all an act.

Now, within the Order, Severus is a black sheep. Many of his childhood bullies are within their ranks, and many who distrust him. Although, with Severus’ lust for power, proving himself is nothing new to him. In fact, he thrives on it. No more fighting behind a mask…watching those he cares for nearly meet their end. An easy task to spy, being a great reader of both people and their minds. However, an overwhelmingly difficult task to want to continue fighting for something he didn’t believe in. Not that he believes in the Order either, but his lust for power has now been overcome with a desperate need to win an old friendship back. Perhaps to take Lily Evans far away from any wars as well, forgetting the two sides; no more choosing between what is right, and what is easy. Severus faces this new challenge, while fighting off those he once stood beside. For now, he’ll leave it to fate – if he’s able to win Lily’s friendship back.

After the latest events of Muggles being slaughtered from his mistakes with the orb, Severus feels a familiar pang of guilt. The same kind he felt after calling Lily that horrid name in school. It doesn’t help that The Order sees him as a risk and has been keeping him away from the center of the action. Severus feels responsible and a need to redeem himself. The night of the engagement party, The Order tasked him with staying with the healers – at least giving him that opportunity. Among the chaos, steady hands and minds are needed. Which, thankfully, Severus was very skilled with.

SURVIVAL:

Severus Snape survives purely relying on his skills – and providing them to whichever side he feels is winning. It was part of the reason why he joined the Death Easters in the first place. Unfortunately for the Order, Snape believes the Dark Lord will win; that they will fall – and not rise from the ashes, as their namesake. A lust for power has blinded him most of all. But with it, he’s earned the trust of Voldemort, become invaluable. A faithful servant. Once the war s over, Severus believes he will be rewarded for his acts. At least, as long as he continues to do his bidding…

While with the Order, Severus has taken up housing in Hogwarts during the school year under his apprenticeship with Slughorn. During the summers, he’s found a small flat down near Hogsmeade to keep close enough. Beforehand, he often stayed with Lucius Malfoy in their incredibly large manor. It made it easy to stay near his comrades and to carry out any dark deeds.

Until there seems to be a clear winner, Severus will carry out his work as a spy. Even if it means slightly changing sides to do it as time goes on. The skills he carries with Occlumency are not to be trifled with. It seems he’s one of the few to have mastered such magic, making him the perfect soldier for espionage. Especially now that he has a desire for redemption for the mistakes he’s caused.

RELATIONSHIPS:

Severus’ relationship with Lily Evans was broken long ago. However, he will try and make peace with her, at the very least. If they rekindle their friendship, Severus would likely switch sides; happily die for her and prove himself. If it blossomed even more (something he fears even daydreaming about will jinx it), Severus would give up everything with the Dark Lord and his following. Everything with the Order. All to be with her – away from the rotting parts of the Wizarding World.

OOC EXPLORATION:

SHIPS/ANTI-SHIPS: Ships: Snape/Lily & Snape/Chemistry. Anti-Ships: None

WHAT PRIVILEGES AND BIASES DOES YOUR CHARACTER HAVE?

Having gone through a very traumatic animalistic incident in his years at Hogwarts, Severus has a large bias against werewolves. The whole experience left a nasty memory for him, left in complete shock and disagreement with Dumbledore. And having Fenrir Greyback at the Dark Lord’s disposal certainly didn’t make matters any better.

There is one thing that will never chance for Severus Snape, and that is his hatred and bitterness towards certain Gryffindor boys he now has to work with in the Order. The thought alone makes his blood boil and skin crawl. Yet, he will do what he must for his cause…and maybe even throw in a snide remark or two every so often.

Muggleborns are something of a mystery to Snape now. When he first met Lily, he thought she was different from any other one – slumping the rest together with the likes of his father. Although seeing how fierce Dorcas has become – and so well integrated with the Wizarding World – Severus has gained a new understanding. Of course, he’s still untrusting, at first, and even a little cold; but that doesn’t mean his mind cannot be changed.

WHAT ARE YOU MOST LOOKING FORWARD TO?

I am excited to explore a redemption arch for Severus! I think it could be really great to see him actually believe in the cause and put his complete loyalty to The Order. I’ve tinkered with this idea before in another RP where his motives were driven by romance. Now, I can see hm relying on changing his mind on his own accord and a longing for his old friendship back to guide him to the side of good and light.

ANYTHING ELSE? Super excited to be re-applying as Sev! 😊

Your take on grey characters 😈

An excellent question, and let me preface it with the fact that although I believe that every person is morally grey, I am also of the opinion that there is a difference between a grey person and a grey character. Fiction is always a little on-your-nose with everything, and a character with grey shades will have their complexities highlighted quite strongly, more often than not, as a direct contrast to a 'pure' white, positive character. And by doing that, fiction downplays the grey shades of the character standing on the moral high ground and that's really interesting and totally irrelevant to the answer, but I wrote it in anyway, because it fascinates me and kind of ties in with the stuff I hope to explore in the later parts of this answer, so, just hold on, I guess.

Let me also just point out, that fiction, as it says, is, and always will be, a little detached from reality. While it is true that fiction does not exist in a vacuum, it is a way for us to escape our worldly troubles and perhaps that's why sometimes serious issues get brushed under the carpet to give everyone a happy ending. It's an utopian world. And I bring this up because grey characters receive a lot of acceptance that they might not receive had they been real, flesh and bones, human beings. They also receive a lot of flak for not fitting into the 'good box', because more often than not, grey characters are show leaning towards the good side, as in, their actions directly or indirectly support the protagonists, or, in some cases, they go against the antagonist, thus leaving them on shaky ground. People would cry that they are being whitewashed (which, although it pains me to admit it, they are, but again, fiction is an utopia, even if we are talking about a zombie apocalypse).

Anyway, this too is confusing and I am terribly sorry for this disorganised mess of an answer you have to read through.

Forgive moi?

Okay, let's get back to the topic of grey characters. In the recent few years, I have come to sort 'grey characters' into different categories. So I'll just quickly (ha!) go over that.

GREY CHARACTER™

The characters who are introduced with the grey tag, by the creators themselves (or, in case of literary works, are addressed as grey by the writer(s) once the book is published and people have read it). Their moral ambiguity is their core feature, their whole personality is shaped up around that little nugget of information. The narrative gives them a layered, intriguing character traits (and a lot of snark - like, a lot of it), intricate backstories (and past trauma!!!) that remain hidden behind a facade of casual disinterest in everything that exists on our beautiful Earth, and we get snippets where they are being genuinely affectionate with their people, or where other, minor characters share a cordial, if not a little personal, relationship with them.

^ Another great way is to show them being polite to the staff, drivers and/or salespeople, that makes them likeable.

And it is extremely necessary that they are likeable, because these characters do plenty of questionable things. Some of their actions might even fall under the 'bad' category, where they commit crimes and plan to destroy lives (most of the time the plan fails, or they actively do something to redeem themselves with respect to that particular event, because they are grey characters, not the devil incarnate trope they go for when it comes to the villains and vamps).

Also, this type of a grey character is usually written in with a host of other characters, for whom the character will cross every limit, and a group of characters, with whom our grey character crosses all boundaries. The second group is the intended target, and the creative outlet for writing the morally questionable things that make a character grey™.

Usually, this type of a grey character gets one out of the three kinds of endings outlined below ⬇️

Grey™ but softer

Where they continue to do questionable things, but less frequently, or with less intensity. Nice trope. Moi likey.

Platinum grey, but grey™ if necessary

The go-to if they are the protagonist. I will explain about the 'platinum grey' bit later on, but this is essentially, this character has fulfilled (or abandoned) his course of doing questionable things, but if push came to shove, will not hesitate to destroy some lives. My favourite (♥️)

And the worst kind of ending - whitewashing

There is a difference between accepting the consequences of your actions, repenting for it (or not, both can work, but you have to acknowledge what you did), and justifying it because 'hey, look! I did one good thing in my life, I am pure™, love me!! ' This is my least favourite trope.

((can you guess which ending I have planned for Dhruba?))

TEAM GREY

This type of grey is usually reserved for influential side characters. Influential, in the sense that they contribute to the plot, and have relationship ties that leave a heavy impact on the story. My favourite people. These characters are not given the tag of 'grey', but they move from one camp to another, with their actions and thoughts that move the story forward. They don't switch sides, that's another type. These characters don't change teams because they want to support one side against the other. No, their actions are fueled by their own motivations, and that's what makes them special. They are often overlooked because of Grey ™ characters, but I love them so much.

THE FAKE GREY (AKA DAL BADLUS)

The narrative tries to make us perceive these characters as grey, and in their haste, they make these characters change teams every now and then, and the characters lose all credibility. They differ from 'team grey' in the sense that the reasoning behind them choosing sides is flimsy at best, non-existent at worst. They are inconsistent and ugh, how I hate inconsistencies. What irks me the most is that the narrative doesn't even try to establish them as complex characters (which isn't that hard, humans are complex!!!)

SUPPOSEDLY WHITE BUT OOPS I AM GREY NOW, PLEASE KEEP LOVING ME

I love these characters, if they are executed properly. Tons of potential. The story always reminds us that these characters are supposedly white, but their actions (or reactive action because of the circumstances/events brought on by the grey™) and I love to see them spiral out of control and become complex, layered characters. And if they have comic potential, then I am squealing with joy. Love these people. 

