#what do you mean dc doesn’t stand for disregard canon | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

flying-elliska · 3 years

Text

Headcanons for ADHD characters Masterlist

I was asked for this a while ago and I feel this is a good discussion subject because the canon representation for ADHD is kind of abysmal and is often a caricature or a joke.

usual disclaimer, I'm not a therapist, this is not a diagnosis tool, just for fun, etc etc...basing this on my own experience/knowledge with ADHD and meeting a lot of ADHD people IRL. I'm going off the main symptoms first (inattention and/or hyperactivity, restlessness, impulsivity, problems with emotional/focus regulation, daydreaming, messiness, hyper-focus, fidgeting etc) and then looking at character traits that are not a necessary symptom but often associated (substance abuse and addiction, need to please, sensitivity to rejection, compassionate and creative, thrill seeking, very imaginative, charming and witty or withdrawn and shy or angry and irritable, whimsical and fun and a bit child-like, out of the box thinker, self esteem issues, unstable life, comorbidity with anxiety and depression, very intense feelings, functions better with adrenaline/in an emergency, disregard for rules and problems with authority OR extreme compliance, codependency, perceived as weird, clever in an atypical way, problems in school, extremely good at one specific thing, etc)

Also I found this list with actual canonical representation

BOOKS :

The 'fits to a T so I'm seeing it as my personal canon' list :

note : doesn't mean that the authors actually meant to create representation but it's very likely they at least got inspired by people who did have ADHD (even when the diagnosis itself did not exist) and explained it with 'it's just their personality' OR the story happens in a setting where the label doesn't exist as such. also not meant to be exhaustive.

- Helen Burns (from Jane Eyre by Charlotte Brontë) One of Jane's school friends from the start of the novel, fits the inattentive type to a T : she can't seem to focus or learn her lessons, is constantly daydreaming, describes herself as messy and careless, forgets rules, and is easily distracted. She talks constantly about her own 'defective nature' and seems very sensitive to criticism but incapable of changing. She doesn't defend herself against the nuns' harsh punishments as she thinks she deserves them. She's presented as kind-hearted and compassionate, almost too good for this world, and hyperfocuses on her faith. Apparently sb even wrote an academic article on this. She dies so it's not super fun representation but it is interesting to see in an older book, to push back against the idea that ADHD was invented yesterday by Big Pharma lol.

- Grantaire (from Les Miserables, Victor Hugo) Part of the student revolutionary group Les Amis de l'ABC and resident skeptic, does not believe in the cause but is fixated on the group's idealistic leader (and yeah it sounds very gay, they die holding hands, there is a lot of Symbolism). He spends his time ranting about things that are only vaguely connected, is described as brilliant but incapable of sticking to any one profession or hobby, is an alcoholic, has a creative streak (was a painter at some point), likes wandering around the city, has massive self-esteem issues and is a general mess but does seem to care about his friends. This is not a very flattering portrayal as Grantaire is described as morally deficient but again, interesting in an old book. ADHD!Grantaire is a popular take in the modern fandom (i was in it before I was diagnosed it brought up a lot of Things) and it's very cathartic to see him get actual therapy in fic lmao.

- Luna Lovegood (from the Harry Potter series) JKR sucks but this is probably the most high profile case of a possible inattentive ADHD character so I didn't want to leave it out. She's a daydreamer, she is a big space cadet and seems to live in her own world, she has a very out of the ordinary sense of style, she's bullied for being weird, but she's also very kind and perceptive and cares a lot about her friends, and good at coming up with out of the box solutions. I wouldn't call it good representation, she's described as a wacko whom a lot of characters find cringeworthy but she's also pretty heroic, so. And she does seem to hyperfocus on magical creatures. Plus her father could also have it (and it runs in families).

- Jasper Fahey (from Six of Crows duology, Leigh Bardugo) Part of a young group of thieves with a heart of gold, he's a charmer and a compulsive gambler who quits college and incurs debts so massive he stops talking to his father out of shame. He's also an extremely talented sharpshooter and the scenes where he describes how the whole world slows and the rush of adrenaline when he is shooting sound like hyperfocus to a T. He's a loyal friend but also quite dependent on Kaz, the leader of the group, to keep him in line. He's witty, messy and he likes danger. His boyfriend later in the series, Wylan, is dyslexic and the way they learn to accommodate each other's issues honestly makes them one of my favorite couples ever. I need to reread these books and I am so stoked for the series I hope they do Jasper justice.

- Julian Diaz (from Cemetary Boys, Aiden Thomas) Love interest of the book, introduced as the 'high school resident bad boy', energetic motormouth who can't sit still and actually very endearing, has issues in school and gets bored easily, main problem is that he's a ghost...sort of. The whole thing was very cute and I love that Julian's personality is described as fun and attractive instead of annoying (which is, if you haven't noticed already, a pattern).

- Evie O'Neill (from the Diviners series, Libba Bray) She's a flapper in 1920s New York who ran away from her boring little town to make a life for herself ; she's a party girl and an impulsive thrill-seeker who hates standing still and is always looking for excitement to 'fill the void'. She craves fame and attention and pretty things, she can be a loyal friend but is also frequently self-centered and forgetful, she's street smart, resourceful and very charming and witty. She's also grieving, drinks too much and is definitely depressed. She's obviously meant as an archetype of the era, caught between trauma and excess, but it does come over as very hyperactive ADHD as well. Her powers to read objects also really pinged me as a good metaphor for the ADHD tendency to be overwhelmed by details.

The 'bit more of a reach but there's a vibe' list :

- Emma Woodhouse (from Emma, Jane Austen) Frequently cited as a character with ADHD, I didn't come up with this one but she fits. She's daydreaming, easily bored, has flights of fancy and hyper-focuses on matchmaking, is a bit impulsive and thrill seeking, clever in an unconventional way, described as a bit immature, mix of caring and self-centered.

- Ronan Lynch (from the Raven Cycle, Maggie Stiefvater) Ronan just has Neuroatypical Vibes, even though it's not entirely clear what, and I've seen people label him all sorts of things which is very valid. As for ADHD, he's restless, impulsive, likes to Go Fast and do street racing, he has very strong emotions he doesn't know what to do with, and big self esteem issues esp. at the start, is very all or nothing with people, snarky, drops out of school to be a magic farmer, problems with authority, looks like a scary mean goth but is actually a big softie (but like, with a few people), pulls shit out of his dreams. Is kind of dependent on his best friend at the start too.

- Sherlock Holmes (from the eponymous series by Arthur Conan Doyle) Again a character who has been diagnosed with all sorts of things. The biggest ADHD vibe for me is 'my mind rebels at stagnation' and the way he needs drugs to function outside of the thrill of a case, and the way he hyper-focuses on information he needs to be a detective while completely ignoring common knowledge. Also sort of dependent on his best friend Watson and isn't great at social interactions. Doesn't care much about upholding social conventions either. The RDJ adaptation is the one that has the most ADHD vibes to me.