((spoiler alert: this is my Agni))

GREY BECAUSE I STAND IN THE NO MAN'S LAND BETWEEN BLACK AND WHITE

Love, love, love them! Love characters who are not inherently evil and who do not engage in criminal activity, but also, they are not pure and white and good™ and they have their fair share of character flaws. They do lots of wrong things, but nothing destructive. All the love ❤️

((spoiler alert: this is my plan with Chandni))

I HAVE TRAVELLED FAR FROM THE GREY ZONE BUT I AM NOT TOTALLY BLACK, BELIEVE ME

Negative characters with plenty of redeeming traits, and a strong (and emotionally manipulative) reason behind their wrongdoings, with their motivation exploited by the antagonists. Can be very interesting if done well, and even the simplest of tracks is better than the plain old everyone is evil unless they are the protagonist (and their supporters). 

((spoiler alert: My rendition of Manju)) 

GREY BECAUSE I HAVE FALLEN FROM MY PEDESTAL FOR GREATNESS AND I AM NO LONGER WHITE ™

Another favourite. Genuinely good characters who do that one wrong thing, but it's pretty big and affects the plot in a bad way and that kind of behavior cannot go unchecked because we need to prove a point. Tons of potential. 

((spoiler alert: My rendition of Kakai)) 

<< are you tired of me screaming about my plans for the Fic Which Must Not Be Named? Sorry, not sorry 😈 >>

THE WORLD COULD NOT HANDLE MY GREATNESS, I AM GREY NOW 

Pure, sweet, soft characters who see the world for what and now they are either a very soft grey (as in their negative side comes out quite often, but it doesn't affect the story all that much) or a very manipulative person. Love this trope! 

((Deepti is a soft grey character, but that's more because she is bitter and she points that bitterness towards herself. Meghna, on the other hand, flits in and out of this trope))

TOO COOL TO BE WHITE, TOO SANE TO BE DARK 

All the snark! Brutally honest, mature, logical people who are cool™ and who do lovely, manipulative stuff. We stan! 

(( Ranja from my ff, not Ranjabati the warrior princess)) 

PLATINUM GREY (AKA SELF-DESTRUCTIVE ™) 

The protagonist, often used as narrative foil to the Grey™ or vice versa. They are portrayed as good and pure™ but have plenty of grey character traits that either get glossed over or are shoved into the cupboard to highlight the differences between the grey character and the protagonist. They also have serious self destructive tendencies where they ruin their lives on purpose and this is often complemented by a generous helping of saviour complex. Like, all the love for these characters. They are supposed to be white, but aren't, but they do shine bright, even if their flaws are sharp and in your face, like a cloudy sky that is a terribly cold, sharp white. I choose to use the word platinum because that's what comes to my mind when I try to visualise their place in the shade card of life, the color of a platinum band. This is my favourite trope when it comes to protagonists. Love them. ♥️

((Tara, Prabha, and Meghna - PLATINUM BABES))

Now that we have covered the type of grey characters in fiction (my brain is fried and I might have missed some, sorry! Feel free to reblog with your additions!!), let me tell you how much I love grey characters. I would choose them every time, as opposed to characters who can be neatly sorted into the black and white categories.

Every. Time.

We need more grey characters in fiction, especially the soft greys and the team grey ones. And we need to appreciate grey characters for how amazing they are!!!

In conclusion, I love grey characters (but you already know that, don't you? Come on Babe, you have known me long enough, you know how crazily excited I get about grey characters) and I need more of them ♥️♥️♥️

[ stuff for my 100th celebration ]

The 100 6x11 “Ashes to Ashes” Review

Trust is hard to come by in a civilization built on lies. In “Ashes to Ashes”, Clarke, Bellamy and Octavia are forced to come up with a plan quick that will appease the Children of Gabriel and save their people in Sanctum while Echo, Gaia, Miller and Murphy forge their own respective plans to get out of the sacred city alive. 

Not only is the story in this episode captivating, thanks to veteran writer Charmaine DeGrate, but the acting and visuals are stunning as well — all due to Bob Morley’s natural talent in his directorial debut. He has definitely proven himself a force in front of and behind the camera, and I know I speak for the entire The 100 fandom when I say I cannot wait to see where his career takes him.

For now though, we are lucky to have him as our Bellamy Blake, who particularly shines in this episode as he faces Octavia and acts as the mastermind behind the plan that aligns them with the Children of Gabriel. That is until Clarke has other, more selfless plans, of course. 

For Monty

Upon waking up as 100% Clarke Griffin, our protagonist has a very different outlook on life. While in the mindspace, she was forced to face her demons in the form of people from her past who knew she could do better. Monty in particular helped Clarke to realize that violence isn’t always the answer. So, when Clarke comes to and realizes her people are still in Sanctum, she is dead set on masquerading as Josephine to get into the city and save them. 

We as the audience get to see that changed and evolved Clarke inside the mindspace come to fruition in the “real world” and witness the satisfying tension it causes between her and Bellamy. Bellamy, who has spent much of the season fighting tooth and nail to get Clarke back finally has her by his side again. So naturally, when she wants to thrust herself back into a dangerous situation, he isn’t a huge fan. 

Though it was disappointing that the two only briefly discussed the lengths Bellamy went to to save Clarke before refocusing their attention on the rest of their people, this is how it has always been. As frustrating as it is, they live in a post-apocalyptic world where there isn’t much time at all to discuss feelings and desires. After the ending scene of 6x10 in which we felt how desperately Bellamy needs Clarke by his side, it’s undeniable that they need to find the time to sit down and have a longer conversation someday about what it actually means that they will risk everything, including the safety of the people they love, to save the other (hint: It is absolutely not platonic). However, as we are approaching the end of the season and tensions are coming to a head, it doesn’t appear that they will find that time anytime soon. 

Regardless, just seeing Clarke and Bellamy back together, working through the problem in front of them side by side was much needed after a season of Clarke mostly existing only inside her own head. Clarke and Bellamy are co-leaders first and foremost, and as such are a force to be reckoned with. Though it pains Bellamy to consider the consequences of Clarke getting caught in Sanctum, he knows that this is what must be done — what Monty would do. 

Monty continues to be their moral compass this season as they try to work towards peace. Though this moon has thrown them for a loop more than once in their attempts to start anew and be better, our heroes know they must do so even when the temptation to get revenge is stronger than ever. Doing what is right is not always the easier route, but it’s still the one that should be taken. 

While callbacks to characters long gone can sometimes be tiring, this season has done a beautiful job at emphasizing the important roles they played and continue to play in the lives of the characters still standing. While Murphy is terrified of facing his mortality, we know through Monty, Maya, Jake and even Pike that dying does not mean you cease to matter. The impact you had on people while you were alive remains. 

And so, Clarke faces her own mortality head on for the greater good. If she doesn’t, she knows her people will likely die. While I’ve missed Clarke deeply, her returning to the screen in such a powerful way almost makes it worth it. She’s evolved into a whole new kind of hero. Just when I thought it was impossible, I love her even more.

The 10-Year-Lie

While brainstorming a plan that will lower the radiation shield and get Bellamy, Clarke and Octavia’s people out of Sanctum, the group is confronted by the Children of Gabriel. They believe that Gabriel is still Xavier, and that he and “the old man” are protecting Josephine, thus betraying their anti-Prime regime. When they discover that Gabriel has bodysnatched Xavier, and has secretly existed in this form for 10 years, the Children of Gabriel are understandably upset. 

Layla, the sister of Xavier, helps add an interesting layer to the story. As Bellamy and Octavia work through their tarnished sibling relationship, she must mourn the fact that she’ll never get the chance to do the same, as her brother is gone forever. Layla’s hurt and anger is palpable as she must cooperate with Gabriel in order to destroy the Primes. 

We also get to see more of how the Primes are directly hurting people and tearing people apart, even though they believe what they are doing is right. The 100 has always placed emphasis on the grey area between right and wrong, a space that many if not all of the characters on this show have occupied at some point in time. The view of the Primes as godly figures and the cold war between the believers in Sanctum and the nonbelievers in the forest once again highlights that grey area. Both believe they are right, and neither are willing to budge. 

Also interesting is Gabriel’s role in all of this. Though he has notoriously led an anti-Primes movement, he is still alive in yet another body. We get little insight as to why he was resurrected 10 years ago, only that it was done by a man named Eduardo without his consent. This explains why he’s been hiding for so long, pretending to be Xavier. Though this season has largely been about redemption for characters like Octavia and Clarke who we know to have done bad things in the past, Gabriel needs to redeem himself as well. He has his own demons that he must face by helping to rescue the innocent and unwilling before they become hosts.

What is still undetermined is whether he will go along with Clarke’s peaceful plan, or aid the Children of Gabriel in killing the remaining Primes. While Clarke and Bellamy have a moral compass in the form of Monty guiding them, he does not. Though he has agreed to side with Clarke, we know how quickly characters on this show can switch allegiances when it is convenient for them. So, Gabriel is certainly a wild card.

A Spy Named Ash 

Back in Sanctum, Russell and Co. waste no time finding a new host for Simone’s mind drive. Echo, who has just been betrayed by Ryker while attempting to assassinate Russell and save her friends, is the chosen one. 

As Ryker prepares to kill her, Echo stalls, offering up a backstory that gives the audience an important little tidbit of information: Echo isn’t the name she was born with. As a child living under Queen Nia’s rule in the Ice Nation, or Azgeda, Ash was forced to kill her friend, Echo, and assume her identity before a trip to a neighboring kingdom. 

She tells the tale through tears, seemingly still guilty that she was not able to spare her friend’s life. However, when Gaia and Miller (a dream team, might I add) come to her rescue, Echo reminds Ryker of something Queen Nia taught her, right as she plunges a spear into his heart: hesitation is death. 

While this was an unexpected “badass” moment, it completely alters the importance of Echo’s story. While watching the flashback, we’re supposed to feel bad for Echo who was forced to kill someone close to her at such a young age. We believe that this provides more depth to her character, shows her as more than just a spy with good aim. 

However, Echo does not redeem herself by doing better as so many others have done this season. Instead, she takes the easier route, revenge, and kills Ryker. 

While this may be smart and cunning, it makes all of Echo’s flashes of vulnerability up until this point seem ingenuine. If this moment, an important glimpse into her traumatic past, was only a ploy to set her up for revenge, how are we as the audience expected to interpret any moments of warmth or vulnerability from her as anything other than manipulative? I want so badly to like Echo and to see her become a well-rounded character, but unfortunately this flashback only aided me in viewing her as cold-hearted, one-note character. 

The “badass female warrior” trope is only entertaining up to a certain point. If Echo is to continue being a part of the story the writers are telling, she needs an emotional facelift. And pronto. In a season constructed around the idea of facing one’s demons, there’s no reason Echo couldn’t have done the same — and shown some real depth in the process. 

My Sister, not My Responsibility

While dangerous, Sanctum sure is beautiful. I’ll give it that. While foraging for the toxic mushrooms needed to make a bomb with the same hallucinatory properties as the red sun, Bellamy and Octavia get a much-needed opportunity to hash things out in a glowing cave.

Octavia has changed since going into the anomaly and facing her demons, the most significant of which was her brother and what she put him through. She knows that she cannot expect Bellamy to forgive her for the person she became in his absence over those six years, but she also needs him to know that she’s turned over a new leaf. 

It’s understandably difficult for Bellamy to believe that she could have changed so much in such a short amount of time, but it’s clear that he sees some sort of shift. While Bellamy refuses to forgive and forget, he does offer up a satisfying line, delivered perfectly by Bob Morley: “You are my sister, but you’re not my responsibility, not anymore.” 

For Octavia, Bellamy was her moral compass. She needed his guidance, although this is the first time she’s admitting that. The Blake siblings have been through a lot. At times, their tumultuous relationship has felt exhausting. Bellamy’s recognition that Octavia is still his sister, but that she’s not his to guide anymore is something that has been a long time coming, perhaps too long. Though they still have a lot to work through, when and if they ever find a moment of peace, this moment felt satisfying. Bellamy is no longer running away from Octavia and pretending she doesn’t exist, and Octavia is taking responsibility for her actions. 

Marie and Bob’s acting in this scene was impeccable and really brought this relationship back to life. This scene was probably my favorite of the entire night, purely because we got to see a pairing that has been missing all season return. And, perhaps more importantly, Bellamy was able to definitively tell his sister that he doesn’t forgive her for her abusive behavior, and doesn’t have to. 

From this point forward, Octavia will have to continue on her journey of redemption by herself, without that moral compass she claims to need so badly. Her demons are perhaps the darkest of all, so it will be interesting to say the least to see if she can reach some form of enlightenment or if she will fall back into her old ways. 

The Unsung Heroes 

An unexpected yet delightful pairing this episode was Miller and Gaia. These two minor characters got the chance to shine through and bounce off each other in ways I never knew I needed. Gaia helps Miller to forgive himself for following Octavia despite her wicked ways, telling him that mistakes can be forgiven, it’s not learning from them that cannot be. 

This line parallels Gaia greatly to Monty, whose only wish for his people was to be the good guys moving forward. While Monty is the moral compass for Bellamy, Clarke and Octavia in the forest, Gaia is that same moral compass in Sanctum. 

She and Miller escape their holding cell and manage to save Echo, but not before she’s been made into a nightblood. Gaia notices this right away as she’s untying her, and in true Gaia fashion is stunned. 

I can’t help but wonder if Echo’s nightblood is a setup for something greater. Will she take the chip and become commander? I don’t think so. More plausible, I think, is that she will have to lower the radiation shield. Of course this means something would have to happen to Clarke and/or Raven that would hinder them from being able to do so themselves. 

While Gaia and Miller got their chance to be unsung heroes in this episode, perhaps Echo will get that same chance soon, possibly redeeming herself. Though this is equal parts speculation and wishful thinking, The 100 is unpredictable. Regardless, I would like to see Gaia and Miller become best friends and continue being a dream team, please and thank you. 

Caught in the Middle

Poor Murphy, always finding himself caught between a rock and a hard place. Then again though, as Russell puts it, he’s willing to do whatever and align with whoever in order to save himself. While Murphy takes offense to this, he can’t necessarily deny it. 

However, there’s a shift in Murphy’s thought process that is visible when Russell warns him there will be consequences for not bringing Josephine back alive. Murphy assumes he will be killed, “an eye for an eye”. He seems genuinely accepting of this. It’s only when Russell says Emori will be killed that Murphy’s face changes. 

Murphy has always been a selfish person. Arguably, Emori changed that about him the moment they fell in love. In Season 4, he fought to make sure she would not be killed in the radiation chamber. Similarly, she refused to leave him to die on earth at the end of Season 5. The two are willing to die if it means dying by the side of the person they love. 

However, this is the first time we’ve seen Murphy really accept his own death as he recognizes Russell’s deal for what it is, immortality versus mortality. He still wants to live forever by Emori’s side, but if one of them has to die to save the other, he wants it to be him. 

I’m still waiting for Murphy to change sides as he does so well and become the hero we all know he can be (see: him helping to save Clarke in Season 3). This time though, perhaps he will stay on the “good” side and take Monty’s words to heart. 

Murphy’s internal battle with his mortality has been so interesting to watch, and has been perhaps my favorite storyline to come out of Sanctum’s body-snatching ways. He’s known as a cockroach for a reason, but does he want that to be his legacy? Though he’s high up on my list of characters most likely to die this season, I sincerely hope he sticks around purely because I want to see him accept his mortality and live with it.  

This is The 100 though, so I’m not holding my breath that he will get a happy ending. After all, does anyone ever get that on this show? 

The Academy Award Goes to: 

You’ve seen Clarke, Josephine, Josephine pretending to be Clarke, and a Clarke and Josephine combo. Can I interest you in Clarke as Josephine? 

Realizing that the only way to avoid killing innocent people is to lower the radiation shield before the less intense bomb is set off, Clarke knows she must pretend to be Josephine and do it herself. Clarke parallels Bellamy from Season 2 as the inside man, and she certainly isn’t expecting what she finds when she returns to Sanctum. 

Madi is strapped down and being drained of her bone marrow to allow for the creation of more hosts, including one for Simone, Josephine’s mother. Clarke takes on perhaps the greatest acting feat of all time when she tells Madi that she is Josephine, and that Clarke is gone forever. She must be apathetic as Madi struggles in place, promising to avenge her death. 

I genuinely expected Clarke to break in this moment, and I’m sure there will be many moments like it in the near future. Clarke knows she must remain undercover if she wants to save the lives of all her people, including Madi, but that’s her child strapped down and being used as a medical experiment. 

It has been such a joy to watch Eliza Taylor’s range this season as she’s taken on the challenge of not only playing two entirely different characters, but playing them as each other as well. She’s really done an incredible job with it and shown just how talented she is (though just her as Clarke was enough to prove that). With Eliza announcing that she’ll be directing next season, I’m already excited for what’s to come after Season 6 is over. However, we still have two more episodes to get through in which I’m positive she’ll shine in front of the camera like she’s done all season long. 

Final Thoughts

In his first episode as a director, Bob Morley really knocked it out of the park. Everything came together to showcase the story in the best way possible, with the actors shining through in their performances. It’s unsuprising that so many cast members have been singing Bob’s praises since before the episode even aired. Hopefully we will get more episodes directed by him in the future!

As far as the story goes, this episode was pretty on par with the excellent writing that’s been delivered to us all season long. Clarke has been set up to once again save the day, but will she be able to? It’s those unexpected yet expected twists that make this show so great. We know that something is going to go wrong with this plan, we just don’t know what. 

With Clarke and Murphy back in Sanctum, almost everyone is in the same place again. The stories are starting to intertwine, with Abby’s bone marrow solution incapacitating Madi and thus throwing an unexpected wrench in Clarke’s plans to stay cool and undercover. Meanwhile, Murphy has further aligned himself with Russell and the Primes and will likely be a key player in determining the fate of his people. Does this mean more Clarke/Josephine and Murphy? Sign me up. 

And then there’s Bellamy and Octavia who are still with the Children of Gabriel and Gabriel himself. These two will really have to work together to save those they love and avoid a bloodbath. Octavia’s redemption, incoming. 

After all is said and done, Bellamy is going to have to face what he did as well though. He cannot sweep under the rug the fact that he left everyone else behind to get Clarke back. Even if it was in the best interest for his people, his focus at the time was on saving Clarke. 

This episode did give us a few breathers amidst the chaos for characters to work through their personal issues, and I’m hoping that we’ll get more of that after the climax of the finale. If the story is to move forward, the characters' relationships need to change, whatever that means for each respective pairing. 

Interpret that however you wish. 