- Harley Quinn (DC Comics/Movies) Big codependency issues (that's arguably the thing she's most known for) and sadly people with ADHD are often prone to getting into abusive relationships. It depends on the story too but she's very energetic, zany, impulsive, she likes shiny things and bright clothes, she's fun and chaotic and likes to break the rules, she's a criminal but she does seem to have a heart, she's also frequently immature and rash, etc.

What are your headcanons ? I would love to hear if you have some so I can add them to the list. I'll make a TV/Movies list soon.

#adhd #actually adhd #adhd representation #neurodiversity #media representation

68 notes · View notes

commonratmiraculous · 4 years

Text

Daminette Soulmate AU - Idea/Prompt?

Yes, I know that not everyone likes Daminette in the fandom, mostly because they don’t like Damian, or crossovers, or the salt that generally comes with these fics (though I plan to keep this salt free). Which is fair.

But Daminette Soulmate fics tend to have similar starts to explaining the specific soulmate type that Damian and Marinette have that is so rare seemingly no one else has it. This is a twist on that.

The “ultra-rare” versions that I’ve seen picked are always something kind of dramatic, I guess? Swapping bodies for a period of time as an example. And sure something like that does fulfill the general understanding that the League of Assassins might not look favourably on soulmates, as Damian wouldn’t want to have a physical mark if you’re going down that route.

But I saw a Soulmate prompt that’s far subtler and kind of perfect if you’re the kind of writer who likes to play things for comedy purposes. I can’t remember the exact wording, but it goes something like:

Everything you can do, your soulmate can also.

This would go someway into explaining how Marinette can just become a superhero in minutes, what with the necessary fighting skills and battle strategy. Sure her mother was introduced as being a trained martial artist in Troublemaker but there’s no evidence that she did teach Marinette - she’s only now learning Mandarin after all (though Marinette probably would know Mandarin since it’s likely one of the languages that Damian speaks: little baby Marinette speaking random Arabic) Not to mention the idea that Ra’s and Talia accidentally taught a random French-Chinese infant how to be an assassin with no knowledge they were doing it.

Damian has mentioned a lot about the things he can do beyond fighting and language skills of course. Like being able to drive by the age of ten, hacking into NASA at six and finding it easy, he’s mentioned that he could have had a Geometry Degree (by what 13?) had his mother not killed his tutor. He’s a great artist, and he’s also able to perform magic (which he doesn’t persue despite his interest in doing so).

Of course the art and the magic could be explained in this AU as having come from Marinette. And his training and tutoring both goes some way to explaining why Marinette is almost two years younger than some of her classmates (Alix, Adrien, and Nathaniel have their 15th birthdays while Marinette is thirteen though she gets her 14th towards the end of the school year, the last timeline I saw had Befana placed in June) as well as the aforementioned fighting skill.

(When it comes to the fighting aspect of MLB I’m acknowledging that we’ve actually seen Gabriel teaching Adrien Kung Fu (?) in the Felix episode, as well as his Fencing skill. NOT writing him off completely)

But with Damian, imagine he’s now at the Manor and things have settled down into the fanon batfamily dynamic (canon batfamily has no place here and DC fans on this site have accepted that) and all of a sudden they find out that Damian can bake. Their reaction to that has nothing on finding out that Damian can make his own clothes. Of course Damian being Damian doesn’t mention not knowing where these skills came from to his family members because he already thinks it’s weird. He’s definitely not mentioning it to them after he’s convinced into playing Mecha Strike V with his siblings - the first time he’s even played a video game - and just trounces them all.

Marinette doesn’t get the luxury of being able to explain away her quirks to her family though since she’s raised by them. I’m entertaining the idea that neither Tom or Sabine actually know for sure that it’s a soulmate bond giving M the weirdest skills (though she’s never been raised to think that violence is the answer so they’re probably not as worried as they should be). Perhaps though, the closest they got to being told was a conversation with Andre the Ice-Cream man, whose advice they disregarded because he’s an ice-cream man. So Marinette definitely doesn’t know that this is abnormal.

Until, she’s in the middle of a fight as Ladybug and her miraculous starts beeping despite Lucky Charm not being called because Damian called it by accident.

He could have:

a) actually needed whatever the miraculous gave him at the time, or

b) been in an argument with a sibling about cereal (since Lucky Charms is an American brand of cereal)

Tikki tells Marinette what’s up, to her anger and frustration (and also giddiness because she’d thought she never had a soulmate - a topic that Chloé definitely bullied her on as children and Lila probably can’t comment on without the class getting defensive because of said history on the topic - and it turns out she does.)

A magic user on the League, or Wonder Woman, tells Batman. Who immediately tries to figure out who Ladybug is (this isn’t a JLA ignored Paris’ call for help fic since it plays with both LB and CN being more capable then one would assume - the miraculouses do balance each other whether you like the Love Square ship or not, and it’s not like Adrien isn’t the child of a supervillain being trained by said supervillain, I’m whether he knows it or not) only for the magic to stop him. But Damian might know.

And if Damian does know you have to entertain the thought that he also knows the rest of the Miraculous Team barring Chat Noir. Just imagine for a minute the rage he would have over his soulmate apparently not knowing who her partner in the field is. The fact that Marinette doesn’t know the identities of everyone in the Justice League until they’re standing right in from of her can be explained as her having no interest whatsoever in finding out who they are. Which would be an interesting way of showing that just because they’ve got the same skills that does not mean they’re the same people.

#dc #mlb #miraculous ladybug #crossover #daminette #damian wayne #marinette dupain cheng #robin #ladybug #soulmate #soulmate au #prompt

323 notes · View notes

tht-lesbian-fangirl · 4 years

Note

So do you like Ryan Wilder now that she’s played by a Black bisexual woman?

Okay, I legitimately can’t decipher the tone of this anon, but I’m going to give you my thoughts anyway…

No. Why would anyone’s opinion of a character change just because of a minority status added to them? Lexa isn’t a great character because she’s gay. Zari (both versions) isn’t a great character because she’s Muslim. Lexa and Zari are both fantastic characters on their own AND they’re gay/Muslim. Representation doesn’t mean creating an ill-thought-out character that most fans already had a negative response to, but then slapping minority identities on and saying “dO yOu LikE HeR nOW??!” Good representation comes when a character is first created to work well into the story. Diversity only embellishes those great characters and then allows the writing to dig deeper and adapt accordingly. That’s why Batwoman Season 1 never felt like it tokenized any character, because Mary, Sophie, Luke, etc. all had amazing development, introductions, and plot value (unlike what other shows Supergirl tend to do). And Ryan Wilder’s current character description seems to undo most, if not all, of the story.

The casual character swap is exposing how the show never cared about Kate Kane, they just cared about having a lesbian lead. For all of Caroline Dries’ talk about loving Kate, she constantly disregarded a crucial element to the comics character: her Judaism (which is something I’ve talked about before in a post and as a podcast guest). The show has always just wanted a lesbian hero and apparently it didn’t matter who. It’s crystal clear, due to how anything Jewish onscreen was an afterthought and not truly embedded into the character, despite Judaism playing a huge role in Batwoman comics.

This sends the message that lesbian characters can just be swapped out because the individual characters themselves don’t matter, just their sexuality.

It also sends the message that you can just swap out different minorities so your show can keep its diversity points. Because that’s exactly what’s happening here: they’re trading a Jewish woman for a Black woman. And why would that be okay? It wouldn’t be okay if it was the reverse, right?

In my opinion, I think one of two things should’ve happened:

Javicia cast as the new Kate Kane. This casting would keep everything that Season 1 built up and would stick to comics. Because, as we know, only Kate has ever worn the Batwoman cowl (unlike how many other DC heroes work, so using Batman as an argument is a faulty excuse). There would also be no representation lost, only gained. Black Jews are incredibly underrepresented and often dismissed by goyim and unfortunately some sects of Jews as well. It would be phenomenal to see a Black Jewish leading lady, especially if she’s also gay and a hero.

Or restructure the character of Ryan to not be so disrespectful to Kate’s legacy. Stealing the suit to kill a villain out of revenge? Right after we witnessed an entire PTSD arc for Kate having killed Cartwright? Acting antagonistically toward Luke and Mary? Repeating the same “rough around the edges, doesn’t think she’s a hero” personality arc that Kate already had before becoming a Paragon and Justice League member? And forgive my gullibility for thinking the CW would actually listen to Vanessa Morgan’s valid complaints about constantly giving Black characters drug-related backgrounds… Yeah, if the show is really running with a new character to take up the mantel, then they have to actually honor Kate Kane and give Ryan the ability to be liked by the audience. Why not have Ryan try to work with the Bat Team to look for Kate, since Dries said Kate’s disappearance would be a focal mystery of Season 2? Why not give her different positive traits that separate her from Kate-- like leading with compassion, wanting to be part of a team, literally anything that makes Ryan not seem like a rougher copy! I even saw someone on twitter throw out the idea of Ryan being a former lawyer and that would be cool! The show, audience, and Javicia deserve better.

Speaking of Javicia, even though many people are upset about the mishandling of Kate Kane and seeming erasure of a comic canon Jewish lesbian’s identity, this is an issue with the WRITING. It is our job as fans and decent humans to fully support Javicia and stand up against anyone who attacks her, especially those hiding behind “supporting Kate” as an excuse. I consider any hate directed toward her as racist. Javicia has no control over the story or writing, she’s simply an actress who earned a leading role and we cannot allow an inkling of what’s happened to Candice Patton, Anna Diop, etc. happen to her too.

The CW (and all of TV) could use a ton more Black leads, especially LGBT women who represent that demo on screen and off. That’s why part of me is so happy to see people celebrating the casting on social media. But please understand that the other part, the part of me that grew up clinging to Kate Kane’s comics when I felt so alone during my coming out years, is extremely sad about how we’re losing that Jewish lesbian representation and no one really seems to be talking about it.

#if you wanna talk more about this feel free to message me #my feelings are clearly mixed #happy for the win with javicia but sad for the loss of kate kane #javicia leslie #batwoman #asks

27 notes · View notes

hellzyeahwebwielingessays · 4 years

Text

Super Heroes are a HUMAN power fantasy Part 2

Super Heroes are a HUMAN power fantasy Part 1

Master Post

There were several points a bit more tangentially connected to my arguments in part 1. As a result I decided to leave them until now and hit them up in bullet points.

These are arguments against the superhero genre chiefly perpetuated by the tryhard trinity of Osvaldo Oyola , J. Lamb and Noah Berlatsky.

On the topic of the genre portraying ‘might making right’, the truth is this is part of the ancient inspirational aspect of these figures and can be found in stories like Rama and Sita, Rama of course ultimately never giving up his quest to be reunited with his lover. Which was not a Western influenced story.

Yes the genre involves ‘punching as conflict resolution’. I’m sorry, but that is part and parcel of the genre and the wish fulfilment/fantasy/narrative entertainment value of the stories. If you DON’T like that then frankly it’s like complaining that a romance story involves kissing.

It has been claimed that a black hero wouldn’t punch someone but again, the genre is entirely about people with powers using them to help people by preserving their life. And if they have no other choice but to K.O. a mugger who’s going to stab someone then a black person, or any decent person, would/should do it. But examining the meaning and repercussions of that realistically given the fact that they aren’t white in a white society is something that could benefit the genre.

A common critique of the genre is that crime happens sometimes because of a racist system, therefore fighting crime innately supports racism. Look, obviously we should remove institutionalised racism from the law. At the end of the day though if someone of any race is committing a crime which HURTS people they should be stopped, the reasons which drove them to that should be taken into consideration, but Spider-Man shouldn’t NOT stop a mugger because they’ve been driven to do that through desperation. There is often no time for that and without being able to talk to or trust strangers he or other heroes need to act in the moment.

Superhero fiction on one level is childish, but on a deeper level they’re representative of universal truths and desires which are often boiled down to fairy tales or simple stories. The above shitheads also claims that superhero fiction is written and consumed by children, when the truth is that in the last 20-30 years the opposite has been more true. THAT is partially why sales have been dwindling over the years.

Superman’s values are innate to the heroic and altruistic desires and ideals ALL humanity has expressed throughout its history. They are not inherently ‘white’

Apparently superheroes are white constructs because they reinforce the ‘status quo’. To quote the Atlantic article (see part 1) again:

“What status quo do superheroes reinforce? These heroes fight because everyone is entitled to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. The only fascists here are the supervillains who disagree.”

Also Superman, Batman and Wonder Woman were created specifically to change the status quo of the fictional worlds they were created in. At the same time the entire Marvel pantheon were about changing the status quo of the genre by introducing people who were flawed and different and more human than the DC heroes

Superheroes, despite the assertions by the above fuckwits have at times interrogated the justice system. But generally their lack of interrogation is I think for the same reason their science is so wonky. They don’t know better. They just boil it down to the simplest terms. Muggings and villain threats abound. Hero prevents those. They don’t know enough to tackle something much deeper than that. This ties into the fundamentally flawed aspect of most critiques wherein they are looking to superheroes as intellectual pieces of academic and critical study when...that’s not what they are...at all…

One of the above douchebags once said:

An African American Superman, with kinky, close-cropped black hair, thick, half-reddened lips, high cheekbones, and wide nostrils all bathed in dark Lindt chocolate, resists White supremacist logic, negates Black inferiority mythology, and threatens the established order. Superman’s disconcerting physicality, tempered by his omnipresent cheerfulness calmed and invited White comic readers to imagine themselves as gaudy Caucasian perfection, the Anglo-Saxon ideal. Static in panel, without speech bubbles or thought balloons, Superman Black warps the absurdly developed skeletal striated muscle and eternal hopefulness fans rejoice into a clear and present danger to the American experiment, an unholy figure derived from Tea Party paranoia, Barack Obama’s calculation and Terry Crews’ musculature. Public Enemy’s prescience abounds – were Superman Black introduced on the game-changing Action Comics’ cover, White America would have yet another reason to fear a Black planet.

This entirely depends upon who is doing the perceiving. To someone of a different mindset a Black Superman could be just that. The same thing Superman is except he happens to have black skin.

Also, the author needs to take a major chill pill, Jesus Christ.