With two hours of Season 6 left to go, I think this episode ultimately did its job. It forced the characters as well as us to consider how this is all going to end, and if they can really follow Monty’s advice and do better. 

Next episode, the penultimate, will launch us head first into the action and thrill The 100 does so well with that morally grey area growing even bigger. I can’t wait!

Stray Thoughts

Where is Jordan? It makes no sense that he suddenly disappeared, especially having played such an integral role in the first half of the season.

Bellamy hiding his tears after talking to Octavia really got to me. Bob Morley truly is a force in front of and behind the camera.

Speaking of acting, can we talk about Eliza Taylor playing Clarke playing Josephine? Incredible. That “Boo hoo” was everything.

That parallel between Clarke pulling the gag out of Bellamy’s mouth and him doing the same to her in 3x02 was something I never knew I needed until now. *Chef’s kiss*

Gaia must be protected at all costs. That is all. 

Jessica’s episode rating: 🐝🐝🐝.5

The 100 airs Tuesdays at 9/8c on the CW.

Hans’ possible Redemption Arc PART 1: Deconstructing Hans' character

Hey, guys! So this is my first post analysis, meta, observation, whatever you wanna call it, so if it’s seems incomplete or lacks of depth please add your opinions as well! Also English is not my first language but argentine Spanish, papá, so don’t judge me plz. I don’t want to encounter with any anti or hater, and if you have the necessity to speak your mind anyways, do it but in a cordial way.

I’m going to divide this post in 3 parts I think, since is very long, and I have a lot to say for my favorite Jerk redhead Prince 😆

Ok, let’s start, shall we?

_________________________________________

1) Is he really a sociopath?

You know, this is something that upsets me quite a bit. The fact that you can just say “Oh well, he’s a sociopath so he’s manipulative and lacks of empathy” is something that annoys me a little, or at the very least, disappoints me. TBH, you don’t need to be a sociopath (a psychological and mental condition) to be manipulative, apathetic or cruel. I’m trying not to rationalize his actions in Frozen, because he still was wrong by harming two innocent women, but by saying that he’s a sociopath it makes his character a little more… shallow? Simpler? My point is, that a shitty toxic person can be anyone, and it simplifies the complexity that they brought on the table on the first place.

But the questions still remains, is he truly a sociopath?

Is tricky, since we know nothing except that his family is shit, and that he is a chameleon, a mirror to other people. By the end of the movie, and by the interviews that Jennifer Lee gave to us, it seems to me that he does have sociopathic traits, but he is not a sociopath per se. Hans can be a sociopath, as much as he could be not, if it’s given a proper character in-depth and backstory.

I think that by calling Hans a sociopath is an easy way to make the GA and the Frozen Fandom to disconnect with him since statistically we have normal-functioning brain, and because people with ASPD diagnose have a negative -though justified most of the time- stigma surrounding them.

2) Grey Morality: The line between good and bad, where we all fall.

“All it takes is one bad day to reduce the sanest man alive to lunacy. That's how far the world is from where I am. Just one bad day.”  ― Alan Moore, Batman: The Killing Joke.

As I said before, I like the idea of a morally questionable prince. A more grounded, realistic, game of throne-like character as Hans is. What I don’t like, is the seemingly automatic white to black view that we have for Hans,  while at the same time, we have one of our protagonist letting almost die a whole kingdom, and her sister,  to escape her duties and crippling fears –unintentionally, but still-.  An empath or normal person can commit crime or bad things given in extremes situations of distress, anger, etc. And we see that with our own eyes in Elsa. She almost gets tempted to kill two men, you can see the fury in her eyes, in her face. 

It is self defense, yes. But regardless of that, her people knew nothing about her powers and they just knew that she cursed them and ran away. No matter how morally wrong Hans was by trying to kill Elsa, or letting Anna die, he also helped her. He helped them both.

If she indeed killed those men here, I don’t think anyone whould’ve ever trusted her. Not even her own men, whom remember, they witnessed her actions and they were attacked too. 

A normal person lies. A normal person manipulates. Heck, we even can choose to not feel empathy if it is inconvenient for ourselves.  How many times did you pretend to feel empathy for someone just to make them feel comfortable? How many times did you see a homeless person asking for a money and you just walked away?

Again, I’m not trying to normalize these negative traits, but to be sincere about it. And is something that makes us very complex as human beings, we are true neutrals, and we can be good or bad, depending of the actions taken at certain moments, and how it impacts to others.

Yes, some people are irredeemable monsters, but I don’t think that’s Hans’ case. And so he does have redeemable qualities as well, even if it might be for personal gain, or perhaps some of his actions were genuine, we don’t know for sure. 

When did we not see an ambiguous morality in Frozen? Or when did we not see ambiguous morality in some Disney characters, in general? Is hard to find, but we do certainly have our morally wrong characters redeemed. Here are a few: 

- Abused both physically and psychologically Cinderella. CURRENT STATE: Redeemed.

-Imprisoned Belle. -Verbally violent towards his subjects and Belle. -Almost harms physically Belle. CURRENT STATE: Redeemed.

-Killed a bear out of vengeance. -Let motherless a bear cub, that after he would befriend. CURRENT STATE: Redeemed.

-Almost kill a bear out of vengeance too. On top of that, was his own brother (though he didn’t know). CURRENT STATE: Redeemed.

-Tried to kill Simba and take his pride. -(invoked) Forced mating with Kiara. -Almost attacks Simba. CURRENT STATE: Redeemed.

-Tried to kill Simba. -Attacked the lionesses of his pride. CURRENT STATE: Redeemed.

-He was an asshole to everyone. -He ordered a guard to throw an old man through a window (still lol). -He tried to let homeless a whole village for his selfish desires. -He betrayed Pacha’s trust. -He let Pacha on his own fate (probably to die). CURRENT STATE: Redeemed. 

-Along with Syndrome, she plotted the death of many superheros, including Mr. Incredible. -Almost kill Mr. Incredible. -She almost kill a whole family, including the children.  CURRENT STATE: Redeemed.

-He tried to kill Elsa, and let Anna die alone for personal gain. -Deceived Anna, Elsa and everyone else. -Plotted the death of Elsa at some point in the movie (unclear when exactly). -Degraded verbaly Anna. -He tried to break Elsa’s heart to make her give up her life. Redeemable Qualities: -He took care of Arendelle while Elsa and Anna were gone (though, it still can be interpreted as gaining popularity). -He went off to look out for Anna. -He ordered the Arendelle guards and the Merchant’s not to harm Elsa. -He calmed Elsa’s rage, avoiding her to kill. -He tried to reason with her.

Elsa is shown that suffers of guilt and insecurities, yet throughout the majority of the movie, she still rejects Anna and her responsibilities as Queen. Even to a point where she witnesses hurting Anna with her magic,

 yet she just casts her away from her Ice Castle. Or after the misery that she caused -and she’s visibly hurt by that- she’s still thinking of running away, instead of trying to change things. Hans pleaded her to stop the winter and bring back summer, but she said that she couldn’t.

My goal here is not victim-blaming. I’m not blaming Elsa for her insecurities or self-defense actions. But her character at the end of the film, has a lazy realization, and for me, an unsatisfactory conclusion in terms of story-telling, because we never she her develop for herself, or working hard to balance her bad actions throughout the end of the movie, but anyway.

I’m not trying to rationalize morally questionable/wrong actions either. A good action doesn’t cancel the bad one, but my main interest is to analyze the human psyche, character growth and development.

3) Love and Fear: a constant subject in Frozen, and a constant subject for a “Prince”.

So cut through the heart, cold and clear Strike for love and strike for fear See the beauty, sharp and sheer Split the ice apart, and break the frozen heart.

—Disney’s Frozen “Heart”

DID HANS ACT ONLY OUT OF COLD AMBITION, OR HE WAS ALSO AFRAID?

For what we know from A Frozen Heart, interviews and extra information, is that Hans is abused so much by his brothers, that he just accepted their behavior and doesn’t fight back, is something normal for him. Nor he tries to improve his relationship with them. His relationship with his father is also painfully cold and toxic, and their dynamics are comparable to Zuko and Ozai, Tyrion and Tywin, or Theon and Balon. Hans seems to have an inferiority-superiority complex, and so, his pride is fragile and as well (just as previous Zuko, Theon and Tyrion).

But how? He’s very charming, and his body language never shows signals of insecurity (though that’s debatable). Or when he confesses his true intentions to Anna he has a sexy smug smile in his face, and his voice is soft and low, cruel and never trembling. How is that I believe that he was afraid or scared? Well, the movie itself states that he does have a terrible relationship with his brothers, the novelizations extends this to his father. 

So by knowing this, a person copes with the pain and abuse in different ways: Elsa’s fear is hurting her loved ones, so she forced herself to an emotional -and literal- isolation towards them, specially with Anna. In Hans’ case, his fears are being trapped forever in his “home”, and being rejected by his father. So his way to acclimatizing himself in such negative environment, is to avoid his true feelings and morality. Avoiding his true identity, in essence. Thus, becoming into the Mirror Hans (more on that later), allowing him to become the very thing that he actively tried to avoid for years.

I think that here’s the point where he started to panic; where the fear of going back to his depressive life, and the taste of power that Anna gave him when she left him in charge, took him over completely, forcing himself to toss apart any bit of  true morality and compassion that he had for Anna and Elsa. Where his mind started to realize that executing Elsa was the only way to bring things back to normal. 

But is also the fact that Anna dissapeared, and Elsa was the only rightful heir to Arendelle, so his conflict was “What do I do? What’s next?” If Hans decided at the moment to execute her, and Anna was dissapeared, he wouldn’t get to be King of Arendelle, and he would back to his hell home. His conflict is both emotional and materialistic, and fear started to get under his skin too. Some might argue that he’s just reflecting Elsa’s emotions, which is valid, but keep in mind his goals, his backstory; try to read him beyond what the movie told you. Link the dots to picture his mind. 

Some other might point out this scene.

[SIDENOTE: To me, it seems like another atempt to make us dislike him more. In my eyes, is like that the creators tried to manipulate us to hate him, but anyway don’t mind my defensiveness towards him LOL. He’s a terrible person Angie! Stop it, goddamit!]

It interpreted this part as Hans joy of finally seeing the chance of escaping his prisonic home, dehumanizing Elsa completly. WHICH IS BAD regardless. Is he a sadist? The book implies that he takes pleasure in feeling physical pain, but he does not take pleasure on harming others. 

So to me, is a smile of almost getting to win a big bad in a videogame, or well... that’s the type of face when I’m about to eat a pizza so, IDK :v 🤷‍♀️

THE MACHIAVELLIAN KING VS THE MACHIAVELLIAN PRINCE: The Lion and the Fox.

One of the reasons that Hans didn’t fit his family -besides being the smaller and weaker member of them-, is that his morale and philosophy clashed with the imposing, hard power that his father values. Being flexible and benevolent to the common people is a sign of weakness for Hans’ father and brothers. The king sees himself and his other sons as strong and powerful as lions, and he compares Hans to a mouse because he doesn’t fight back, nor shares his value of hard power. The King’s philosophy is kinda like Darwinism with Machiavellian shades. So in one side, we have the cruel side of the Machiavellian philosophy, the one that values fear over love:

“From this arises the question whether it is better to be loved rather than feared, or feared rather than loved. It might perhaps be answered that we should wish to be both: but since love and fear can hardly exist together, if we must choose between them, it is far safer to be feared than loved.”

“One can say this in general of men: they are ungrateful, disloyal, insincere and deceitful, timid of danger and avid of profit...Love is a bond of obligation that these miserable creatures break whenever it suits them to do so; but fear holds them fast by a dread of punishment that never passes.”

But in Hans’ side, he believes (or puts in practice, at least) that appearances and benevolent acts are better way to influence people, to gain more popularity. This is the softer side of power, the more deceitful and diplomatic Machiavellian route:

“Everyone sees what you appear to be, few experience what you really are.”

“Never attempt to win by force what can be won by deception.”

“Therefore it is unnecessary for a prince to have all the good qualities I have enumerated, but it is very necessary to appear to have them. And I shall dare to say this also, that to have them and always to observe them is injurious, and that to appear to have them is useful; to appear merciful, faithful, humane, religious, upright, and to be so, but with a mind so framed that should you require not to be so, you may be able and know how to change to the opposite.”

So we see the two opposing sides of the Machiavellian philosophy, one relies on hard power, and the other in subtle power. In essence, Hans’ father rejects the soft power because of his imposing pride and ego. But both characters share the same Machiavellian influence in their beliefs, the only difference is that Hans takes no joy in being cruel and tyrannical, thus preferring the softer, more subtle side of power. 

Yet at the end of the day, he embraces the cruelty, and fails to become the hero he expected to become, and by the time he realizes his mistakes and regains his morality, is too late.

What I’d like to see in Hans’ Redemption Arc, is a discussion between the characters (mainly Hans and Elsa) about this matter. An intellectual battle, and him realizing that his father was wrong. Not so in-your-face, because I can see people getting bored over political philosophy, but in a metaphorical way. And Hans coming in terms that deceitfulness and fear, aren’t the only way to gain trust, but love and true friendship as well. 

He can be a fox, and a lion too.

“The lion cannot protect himself from traps, and the fox cannot defend himself from wolves. One must therefore be a fox to recognize traps, and a lion to frighten wolves.”

― Niccolò Machiavelli, The Prince

Part 2 Here

An Analysis of Villianey

( This is Part 1b, Part 1a here)

Section II: Tragic Backstories

This is another super common way to make villains sympathetic. Giving someone a terrible childhood is a short cut to make someone feel bad for someone. Tragic backstories are super common and sometimes making the villains the most compelling character in really good ways. Both to make the characters truly a person who is empathetic or just understandable. There are three ways I think this can be done really well.

You can make them a redeemed character like Zuko (Avatar: The Last Airbender), Megamind (Megamind) or Peridot (Steven Universe).

An anti-hero/grey characters who don’t join the light side but acts heroically but on their own code. Wade Wilson (Deadpool), Dexter Morgan (Dexter), Punisher (Marvel), Harley Quinn (DC)  or Don Vito Corleone (The Godfather)  

A  bad guy who remains bad at the end, we know why they are bad but aren’t ever fixed. EX: Merrin Meredith (Septimus Heap), Morgana (BBC Merlin), Voldemort (Harry Potter),  Bane (DC), Or Davros (Doctor Who)

One important thing about writing these stories is to be done right you do have to choose the end game. How the character acts in relationships during the story changes which outcome is compelling and even feels possible. Things to consider:  rather they have any guiding belief system if this backstory includes trauma how the heal from that, their relationship to the power system, and how much they change their actions to move towards saying sorry and becoming better. Not every character is written in a way where a character can become better, or even should. The Diamonds (Steven Universe) keep having their characterization, actions, back story, and relationships altered leaving a confused story arc. The Diamonds are also on a list of characters who should not be redeemed because of the severity of their actions. They are written as space fascists no matter how sad they are it’s problematic to pretend the trauma of a dead love excuses attempted genocide.

A revolting part of this trend is tragedy porn. Stories of violence, poverty, mental illness, child abuse, disability, domestic abuse or sexual assault are exploited for shock value and making money from real pain. This is used to create a reason for a character to be broken or evil. A cheap gritty story of how our villain got there instead of writing an interesting motivation or taking into account the cultural and psychological damage of associating trauma and mental health with villainy. This also plays into the trope of mental illness being dangerous or a problem of morality. If it’s just because they are too broken you can kiss it away and fixing the trauma fixes the problem of horrible acts of violence.  If you do write traumatic backstories as motivation for their actions have the behaviours actually track with trauma. Catra’s (She-Ra 2018)  trauma is inherently tied to her motivation as the villain and essentially to her role as the deuteragonist of the narrative. But they show how and why this trauma matters, and choose to display the abuse in a way that while explicit and horrific isn’t exploitive and the refrain from showing realistic physical abuse that too clearly mirrors real life trauma. Her narrative of becoming the antagonist makes sense with her history of indoctrination, betrayal, fear of violence, and psychological trauma. It mirrors the narrative of the hero as well throwing off their primary abuser in both instances making it possible for this story to not demonize trauma. Another important thing to keep in mind when writing these kinds of narratives is to do research and represent any mental illness at least mostly accurately.

Another frustration is when people use these backstories to form a “well they could never have done/known better” and therefore they did nothing wrong mindset. This an oversimplified reading of good storytelling and the reading for poorly written characters. The idea that no one could ever know better is used in defence of characters like Kylo Ren (Star Wars), Azula (Avatar: The Last Airbender), Billy Hargrove (Stranger Things), Draco Malfoy (Harry Potter). However this excuse really only extends so far it tracks best with children when we see them alter perspective when exposed to other ideas and when the behaviours mirror what was done to them. Abuse and trauma don’t always make angry violent people and the majority of people who do become angry hurt people but not murders. Then you do have indoctrination but there is a reason the Nuremberg defence doesn’t excuse everything.

This excuse also falls apart somewhat when you can point to another character [or real life person] in the same or similar situation who did change. This whole way of viewing things become an exercise in letting people who have hurt others go without their actions analyzed and without being held responsible. In a literary analysis standpoint it’s lazy and in reality, it is dangerous to do this with anyone who was hurt in the past. Empathy and understanding are always important, understanding why people end up where they do is key to life. Some people do horrific things with no trauma, and who did know better searching for a sympathetic reason doesn’t help make things better. And even more so those who have been abused or manipulated and did wrong should be helped to work through trauma and learn to understand and change from they have done in the past not have all of their behaviour excused with a handwave. People shouldn’t be taught that abuse forgives abusing, later on, they should know they never deserve to be treated poorly and they can’t love abusers better.  And of course, this is often applied enviable around factors like race, gender, power level and perceived hotness.

Anti Heros I think are criminally underrated wanting them to either be good or be bad. We romanticize the ones we should see as good [usually hot people] or demonize the ones it’s easier to see as all bad. Anti-heroic characters are hard because the lines differentiate these from redeemed people and real villains are connected to personal morality. But making them black and white is rationalizing when they make choices that are truly harmful as part of their “good” actions. Making them all bad strips the way they are often societal outsiders and the way they learned in the stories to move and act in life. This is the grey morality people claim to want in characters, and claim to see in their faves but people don’t appreciate it when they happen.