Here is another quote from one of them:

Only in White male power fantasies can people blessed with skin privilege and bodies carved from living marble wield heat vision or super speed or unbreakable claws against indigent criminals from broken homes who lack high school educations.

This is again grossly incorrect because the idea of individuals having superhuman abilities and using them to fight criminals predates American society, and if one accepts figures like the Hydra to be stand-ins for threats to human life then the superhumans have been fighting what the criminals represent for eons before the advent of American society. The criminals they use their abilities against are rarely stated to lack education or come from broken homes, but yes okay let’s say that they are that.

Having super humans go up against them and defeat them isn’t a white male power fantasy because their abilities are used to subdue and NOT kill. Injure perhaps but in real life sometimes force is sadly necessary and if someone is robbing a bank or holding a gun to someone in an alley it is justified no matter what skin colour anyone involved in is, or what society you find yourself in, for the perpetrator to be stopped in order to safeguard life. Just because the perp resorted to what they did due to social ills beyond their control, that doesn’t justify their actions at that moment. Stealing someone’s money or trying to murder them is never ever going to be acceptable no matter if we live in a white society or not.

Only in White male power fantasies would women display abundant porcelain cleavage or don starry microskirts to fight crime.

Yeah um, preeeeeeetty sure that actually that’s more of a male SEXUAL fantasy and less than a WHITE male POWER fantasy. That was never the topic of conversation.

Shuttle diplomacy or natural resource husbandry rarely bring metal-faced technological sorcerers to heel in superhero comics; superheroes often save planet Earth through fantastic violence judiciously applied.

Yeah, that’s part of the narrative FANTASY element of the genre that is intended to be escapist. Condemning it for being otherwise is asinine.

More than this, guess what, there are people whom Dr. Doom is a metaphorical stand-in for. And an awful lot of them legitimately can’t be negotiated with. I am of the belief that in the REAL world we should negotiate and use force when there is no other choice and even then only use what is necessary. But the Dr. Dooms and Lex Luthors of the comic book world represent grander themes of evil and social ills, whilst at the same time existing to challenge the heroes physically and mentally. They represent the unmovable types of evil that legitimately can only be dealt with via physical means.

This was the type of circular logic I talked about before. It is looking at the villains as stand ins for EVERY type of situation and therefore the super hero’s use of violence as ‘problematic’, when in reality the superheroes’ use of violence isn’t problematic because it is justified by the extreme circumstances they find themselves in.

Because those situations don’t exist in real life...like in World War II...which was literally about people using force in the face of failed negotiation to halt the advance of fascism…

I submit that the superheroic reflex to subdue evil with violence directly descends from Thucydides and Alexander, from Richard the Lionheart and Dwight Eisenhower.

Yeah...except it isn’t. Again...it came from the same place as Hercules and Sun Wukong, and those came from the natural human biological imperatives to survive.

Superheroic morality requires Western Civilization’s literary canon and political history to justify its callous disregard toward collateral damage. To be clear, superheroes routinely consider innocent noncombatants’ lives (if not their property) when they confront cosmic despots or sociopathic steroid abusers, but comics document the never-ending battle in colorful tomes largely sold after Nagasaki and My Lai, after the time when total ignorance of American military supremacy was vogue. When Wally West as the Flash pulls a hysterical single mother out of her overturned silver 2001 Honda Civic and carries her to safety from Apokoliptian cannons at breakneck speed, comic fans favorably regard his heroism; any dialogue from the frazzled thirty-something file clerk will remind readers how grateful she is to escape otherworldly horror with her life. Superhero comics don’t care about the destruction of this woman’s sole transport; when the gas tank explodes behind the Flash’s blurred strobe, this woman loses her credit cards, her driver’s license, her insurance documents, her six-year-old daughter’s vanilla birthday cake with its beloved artificially flavored strawberry icing. The comics don’t recognize the heroism of this brave woman’s seven-month struggle to rebuild her finances and maintain her identity following Darkseid’s incursion; all we know is for that poor woman, the Flash saved the day. He’s a superhero. Isn’t she grateful?”

Collateral damage and the disregard for it IS regarded. Hence the existence of Damage Control. Furthermore, that is AGAIN part of the escapism and fantasy element of it. THAT is the suspension of disbelief element of superheroes and taking it THAT realistically and criticising it for it is frankly just mean spirited and simply looking for an excuse to hate it.

Furthermore the reason the rescued woman isn’t focussed upon is because it’s not HER story. If you write a story about a protagonist THEY are your focus. Everything is for their benefit. That’s true of older non-white folktales as well.

And yeah readers are supposed to regard the Flash as heroic and the woman grateful because her kid’s birthday cake isn’t realistically as important as her life!!!!!!

This is criticising superhero fiction for being unrealistic even when it is being actively so The woman WOULD probably be grateful that she’s not fucking dead!

I wouldn’t mind seeing the survivors of something like this try to rebuild their lives. And superhero fiction has focussed upon that from time to time, but again...that’s not the point of the story. Criticising the genre fro this is like criticising Harry Potter for having the audacity to focus more upon Harry’s trauma in the wake of Cedric Diggory’s death than his parents’. Harry is the star. He gets the focus.

Superman is a White boy. Superheroes are White people. Superhero morality exacts the Melian Dialogue’s ‘might makes right’ overwhelming force realpolitik with every onomatopoetic Biff! Bam! Pow! gut punch and karate chop combo.

See what I’ve said before about how superheroes are not fascists and how force is often necessary

There exists no genetic propensity for group violence in the human genome. None.”

Er....yeah...there kinda is...that’s part of why wars happen.

racially-informed vigilantism.

This phrase in one of the articles itself sums up it’s own contradictions. Racially informed vigilantism is just one type of vigilantism, a type the superhero doesn’t subscribe to. A superhero would sooner join the likes of the Joker than the KKK style vigilantes and would be all too happy to apprehend them.

One of the articles seems to be conflating basically ALL criminals super heroes fight with people who’re labelled criminals due to racial profiling. Yes superheroes operate to an extent like police officers but you can’t truly complete the analogy whatsoever.

Few of them have legal sanction, which is partially why so many refrain from actually killing anyone as officer’s are allowed to do under certain circumstances. More than this when they take down criminals their methods are entirely different from regular cops. Apart from very loud and overt super villains who may or may not be on a rampage, most of the time when they tackle regular criminals it’s due to them either being informed of a crime that is going to happen (like a hijacking or something) or they literally see something happening whilst on patrol. They don’t profile people beyond what their super sensory abilities or logical observations tell them. Which is to say if someone is following someone else a little too closely then maybe, just maybe they are planning something. If their Spider-Sense or super hearing or something alerts them to something they will act.

Taking that, ignoring it, and then supplanting the superhero for a regular cop who would racially profile people and/or supplanting the criminals they tackle for racial minorities because those are the people who (stereotypically in the real world) would be targeted as criminals is very inappropriate. Not least of all since superhero comics obviously don’t present a wholesale realistic depiction of the real world so what they present isn’t entirely interchangeable with that. And what is more, erasure of minorities was so prevalent that overwhelming majority of all the criminals they ever encountered were themselves white, so again exchanging those for racial minorities who’re profiled as criminals is highly questionable.

It’s all just such a MASSIVE reach!

But I think the panels also work to point out that Miles himself “does not belong” in the superhero tradition. He, like most black and brown superhero characters in mainstream comics, is an outlier. In other words, people like Miles or Trayvon are unfortunately more likely to be victim of a “heroic” vigilante than to be one.

This is conflating the superhero vigilante with the majority of real world vigilantes who are overly violent (and frequently hard conservative) individuals who do take overly simplistic views of the law and use those to profile people. And it’s doing so whilst taking superheroes too literally, bringing their own personal interpretations to the mix and then overlaying them onto the superhero concept before finally accepting it as fact.

Police officers use violence against racially profiled people who exhibit unrest due to a societal system stacked against them. Well shit, Batman punches the Joker. It must be the same thing obviously!!!!!

Look. Without our stories, without the true nature and reality of who we are as people of color, nothing about fanboy and fangirl culture makes sense. What I mean by that is, if it wasn’t for race, X-Men doesn’t make sense; if it wasn’t for the history of breeding human beings through chattel slavery, Dune doesn’t make sense; if it wasn’t for the history of colonialism and imperialism, Star Wars doesn’t make sense; if it wasn’t for the extermination of so many indigenous nations, most of what we call “first contact” stories don’t make sense. Without us as the secret sauce, none of this works, and it is about time that we understand that we are the Force that holds the Star Wars universe together. We’re the Prime Directive that makes Star Trek possible. We are… in the Green Lantern Corps? We are the Oath. We are all of those things. Erased, and yet without us? We’re essential. This is an incredibly important project, because it puts front and center, not only a community that has long consumed and given power to these practices and consumer categories, but it’s a community without whose suffering and struggles, none of [these narratives] would make sense.

I agree with a lot of this but there are some problems with it.

a) X-Men makes sense also because they are a stand in for almost ALL marginalised groups. Racial minorities, disabled people, queer people etc.

b) Actually Star Wars makes complete sense with or without colonialism or imperialism, at least the kind which directly relates to the issues of racism. Imperialism, conquest, these are things which are much older than American society, dating back to even before Ancient Rome. It’s about freedom fundamentally and freedom is a desire shared by ALL human beings innately because at the end of the day we are animals who wish to be free and not caged. Being caged metaphorically within a tyranny is thus something we abhor

c) The Star Wars universe doesn’t begin and end with the story of imperialism. It’s about how Democracy can be turned into an dictatorship and how that has to be prevented, or re-addressed once it happens

When white comics readers claim that they did not need white characters to relate to and enjoy comics (as a way to argue against positive race-bending), that point to their love of Luke Cage or Spawn as evidence of their ability to enjoy characters across race, what they are failing to note is how black, Latin@, etc… identities in the superhero genre are framed by a system of white supremacy.

Again I don’t understand this one. I as a white reader can enjoy Luke Cage rescuing someone from a burning building because doing that is part of white supremacy????

It presumes a white power fantasy is inherently different to a black one. But the power fantasy element of the superhero relates to them having powers and using them to help others and defeat villains. A power fantasy by another race would still have that because it is inherent to the human power fantasy. Non-white power fantasies would logically have all that and more!

Much like Noah Berlatsky explains in his book Wonder Woman: Bondage and Feminism in the Marston/Peter Comics, 1941-1948, part of what made Marston’s original Wonder Woman stories so wonderful, was his expectation that girls and boys would identify with the heroine, to value and idealize her compassionate strength and victory through submission, rather than through cyclical and ultimately futile fisticuffs of male dominion.

Many female readers enjoy the action scenes. Action scenes are good because it enables us to have a healthy outlet for aggression without taking it out into the real world. It is also NOT an inherently male dominion thing. Again this is THEIR projection. Fighting and violence is innate to human beings because we are animals biologically programmed towards it for the sake of survival. That goes for males and females. Furthermore far from fisticuffs just being about male ‘dominion’ the Wonder Woman, Batman and Superman comics were a reflection of impending war. A war that sadly required violence to be solved. That’s what the superhero typifies. Wish fulfilment action in situations where violence was (usually) a necessity. Diplomacy is good and should be our first resort. In life though sometimes things do come down to necessary violence.

There are many ways to craft a racial minority superhero, but if we consider racial authenticity as a foremost concern, today’s Hollywood is simply not prepared for that intellectual labor. The real diversity conundrum isn’t how to include the minority metahuman in the existing comic framework; that’s an art project, a casting decision solved by calling Michael B. Jordan’s agent. The real question is how to write that superhero in a way that moves the medium forward, past the Reaganomics antiheroes of Alan Moore and Frank Miller and past the hyper-emotive Silver Age redux of Geoff Johns and Brian Michael Bendis. Respectable, authentic diversity in superhero comics should redefine the nature of the meta-protagonist to his powers and his audience, with exhaustive attention to cultural detail. I’m not convinced that a Black superhero would wear tights. I strongly doubt that a Black superhero would solve conflicts with his fists. The Black superhero knows that his community watches him religiously, and that any false move will have public repercussions he cannot expect or control. If anything, the Black superhero template plays out on our nation’s cable news channels at all hours. President Barack Obama, with all his clipped vocal inflections and measured language and natural equivocation and faulty dealmaking and perfect family and limitless patience is the closest public figure to a Black superhero America has yet experienced, an international celebrity unthinkable before his ascent. Watching President Obama today, one feels expectation crush into his bones like a gravity well. No matter the political stimuli, Republicans oppose him. The concept of the Obama Presidency struck American conservatives like a Bernard Hopkins’ kidney punch, and in return, President Obama absorbs the vitriol of our coarse public debates more than any President to date (and progressives never tired of calling his predecessor a National Socialist). The agony and the ecstasy of Grant Park has given way for many Americans to the sobering fact that American authority, her global military supremacy and international economic primacy, is controlled and represented by a Black man. Disliked, hated, or worse, the Establishment is Black. I need the Black superhero in print and/or on-screen to reflect that paradigm shift. Superheroes in the popular imagination are Establishment figures; if the Black superhero I’m presented can’t interrogate what it means when the Establishment is Black, of what utility is her story?

A minority hero wouldn’t wear tights or punch people...why?

What do tights have to do with anything? As for solving problems with his fists this is conflating the threats superheroes face with ANY threat, when they are almost always situations which legitimately do require necessary physical force to resolve. If the black superhero patrols an area and sees someone about to stab someone else, yeah he should punch the stabber to save the innocent person if there is no time for anything else.

This is basically asking for the core foundation of superheroes (which transcends racial constructs and is innate to human wish fulfilment and mythic tradition) to be scrapped in favour of something else entirely. Barrack Obama isn’t a superhero. He is many, many things but what Mr. Lamb here is asking isn’t so much for a different template but for something just wholesale different. He doesn’t actually WANT a superhero story in the first place!

Super heroes aren’t establishment figures. Superheroes don’t uphold the law regardless. They uphold the law in so far as a greater need to safeguard innocent lives. Conflating them as inherently establishment figures ignores their origins and over literalises what they do.