Constant manipulation of tragic backstory to say a character didn't really do anything bad, or they deserve redemption excuse also strips away truly tragic stories like the life of Inspector Javert (Les Miserables). Fall from grace stories can be really interesting like Walter White (Breaking Bad) or Harvey Dent (DC). Because sometimes life does eat someone up and they can’t find it in themselves to act in a different manner. Tragic stories are still okay, villains aren’t always going to be the good guys because they are meant to be just that villains. That is how they were written and how the best fit in stories and tell the story wanting to be shared. Sometimes villains made to many choices to hurt other people to be capable of total transformation to hero. These characters can still be three dimensional and interesting but they aren’t people who “done nothing wrong”. They did do something wrong and in the story that is fine, it’s what works in the narrative. Not every person can be healed with forgiveness and a hug.

The concept that Deserving redemption is tied to how sad their life was before but it isn't, it's based on the actions they do during the story.  a careful narrative that shows the path a person took to get the right place, the ways they changed and what influenced it is much more important. Let's use Tony Stark (Marvel) most of Iron Man 1 and iron man 2 are dedicated to him trying to be a better person, to use his remaining life to make the world better and atone for his wrongs. Tony Stark starts off as an unrepentant war criminal allowing the way he was groomed to ignore harm and gain power as an excuse to never address any of what he did was harmful. He drowned his trauma with addictions, shallow relationships. Yes, his trauma as a kid and during the narrative are driving pieces but why he is so heroic, why his phoenix narrative is one of the best in history is the choices he makes with what to do with that pain, he uses it to be earth's greatest defender. You do have some snapshot redemption stories that are good namely Anakin Skywalker/Darth Vader (Star Wars) but I think [save the ret-cond Anakin force ghost] this wasn't so much meant to be proving he is a good person, but just acknowledging that no one is truly dark or light side. Anakin’s life is more told as a Shakespearean fall from grace, but even if this arc comes out of nowhere it works because the actions are narratively and thematically done correctly.

People who are obsessed with redemption also often don’t do a real analysis of societal structures, cultural history or context. It’s not that they really are deconstructing societal factors, or understand trauma, mental health or what really causes crime and antisocial behaviour when they try and justify via trauma and no other choice. I think starting to create and analyse content on a wider more holistic standpoint would be a good exercise to apply empathy to real-life crimes of desperation, end the killer = crazy myth, and stop letting people blame hate crimes on white kids being bullied.

[other posts on this topic: Zuko and good redemption arcs, trauma and justification of violence, Catra, Adora & trauma part 1 & 2, the diamonds still suck ]

The Last Jedi: What I Disliked About One of the Most Fascinating Films Ever Made

The Last Jedi is probably one of the most controversial films ever made for a lot of reasons. This movie did a LOT of shit, a lot of shit that would piss people off. Hell, it even pissed ME off. But when I see people on the internet frothing at the mouth and calling this movie the worst shit pile to ever exist, the most offensive thing Star Wars has ever produced, and threatening the director with death and calling him a soulless piece of shit bastard… I’m pretty inclined to defend the movie. Frankly, anyone who reacts THIS negatively to TLJ is an utter braindead moron; you do realize you can dislike a film without being completely, insanely hyperbolic, yeah? Again, there’s a lot I hate in this movie too, and I’m gonna talk about it shortly, but in a franchise with Jar-Jar, the holiday special, and vast swaths of the Legends continuity, is this seriously the worst this franchise has had to offer? If you answer anything other than “No,” congratulations, I’d say you’re about the same mental capacity as people who think Watto is some sort of offensive Jewish caricature.

But as much as I would love to spend an entire post insulting all the whiny bastards in the Star Wars fandom, I have more pressing matters: criticizing stuff in The Last Jedi. And boy do I have a lot to criticize. I actually did review the movie a while back, and while I stand by my initial thoughts, I gotta go into more detail about what I didn’t like. However, before continuing, I want to make one thing  absolutely clear:

I think The Last Jedi is a genuinely good movie. Maybe not GREAT per se, as I have more criticisms for it than just about any other film in the series, but excellence is just so wholly ingrained into the DNA of Star Wars theatrical films that even at their most divisive they still have some level of charm. And at any rate, this movie is a hell of a lot more interesting than Rogue One. I’d say out of the newer films, this one sits behind Solo. Anyway, let’s get on to the main event… here are all my issues with The Last Jedi, presented alphabetically, and with lots of spoilers:

Canto Bright: This is probably the most annoying waste of time in the entire film, a blatant and obnoxious stretch of padding the runtime. Nothing that happens in the entirety of this subplot is truly important in the grand scheme of things; the only relevant bit of plot is that they find DJ, and this could have been done a lot quicker. This wouldn’t be so bad if they had made Canto Bright a bit more interesting, but it just feels like another attempt to rehash Mos Eisley’s cantina. It also doesn’t help this part of the film has blatant, unsubtle moralizing and cuts away from far more interesting plotlines that get much less development, particularly Rey training with Luke.

Ditching Kylo’s Motivation: In The Force Awakens, Kylo was motivated by a sort of misaimed admiration for his grandfather, where he viewed Vader as someone to emulate and who he looked to as he struggled between the light side and the dark side. All of this helped make him rather intriguing, as well as making him a very intentional Darth Vader clone character; his whole purpose was to emulate Vader, after all. All of this is ditched close to the start of The Last Jedi, and the Kylo in this film feels almost entirely different to the one seen previously. While I did like Kylo Ren  a lot more in this movie, I wish they didn’t completely rewrite his character and ditch everything established in favor of what they did. It could have easily been worked into how he acted in the film.

Finn’s Diminished Importance: After being something of the star of the last film, complete with a noticeable character arc and a lot of focus, Finn kinda gets shafted here, relegated to a shitty, unnecessary sideplot that leads the heroes nowhere. It just seems really weird, though I’m not unhappy Rey got more focus and was fleshed out better.

Holdo: While I tend to view people who write her off as “The purple-haired feminist bitch” or “Captain SJW” as inferior human beings – and they are, seriously, if you unrironically say shit like this you’re a drooling nincompoop – I really can’t deny in the slightest that Holdo was written rather poorly. She really is a poor excuse for a captain, openly lying to her underlings and keeping things secret when explaining the plan would have effected nothing except her entire crew’s compliance. It almost feels like this plot was written so we’d be on Poe’s side, but it works a bit too well by making Holdo far too arrogant, stupid, and haughty to really get behind. If not for her awesome heroic sacrifice  (one that might not have been needed in the first place if she’d been more honest but hey) I’d probably list her as one of the worst Star Wars characters ever… but a heroic sacrifice of this magnitude,  no matter how unearned it may seem, never fails to impress me.

Killing Snoke: I can kinda see what they were going for, seeing as Palpatine as well was killed with very little revealed about him in The Last Jedi… but we have now had several years worth of canonical prequel material to flesh him out, and it’s honestly pretty stupid to assume you can pull off the same trick in a franchise twice and expect it to go off as well. Snoke was unflinchingly cool, creepy, and badass, so his bisection comes across as a waste of a truly intriguing villain. That there may be prequels detailing who he was do little to ease the sting of Andy Serkis being built up as the big bad only to be cut down. At least in Black Panther he got more substantial screentime; here,  he’s s till cool, but it just feels like there is so much more he could have been.

Luke’s Attempted Murder: While overall I loved Luke’s characterization in this film and how it tied excellently into the theme of not deifying your heroes due to the trouble that can cause, it’s hard for me to rationalize Luke’s attempted murder of his own nephew, leading to Kylo Ren’s turn to the dark side. While Luke has always been a bit impulsive, this man believed he could redeem Darth Vader, AND DID SO. Need I remind you what Anakin did to those younglings? And yet his own nephew, he won’t give him the benefit of the doubt. Yes, he did stop himself, but the very fact he went in there lightsaber ready to cut down the child of his sister and his best friend just feels really jarring and out of place, even within his more cynical characterization.

Phasma: Phasma has come across as a forced Boba Fett replacement since The Force Awakens, to the point where in both films she has appeared in she has been completely and utterly outshined by mooks – Nines (AKA TR-8R) in TFA and the Praetorian Guard in this one. Despite her getting a ton of fascinating backstory and depth in  canonical supplementary material, literally none of that is ever showcased even slightly in this film, and after a short, underwhelming fight scene, she apparently falls to her death. Sure, she COULD have survived, but this still feels like a rather big waste of the character. For someone they hyped up so much, the way she is handled really feels undignified.

Rey’s Parents: I’m not gonna lie, this reveal is stupid in and of itself, but the stupider thing is that a lot of people seem to be taking it at face value. When was it collectively decided we should trust the creepy, evil Sith lord who has made it perfectly clear he wants control over Rey? Why are we taking Kylo’s word that Rey’s parents were drunks who sold their kids as FACT? Honestly it just seems like a further ploy to manipulate her more than anything.

Reylo: While it isn’t canon as of yet, this movie really hammers in a bunch of hints for the obnoxiously popular ship between heroine Rey and antagonist Kylo Ren. And, quite frankly, I absolutely fucking hate this ship, but probably for a lot different reasons than most people. Do I think it’s shipping abuse? No, I don’t think it’s that any more than I think any other hero-villain ship is. Do I think Kylo doesn’t deserve to be redeemed by Rey? That’s not it either; the entire premise of this franchise is that any person can be redeemed. Kylo Ren is really no exception, though considering he killed my favorite character I’d be happy to see his ass beat. No, I hate it because I just absolutely hate the trope, if it even is one, of the hero redeeming the villain through romantic love. I feel like it would cheapen Rey’s character, and just turn the entire new trilogy into an overly long romantic drama. All the heavy-handed hints towards this pairing is just gag worthy, and frankly I’m going to be annoyed if they ruin both of these characters by going through with it.