At the same time the utility of their story is first and foremost as a story: to entertain and inspire.

It is inherently worthwhile for a little black kid to sit down and open up a comic book where someone who looks like them is being a good person, is helping people, is defending the weak. I agree that minority heroes shouldn’t just be white heroes who happen to have different skin colours. I think they need to reflect the realities of what it means to be black or Asian or Pakistani in white society is necessary and a superhero should do that and should have that inform how they interact with their powers. It doesn’t mean the whole genre needs to abandon what it fundamentally is or that those minority heroes should not do the things a superhero fundamentally do.

Ultimately, yeah these characters were created within a white context, but my point is fundamentally the same thing was created in non-white contexts as well throughout history.

Super Heroes are a HUMAN power fantasy Part 1

Master Post

#Osvaldo Oyola #Noah Berlatsky #Marvel #DC #DC Comics #Marvel Comics #Super Heroes #Superheroes #Wonder Woman #Robin Hood

12 notes · View notes

jenniferladybug · 4 years

Text

Essay Wars - it’s a doozy

Last night my friend got in a texting debate about the story structure and character developments of Star Wars (a majority of it Kylo Ren). Well, what started off as my vigorous texting writing turned into full-blown essay responses.

Alright, let’s get into how this actually happened.

First, I was so excited about The Rise of Skywalker Final Trailer and I began to sing praises for Kylo Ren/Bendemption. My friend did not like that...so I whipped out the big guns.

I began to send scattered texts about certain things, mostly pertaining to:

Kylo Ren was turned to the dark side before he was even born via Bloodline, where Leia describes a dark presence over her womb.

Someone must be impersonating Darth Vader when Kylo goes to the Vader mask for advice.

Leia and Han were emotionally neglectful/did not know how to raise their son in the right way, mixed with brainwashing lead to Kylo Ren.

The Jedi are not good for the galaxy (yes, yes I know, but see my explanation down below...if you last that long)

Kylo wants to let the past die and start fresh with a new ‘order’, leave behind the Sith, Jedi, First order etc.

I also rambled on about a few other things in separate texts, but that is the gist of it.

So, in response to my scattered texts I received this from my friend Sammy, and oh boy was I ready:

So, let’s start with the story of Ben. The dark side since before he was even born thing is interesting and the fact that he’s been influenced his entire life by it is something they should have made much more clear in the films. That’s actually one of the problems I have with this new expanded universe- it just seems like damage control for the movies. The Previous EU EXPANDED everything, giving backstory to the characters we know and understand, in addition to secondary characters. Hell, they even gave us new characters as well but they never negated or changed the meaning of the films which is the bread and butter of the franchise, so if this super important info is coming from the book I think that’s just silly. You really shouldn’t have to read the novel iteration to understand what the movie did a bad job of interpreting. But I digress, that is some crucial info…

The Vader mask scene and the theory that it’s someone else like Snoke who has been pretending to be Vader is interesting, and I buy that, but like…Kylo didn’t know Vader was redeemed? Did Luke, Leia, Han, Chewy, Lando, Akbar, Wedge, or like literally anybody else form the Rebellion forget to tell him that? Big yikes.

IMO, feeling “misunderstood and neglected by his parents” isn’t a valid excuse for him to kill his own dad and being ok with his mom getting bombed to hell. Idk, you can ask why it’s ok for us to forgive Vader through his redemption arc but I think comparing his experiences to Kylo’s is like comparing apples to oranges. Vader was a BAD guy, but he ended up doing the ultimate GOOD thing in the end, and then the prequels fleshed out how he became bad intangible way, which to be fair, Kylo doesn’t have. But still, this is why most fans don’t take him seriously.

About the Jedi not being good- I challenge your credentials. “For a thousand generations the Jedi knights have been the guardians of peace and justice for the Old Republic”, then they were hunted down and everything turned to shit. And both in this canon and the previous one, it’s wildly considered that the few thousand years preceded the events of the movies things were super peaceful all things considered when the Jedi were in charge…and the Sith traditionally only operates in agents of 2. So how come everything was so peaceful for a thousand generations when there were a million Jedi and 2 Sith…ying yang in this case is bollocks.

And if Kylo really wants to “Start fresh”, why’d he start by becoming Supreme Leader of like the Star Wars version of ISIS? This is something we’ll need to find out in this next movie. I agree, his motive is to dismantle the Jedi and Sith way and create something else entirely, but the second Rey says “nah” he goes back to how he was. It’s not looking good.

The George Lucas rhyme thing lets not forget he’s talking about Episode 1 which was arguably one of the worst Star Wars movies made and he ended it with “hopefully it’ll work” and then grimaces…IDK bud lmao. And I doubt back in 1977 he knew there was going to be an episode 9 because he didn’t even know what he just made was Episode 4! It definitely was never a 9 episode arc from the get-go. Now, I know for certain after the prequels he had another trilogy in mind, and when he sold the rights to Disney he did hand them his drafts and notes, but even Bob Iger, CEO of Disney, admitted in his new book, they didn’t follow those drafts AT ALL. LIKE NOTHING. And he said that George felt betrayed. This idea of a new trilogy is something that was created in 2012, but I suspect they have been making this up as they went. After this last movie, Disney scrambled to get JJ Abrams back and figure out how they were going to get everything back on track. Daisy Ridley herself said JJ wrote a story for each of the 3 new movies, but Rian ended up created his own completely. I think that alone shows that production for these movies has been inconsistent, I don’t buy this was all part of some 9 series plan with a definitive beginning, middle, and end from the get-go.

Not sure what Rey’s lineage is, we’ll find out for sure in this next movie. I read one theory that Palpatine created her sorta through the force like many people think he did with Anakin.

So that was what I was up against.

Let’s take a brief moment to appreciate this:

Okay now that that is done...great.

My turn!

Now, I wrote my response (copied below) at top speed in about an hour, so maybe some of the things I say start sounding rushed or not as fleshed out as they should be. But I cracked my knuckles and gave it a go:

I am the first one to advocate for a film to have the ability to ‘stand-alone’ in any particular universe, whether it be Marvel, DC, Hunger Games, and Star Wars. By introducing a backstory for Leia’s pregnancy and hers and Han’s marriage in ‘Bloodline’, LucasFilm is doing just that: giving a backstory. In both The Force Awakens and The Last Jedi, there is proof that Snoke is the one pulling the strings when it comes to young solo. In the first film, Leia is quoted saying to Han, “There’s still light in him I know it! No. It was Snoke. He seduced our son to the dark side”, and in the second film Luke is quoted as saying, “Snoke had already turned his heart”. It is made apparent that ‘Kylo Ren’ is the production of Snoke, and Ren suffers abuse both mental and physical from his master. Though this changes when Kylo finally becomes free of the shackles Snoke once had on him when Ren slices him in half. The look of shock and release on Ren’s face when he realizes what he’s done says it all. Who are we to judge someone who is freshly out of the control of their captor? By just watching the films it is clear that Kylo Ren is not fully in control of his actions and he is being manipulated consistently as shown by the quotes above. When having that manipulation in conjunction with the neglect of a parental figure, then you get the full-blown reality that is Kylo Ren.

Feeling “misunderstood and neglected by his parents” is a valid excuse for turning to the Darkside in the world of a fictional fairy tale. Keep in mind we are not in a reality where this is okay, yet the world in which Star Wars exists allows such things to be redeemable and explainable. Take for example when Padme knew about Anakin killing younglings; she wanted him to still come home because she ‘loved’ him. If he had turned back to the light at that moment she would have most likely accepted him back. It is a danger of the force. They are not dealing with everyday normal emotions; the force, as well as the genre of the franchise, creates a heightened sense of urgency which is apparent throughout the forty-plus years Star Wars has been around (hell, as long as any fairy tale has been around). When you point out that Vader did the ultimate good thing in the end, do you mean to save his son and push Palpatine down a duct? If so, then this would be his redemption which occurred in the last of the original trilogies. If you are to treat Kylo with the same rules as Vader, then we must give him a chance to ‘do the right thing’, something which the filmmakers have been steadily building his character-arc for. Vader did numbers ‘wrong’ things, some of them much worse than Kylo has done. But yet the audience still chose to respect him, even before the prequels which fleshed out the story of Anakin Skywalker.

Now, you may be correct in that Ben Solo knew of Vader’s redemption, and I misspoke, to which I am sorry. He, in fact, learned of his heritage when he was training with Luke at his academy when he received a letter from his mother. The contents of the letter are unknown, though it is assumed she told him of his heritage when he was in his late teens. This was only because one of her rivals she was campaigning against in the senate threatened to leak the knowledge to the public that Leia was the daughter of the infamous Darth Vader. Ben had no idea before-hand though, so once again we assume that this had some type of impact. Imagine finding out your grandfather was Hitler. Would that be fun? But, since we addressed the fact that external material should not need to be consumed in order for a film to make sense, then we should disregard any idea as to how Ben Solo came to learn of his heritage. It is not mentioned in the films, but it is a widely held belief by many in the fandom that if Kylo Ren knew of his grandfathers’ redemption then he merely took this as a lapse in judgment in his late years (especially since it is hinted to in the films that Ren is speaking to someone via the Vader mask). Perhaps said mask has been telling Ren lies in lieu of the true story of the redemption. But that is speculation. What is not speculation is the line Ren utters in The Force Awakens, “Forgive me. I feel it again... The pull to the light... Supreme Leader senses it. Show me again... The power of the darkness... And I'll let nothing stand in our way... Show me... Grandfather... and I will finish... what you started.” What we can tell from the film is that Ren is in a constant struggle to stay within the dark, and through his words, it is expressed how this warrants forgiveness. The second half of the statement is even more worrying in the fact that Ren says ‘show me again’, referencing a previous time this ‘Vader’ has shown him what the darkness entails. Will we find out in episode nine if there was an imposter (Palpatine?) feeding more lies and brainwashing to Kylo Ren? That means not only was he getting terrible treatment from Snoke, but from his ‘grandfather’ as well. Perhaps this is why in the final trailer for episode nine we see Rey and Ren destroying said helmet. Until the film comes out, this will still be a mystery.

In coming to why I believe the Jedi are bad, I side with Luke Skywalker on this one. As he says in The Last Jedi, “ At the height of their powers, they allowed Darth Sidious to rise, create the Empire, and wipe them out. It was a Jedi Master who was responsible for the training and creation of Darth Vader.” To that, Rey points out that it was also a Jedi who saved him. Which is true! Yet, the rules surrounding the Jedi order are such that allowed for Anakin to search elsewhere for support. True, he was very conflicted, but the Jedi are so extreme that they do not welcome outside opinions or thinking. You are either all light or you’re bad. There is no intermediary. That is why the answer is grey Jedi. I know those exist, and what needs to happen is a yin and yang between the light and the dark. Working together fosters acceptance and love within the galaxy. Even the symbol in the pool of the Jedi Temple in which Luke tucked himself away had a figure in a yin and yang pattern. “Powerful light and powerful dark...a balance”. Yet, any dark whatsoever that the Jedi see they stamp out.

When Anakin says, “If you’re not with me, then you’re against me”, Obi-wan responds with, “Only sith think in absolutes!”. Well, can you see the issue there? Obi-wan is also thinking in absolute. Using the word only further segmented and cast aside Anakin, by labeling him a lost cause. Such a similar thing happened with Kylo Ren and the incident with Luke at the Jedi Academy. The momentary lapse which Luke expressed to Rey was the tipping point. In Ren’s eyes, even his Master saw him beyond saving. And since everyone around him insists on thinking in absolute, then he must be bad according to them, right?

Slowly, Ren is beginning to realize there is another way, something not presently defined within the Star Wars universe. It is not Sith, it is not Jedi, it is not the First Order: it is the ‘new order’ which he proposes to Rey. Yet, he is not ready for redemption yet. The entire point of the scene was for Rey to realize that Kylo Ren cannot be saved by anyone but himself. This is a very powerful message and I am quite looking forward to seeing how his self-realization occurs in Episode Nine. Now, keep in mind that he had banked everything on Rey saying yes, and in his mind, she is “Still. Holding. ON!”, which she is, and he is right that it is holding her back. How can you expect someone from a family of yelling, angry people to get it right the first time? In fact, Adam Driver had to ask Rian Johnson if Kylo Ren had ever kissed a girl before. Kylo is not experienced in this ‘love’ world. He did not receive much love language from his absentee parents, so the only relationship he’s known for most of his teen and adult life is that of Snoke and General Hux. At that moment in which he wakes up to realize she is gone is one of abandonment and rejection. He thought he had found his match, the answer to his loneliness, and she snapped his lightsaber in two. He is basically throwing a grownup temper-tantrum, which is blatantly apparent in the standoff with Luke. When Kylo threatens everything, even ‘destroying’ Rey, Luke claims that everything Kylo says is “a lie”. It is clear in the last few moments of the film when Kylo is defeated and on his knees holding his father’s die that the audience begins to realize his anger was all a facade. In that shot, he is merely a lost and lonely boy realising the path he has chosen is wrong. The final force-bond between Kylo and Rey exhibits every one of those notions. There is no anger in his face, not very ‘destroy-ee’ of him, and he looks up with her with an almost longing. But when she sternly shuts the door on him, once again he is left alone, the die slowly fading from his gloved hand.

If that doesn’t sound like poetry then I don’t know what is! George Lucas was quoted saying in the behind the scenes of the prequels, “You see the echo of where it all is gonna go. It’s like poetry, sort of. They rhyme.” Similar themes and sequences occur within the franchise, and they have kept that alive at Disney Lucas Films, especially in regards to the parallels drawn between Anakin/Padme and Kylo/Rey. They even designed their respective costumes in a similar fashion. Kylo has his mother and father’s anger and stubbornness. They had a rough idea of where it was all going to go. And in regards to JJ Abrams and Rian Johnson, JJ Abrams was an executive producer on Episode 8 and had a say in the general outline of the plot. JJ had set up the relationship between Kylo and Rey in The Force Awakens, and Rian continued along that path. He followed the skeleton needed to get the plot from 7-9. But think about it, Disney would not allow Rian to just veer off the path completely. Yes he had some creative license but within parameters. Sometimes I don’t think people understand the workings of a large corporation with creative decisions. On a project like Star Wars there is always input from the higher-ups. In addition, JJ Abrams auditioned potential Kylo Ren actors with the script from Pride and Prejudice (Mr. Darcy of course). This is made clear in the writing decisions and parallels which have been made for that particular character.