Rose: Rose is without a doubt in my mind the worst character in the entire franchise. This seems like a rather tall order considering her competition, but consider this: her biggest contributions to the plot are the Canto Bright plotline, the absolute worst part of the film… and stopping Finn from performing a badass heroic sacrifice that might have saved the heroes a lot of trouble, delivering the stupidest line  in Star Wars history, kissing Finn, and fainting. She’s just utterly pointless to the point she feels like someone’s OC from a fanfic where they get with Finn was slipped into the script.

Wasting DJ: So you get Benicio Del Toro,  and you put him in your movie. Great so far, good. He does some weird accent and makes the character have a quirky personality, still good. You give him a very morally ambiguous personality and show the shades of grey in this idealistic universe that leans towards black vs. white most of the time, excellent, awesome! AND THEN… he betrays the heroes and vanishes from the film. What. DJ didn’t die, and he could come back… but he just feels shoehorned in and just doesn’t really reach his full potential whatsoever. He was such an interesting idea, and they just did the bare minimum with him.

Despite all of this crap, though… The Last Jedi still manages to be awesome. Holdo’s final sacrifice, the Kylo Ren and Rey fight against the Praetorian Guards, Yoda’s surprise appearance, Luke’s final battle… Hell, I even liked seeing Leia finally use the Force by flying through space with it; as cheesy as it is, it left me floored when I saw it in theaters. Then, of course, there’s that epic opening space battle… there’s just a lot to love here. In particular, my favorite moment is probably Luke becoming one with the Force. Maybe it’s not my MOST favorite moment, but it just feels so poignant and important, with his final moments mirroring the start of his journey, as he gazes into twin suns one last time before joining his teachers and father. It just… it gets to you, you know? I may have a LOT of issues with this movie, and a lot of stuff I didn’t really like in it, but more than any other movie I have so many issues with, I like and even RESPECT this film. You can say a lot of things about this movie, but one thing you can’t say is that it’s dull. It sparks discussion, and debate, and obnoxiously hyperbolic worst-everism. At the end of the day, whether it’s good or bad doesn’t really matter. The only thing that matters is that this film just… IS. And one way or another people will have something to say about it. Just don’t be a hyperbolic douche about it and try and enjoy things, you know?

Bustle.com  is becoming pretty Anti-Reylo as days pass by. Unfortunately there are too many articles online as predictable, sanctimonious and anti as the one I'm goint to comment on. Have a look at this "beauty": https://www.bustle.com/p/why-rey-kylo-ren-can-never-be-redeemed-no-matter-how-much-reylo-fans-ship-them-7737310 By OLIVIA TRUFFAUT-WONG Spoilers ahead for The Last Jedi. Gather 'round, Reylo shippers, it's time to have a talk. The Rey and Kylo Ren ship that set sail when The Force Awakens was released in 2015 has only gained steam in recent weeks, thanks to The Last Jedi. But, fans of the ship will have to face the harsh truth that Rey and Kylo can never be redeemed as a couple, because as much as it may pain you to admit it, Kylo is actually pretty damn awful. Even putting aside the fact that he's a murderer who killed his own father, Kylo hasn't really proven himself capable of being a friend to anyone, let alone a lover. Now, that's not to say that the Reylo ship doesn't have merit. Do Kylo and Rey have an undeniable chemistry in The Force Awakens? Yes. Is their Force connection unlike any other relationship we've seen in the Star Wars universe? Yes. Are Rey and Kylo both super hot Force badasses who could take over the galaxy together as one awesome super couple? You bet. But, just because the Reylo ship is fun to take a ride on, that doesn't mean it should actually happen. In reality, if Rey and Kylo Ren's relationship were to become canon, it might just become the most toxic relationship in the Star Wars saga — including Anakin and Padmé — and here's why. Kylo Is A Straight-Up Murderer & Probably A War Criminal

I’m fed up with this kind of articles about movies, they are getting really annoying and tyring, so I’m goint to add my two cents about Reylo and anti-articles on Websites.

Reading that article made me feel secondhand embarrasment, at least this is what I felt when I read it, because it's so terribly unprofessional and so wrong. It's the kind of article that might belong in a personal blog because people are entitled to their own opinions, however warped they are, but it should have no place on a site that readers can take seriously. It has nothing to do with criticism on a movie. Instead of focusing on the movie itself this writer extrapolates the story to accommodate it to her personal opinions and makes judgements of value on fan's views on life, expectations and what they should like or enjoy in a story. This article is not about TLJ, it's about policing what viewers should enjoy, and what's worse, whether people should be given a second chance after making mistakes and who deserves to be loved. What does this have to do with the quality of a story? Nothing at all. Also, this person feels entitled to tell others who is to be seen as a war criminal, a terrorist or an abuser in a relationship. We Reylo fans are not children (at least many of us aren't) and it isn't her job to educate us or show us what is morally acceptable or not. This is about a community, the Reylo community, and this person feels entitled to tell Reylo stans and anyone who happens to like Reylo what they think or enjoy is wrong. She doesn't criticize Disney, the writers or LF for the story they have given us, she criticizes a certain group of fans who just happened to understood and enjoy the story they have been offered. We are not responsible for Reylo and what it represents. If she thinks what is on screen is so toxic, she should complain to the right people, those who made this story possible, not to the fans who enjoy it. If authors paid any mind to this kind or articles which unfortunately have become so common these days, all pieces of fiction would be utter trash. If all the characters in a story had to be models of perfection and paragons of virtue, they wouldn't reflect the real world, to start with, their characters wouldn't be relatable, because despite what this person seems to think real people are far from perfect, more often than not relationship aren't exactly healthy, people have bad moments and love isn't about finding yourself a Mr Perfect who can do nothing wrong. If you find yourself a Mr Perfect lucky you, but do flawless people really exist?  Most of us aren't perfect and if we want acceptance for our flaws and forgiveness for our mistakes we should be able to give others a chance. It's not right to jump on high horses and judge others so harshly. If this woman was right, reading Shakespeare plays or Greek tragedies would be immoral, and enjoying westerns or action films, for instance would also be wrong. There should be no villains or morally grey characters in stories and all the characters should be unrealistically good. What a bore! There would be no tension and no drama. This article shouldn't be taken seriously, but the problem is that many people will read it and the site has a responsibility towards its readers. This kind of articles send a bad message and perhaps even try to have an influence on what the writers will do with IX. The article is laughable but its intentions are shady, at best. I'm really sick of finding this kind of articles that do no favours to movies or viewers. A journalist's view on what is terrorism, a war crime or anything of the sort is not what readers usually look for when they read an article about a movie. She is even wrong when she says Kylo is abusive when Rey is the one who hurts him physically, breaks his heart and betrays his trust. If she didn't trust that he would let her go after he killed the master who'd been manipulating him for years for her sake, then maybe the problem was hers and not his. Pretending she was going to accept his offer and take his hand and summoning his lightsaber instead felt very much like betrayal to a man who already feels betrayed by everyone and who only trusts her at this point. Of course she didn't have to accept his offer, but was playing a trick on him and leaving him unconscious and vulnerable the right thing to do? Her decision nearly cost him his life. She took her choice and her priority wasn't him, this is not new for Ben Solo, it's the story of his life repeating itself. Is Rey abusive, is she a bad person? I don't think so, but she isn't perfect either, she is just human. She feels something for Ben, but perhaps she isn't ready to accept him for what he is, and love is about acceptance, not about changing those we love. He needs help to find his way again and she is not responsible for his salvation, but if she loves him, maybe she could support him with her love and faith. It's her choice. In the end, he'll have to save himself but as Mazz says, he needs her help. In fact, what she did for him has already made a different and thanks to her he got rid of Snoke. But I'm digressing, an article about a movie shouldn't try to have an influence on people's moral compass, and enjoying stories about flawed characters doesn't mean you condone what these characters do. Another thing I find disturbing is how some people think once a person falls because they've lost their way or have made terrible mistakes there's no way back. What message is this? How is it right to show children that if a person makes very bad decisions it'll be impossible to come back home or try to find the right path again. I don't think this is a good message for children. It isn't a good message for anyone. It's a bleak and hopeless message.

On the Applicability of the “Draco In Leather Pants” Trope in regards to Kylo Ren

A common practice that antis accuse Reylos of employing is the “Draco In Leather Pants” trope.  Here is what is is, according to TvTropes:

A form of Misaimed Fandom, when a fandom takes a controversial or downright villainous character and downplays his/her flaws, often turning him/her into an object of desire and/or a victim in the process. This can cause conflicts if the writers are not willing to retool the character to fit this demand. In fanfiction, they are frequently the love object of the local Mary Sue, who uses the power of love to redeem the character. "I can fix him" is a commonly expressed sentiment among fans of Dracos in Leather Pants. In extreme cases, the affection these characters receive from fans can lead them to forget that they're actually still supposed to be villains. Or, on the flip side, even the worst crossings of the Moral Event Horizon can be rationalized, while any insult from the hero towards the villain is cast as deplorably mean. The writer's attempt to make the villain more "sympathetic" will likely cause them to remove everything that made the character so cool/well liked in the first place.

Common reasons for this include the character being wicked in a classy or cool way. A physically attractive villain is much more likely to be subject to this trope than a physically ugly one; Beauty Equals Goodness, after all, and shallow as it may be, it seems that, for some fans, this is the case even when the character's beauty only extends to their appearance. All Girls Want Bad Boys may be a factor with male villains getting a female fandom that views them through this lens. A badass villain will naturally be preferred by many of these over meeker heroic characters at times, as well.

Loki, Christian Grey, and the original Draco Malfoy himself are held up as examples of “Draco In Leather Pants”.  With regards to anti culture, antis claim that the fandom’s reaction to Kylo is an example of where a fandom brushes aside the villain’s awful, awful actions to paint them as misunderstood or sympathetic despite all evidence to the contrary just because the villain looks cool, or attractive/handsome/beautiful or just because they are supposedly, when identity politics is factored into the equation, white.

The issue with this assumption is that it ignores the other reasons why people would supposedly “woobify” villains outside of a villain being attractive or white, and not to mention the fact that they may be deliberately written to be sympathetic in the first place.  Antis yells of “Cool Motive, Still Murder” hit a wall if the narrative wants you to sympathize with a villain in the first place.  From what we know of Kylo, it’s very likely this is the intended result of the narrative.  Kylo has been seen to be abused by Snoke and manipulated since the womb, whom had been subtly compared with a child predator.  TLJ hints that Snoke’s treatment of Kylo is abusive with Snoke zapping the floor with force lightning and called him essentially weak because of his remorse over killing his father.  Furthermore, Kylo’s backstory literally shows him being pushed into a corner when Luke had those dark thoughts in his mind, and with his parents being neglectful of him as well as Luke thinking for once to kill him, it may be inferred he had nowhere to go but to Snoke.  What happens if a character is a villain but the narrative writes the character in a way that encourages “woobification”.  Then you cannot blame the audience for thinking a specific way.

Furthermore, if a character is only “woobified” for being attractive and white and not because the narrative writes him in a specific manner or that the character is genuinely an interesting villain that, even if the narrative does not fully want you to sympathize with but opens the room for the audience to “woobify”, then why does Snape from the same work where Draco originated have so much “stans”to say?  Snape wasn’t really portrayed by an attractive actor nor discussed as such in the book itself, so what explains the existence of “Snape stans”?

Of course antis say that Luke, Leia and Han tried their best and that Kylo is an ungrateful white bastard, but that requires the neglect of Adam Driver’s body language conveying a sympathetic interpretation of Kylo as well as all the new canon material pointing towards a more sympathetic interpretation of Kylo. 

There are genuine cases where Draco In Leather Pants as a trope is completely unjustified or the character is much worse than how the fans perceive him to be(I admit to not getting the appeal of Draco in contrast to Snape outside him being attractive, and consider Loki for instance, to be extremely woobified within the fanbase and that the canon Loki is much less sympathetic than the one fans make him out to be, and I think Christian Grey is a completely vile man).  But given how Kylo is portrayed and the willful ignorance of canon material and certain interpretations fostered by the film itself, it is clear that the “stanning” and “woobification” of Kylo Ren, as well as Reylo shipping, is not simply because he is attractive and white. 

365 Days: A “50 Shades of Grey” Rip-off, That’s Actually Worse

Rise to Popularity and Underestimation of People’s Libido

     365 Days is an erotic drama film by a Polish author and cosmetologist Blanka Lipińska released this year. The film is based on a book about a young Polish woman who is snatched (kidnapped and drugged) from her everyday life by a Sicilian mob boss and who then gives her a year to fall in love with him. The film was briefly released in cinemas in the UK and in its native Poland before it was quickly made available on streaming service Netflix on June 7 with so little promotion. It quickly shot up the daily top 10 charts and reached the No. 1 spot by the end of the week. It also reached Netflix's top three in more than 20 countries. The movie had reached the whole world and quickly gained international recognition.

      Despite the film's popularity, the film is currently in the Bottom 100 films on IMDb. But for some people, they watch movies, not because of the genre, neither because of an author or its actors, but because of a popularity chart. The viewer's decision on watching this movie, making it reach the top chart intrigued us, maybe the movie is good since so many people are watching it. Is it because being in quarantine, with limited human contact, had made people psychotically horny, longing for escape into fantasy? Is it because people like watching morally bereft movies about hot people having unusual sexual behavior, the same reason how they like Fifty Shades of Grey, and wanted similar movies? Nonetheless, what caught our attention is its rising popularity on Netflix, having in mind that movies on the top of the list are relatively good. So, we gave it a shot. And that’s two hours of our lives we will never get back.

What Does the Public Think?

           If you search 365 Days reviews on Google, the first thing you’ll see is it’s 3.3/10 rating from IMDb, 1/5 on Letterboxd, 29% from user ratings on Rotten Tomatoes, and surprisingly 80% Google users that liked the film. Also, at the top are excerpts from two critic reviews:

“Although weirdly entertaining in its own sleazy way, this is an adolescent boy's dream about what women want, a sexual fantasy to "prove" that women who say "no" really mean "yes.” – Barbara Shulgasser-Parker, Common Sense Media

“With scenes glorifying physical bondage and outrageous dialogues, ‘365 Days’ ends up romanticising forced sex and manipulation.” – Ronak Kotecha, Times of India

      Scrolling down further, you’ll see reviews from Times, New York Times, Variety, and other media sites basically saying the same thing, “It’s a bad movie.” It was hard to find reviews that were singing praises for the movie; however, we were still able to find some:

“Danielle Steel that had plenty of stories of pirates kidnapping ladies, or warring families taking a daughter until a truce/ marriage could be arranged, etc.  But all these amazing writers wrote about strong women that didn’t just do what they were told, but found a way to make the untenable situation work to their advantage.  I see the same here...” – Michelle Gilbert, Google User

“Political correctness is a disgrace and refrain some people from seeing the beauty of the main characters! Very intense, beautiful to see.” – Savanah D, Rotten Tomatoes User

“If I were to review this film seriously, it’s a solid 60%. But as a bit of indulgence in mindless sex, easily pushes it into the 90%, which is exactly why it’s so popular on Netflix. Not one for the terminally woke, though.” – Matt, commenter on Variety

As a rebut to the following reviews, we recommend reading Jessica Kiang’s review of the film on Variety:

           https://variety.com/2020/film/reviews/365-days-review-365-dni-1234629333/

365 Days Reimagined

           The only redeeming quality of the film is some of its soundtracks and nothing more. Every aspect of the movie is just problematic, and making an entirely new movie is easier than trying to change and make this one better. But let’s give this a try, to support Kiang’s statement, “no one ever went broke overestimating the horniness of a global population slowly emerging from pandemic-mandated isolation.” Basically, everyone just watched it for steamy scenes, and if that’s what people want, then we can give it to them, but by changing the plot completely.

      First, we take Laura out of the picture. We take everything about the kidnapping, molesting, and sexual coercion and throw it out the window. We take an alternate route, where a woman from a similar background and is consenting to all of Massimo’s sexual desires is the leading lady. Well, good thing there already exists a character like that in the movie, Anna. We can keep the part where Massimo loses his dad in a tragic way, but it’s Mario who takes over the organization while teaching Massimo the ropes of the business, and the new twist, he is forced to marry someone from another family because of a promise made by their parents.

      We portray Anna as someone who grew up in a misogynistic and violent home, who is tired of the Mafia life and wants out. Although Massimo has no intention of marrying Anna, they are still forced to bond together, and they slowly learn to listen and accept each other and come to the conclusion that they both want to live normal lives (all the while having hot steamy action, of course). We add another twist where Massimo’s most trusted man, Mario, is actually the one responsible for his father’s death. Mario failed to kill Massimo and so has resorted to molding him to be the perfect boss: cold, cruel, and calculating. As he witnesses Massimo softening because of Anna, he plots to murder them both. Massimo learns of this betrayal and realizes that Anna will always be in danger as long as they are in the Mafia. With Anna’s knowledge about her family’s businesses and Massimo of his own, they make a deal with the FBI giving them all the information they need to take down both Mafia organizations, fake their deaths, and walk unscathed. Leading new lives with whole new identities.

      See? An interesting intense plot with amazing sex scenes is possible. Even stories from Wattpad are more developed and actually make sense than this hot mess of a film titled 365 Days.

On Hollywood’s Attempt to Represent Minorities

      Hollywood actors often say they highlight the mundane and make stories of minorities known, but is that really the case? Or do they just say that because they know that’s what people want to hear?

      The stories made known are not average at all- they appear to be a part of the minority but their experiences are almost fantasies in real-life. If they emphasize what has already been on emphasis our whole lives as “mundane” and as minorities, then they were not making any emphasis at all. Goes to show how the audience does not want clichés and boring stuff- so, instead, they make up or take stories the minorities want to happen as an escape in their own stories or tell stories that are bizarre enough, just the thought of it triggers people’s hormones.

      How many times have we had stories about minorities written by white people? Or casting straight white people for POC/LGBT+ roles? They tell our narratives as if it’s theirs, but some things will only be truly understood by the ones who went through them. Even more so, we should stop making films that surround the struggle and tragedy of our lives. Minorities should be represented to live happy lives as well, to give hope to the viewers, that life is hard but life goes on. Lots of minority groups have yet to see their reflection on the big screen, and those that were able to, only saw a distorted version of themselves that was “suitable” for all audiences. If the stories of minorities are to be told to the world, it should be told by minorities themselves. From the ones in front of the screen to the ones behind it.