Lastly, would you really want George Lucas at the helm of this new trilogy? People thought the prequels were terrible and Lucas went back and digitally altered the originals against the will of fans. He is not technically the best when it comes to scriptwriting (Exhibit A: “I hate sand, it gets everywhere!”) Also, Mark Hamill was interviewed in the early ’00s and said, "You know, when I first did this, it was four trilogies. 12 movies! And out on the desert, any time between setups...lots of free time. And George was talking about this whole thing. I said, 'Why are you starting with IV, V and VI? It's crazy.' [Imitating Lucas grumble,] 'It's the most commercial section of the movie.'” Yes, the first film was a stand-alone, since they had no idea they would receive any further funding. But then the immense success allowed for Lucas to develop the franchise further.

What I think people tend to forget is that Star Wars is a fairy tale, and it is not supposed to be about ‘a mass murder’ who is going to jail. It is supposed to be about redemption at its very heart. George Lucus had expressed that he intended Star Wars as a series for “twelve-year-olds”. This explains things like Jar Jar Binks and other bizarre choices he has made as a creator. Though this explains a lot of why most of the people who hate the franchise now are angry adults online who live in an overly politically correct world judging a fictional character who is in the middle of a character arc. As JJ Abrams had said in the director's commentary of The Force Awakens, “We looked at it like […] a fairy tale. What are the elements that you’re going to see that makes it this genre, this specific genre? […] You’re probably going to have a castle, and a prince and a princess, if you’re looking at a fairy tale. We wanted to give these fundamental, not cosmetic, but prerequisite elements.”

Okay, I’ve talked too much. I am going to end it there for now. Thank you for coming to my Ted Talk.

Haha hope that was entertaining and that sparked some thinking and inspiration. I know I let my keyboard run away from me and please excuse the odd typo from time to time. Let me know your thoughts.

I mean just look at that beautiful man.

Love you all!

#reylo #star wars #kylo ren #rey #long reads #in defense of kylo #ben solo #george lucas #bendemption

11 notes · View notes

neophix · 6 years

Text

Elsword PvP Stereotypes: 2nd Edition

Alright. It’s been a year and a half. Let’s do this again, sure.

Unlike last time, where people salting at me during the match contributed to a large portion of the character stereotype, I only have their gameplay to work off of this season. Mostly. Rage whispers have gone down significantly which honestly is a change that's good for everyone. {Nod nod.}

{Additional commentary by @demos-cloud will be in braces}, and my responses to her commentary will be italicized, since I’ve ah. Ranted to her about a lot of these before, and asked her to help proofread.

Elsword: Bullheaded, stubborn, and does not think very far ahead.

This is mostly thanks to the amount that they've built up Elsword's defensive options lately. The changes to Autoguard mean that Knight Emperor doesn't really have to worry even if he gets caught (I've had more games turned around thanks to that than I care to admit). Infinity Stoic is still a thing, not in the least helped by the large number of quick, stoic approaches and normals he has. Melee Elsword gameplay basically rewards LEEROY JENKINS. Rune Masters are surprisingly rare.

Aisha: Still Bullies.

This has always been the case. Though lately I've come to the realization that Aisha, and Void Princess' line in particular, usually stays out of PvP unless she has access to something dangerously close to hacking. Meditate+Trans slot cooldown drops are always popular, but Oz Sorcerer lives and dies depending on whether she can pretend-hack or not (looking at you, Angkor Millions and Shadow Body). Metamorphy's population likewise dropped drastically as soon as they nerfed the stoic on her >>X(Z). {Her damage output was also hit hard by the Impact Zone nerf in PvE.}

Rena: Slime.

There's been a lot of complaining about the changes to the NF system, though honestly it's probably better for PvP-health in the long term. Now, instead of basically being guaranteed to eat 3 cancelled Violent Attacks to the face in the middle of every single combo, you probably only have to worry about it happening once or twice per game. They're still really slippery, thanks in large part to physics bending over backwards around her and >>Z being so fast, though their PvP numbers have taken a drastic drop since the nerf.

Raven:

Basically only the oldest Raven mains are left, a corps of elite veterans who know their character and yours inside and- oh and I guess you have the bandwagon RH horde. {Man the bias is practically dripping out of your mouth here Ketsu.} The majority of my Raven matches are against players who I recognize on sight, though. The canon Raven has certainly been getting spoiled, comparatively speaking, though the fact that KoG nerfed M.Maximum Drive almost immediately is a good sign. RH is still probably the most consequence-free Raven at the moment; he doesn't really have to worry about taking combos because it's extremely likely he'll be able to mash a Spread out and revenge-catch you if there's even the tiniest delay or mistake.

{PvE is full of old, rich, Ravens as well. BMs/FBs especially are the oldest and most funded. Yeah they know their class in and out, but they’re also not above shelling out $200 to +11 that glorious Void weapon. VCs are dead.}

Eve: Nasod Bitch. Runs on money. {はい、はい。}

Eve on the whole is very confrontation-adverse, and all three of her classes avoid direct combat. Good thing for her, too; aside from the Exotic line Eve's combo game is so poor she can barely hold anyone in place on her own. All three Eves have very strong utilities kits which are supposed to come with a weak damage-per-hit ratio, but Eve players are already very strongly conditioned to spoil her rotten. Nobody's ever been accused of spending too little on her, after all. Codes 4v1 and Sariel both just dunk on melee-centric characters, and Ultimate has enough unsafe-cancels and core synergy that you'll be spending more time eating lasers than spears. {Like I’ve been saying for the past four years, Eve’s Core Release system was built for CN. Of course she has the best Core synergy out of all Eves.} Illusion Thorns' debuff field really should not trigger core. Raven's lingering skill effects (grenade fires and smoke clouds) have NEVER triggered his core, and those at least deal damage, but I guess even KoG isn't tired of spoiling Eve just yet. {Maybe it’s because Illusion Thorns’ debuff area only lasts a measly two seconds compared to Raven’s lingering AoEs (dead laugh).} Raven’s lingering AoEs also only last for a couple seconds, too, though. {oh.}

Chung: HERE I GO. {HERE I GO!!}

Hoo boy. Okay. After the absolute Chung dominance in the 1v1 tournament, there's been a significant rise in Chung PvP populations. Sure, Base Chung has Heavy Stance to mitigate being slow and getting caught, but these three basically never have to deal with such puny things as "consequences" and Heavy Stance itself has actually been vanishingly rare. {DC really should not have so many Heavy Stance/stoic opportunities, given that his whole backstory is based around being faster and thus, being less defensive. IP’s ridiculously high attack speed is abnormal and needs to die. Even back in S1 it was a pain to deal with…} Back Blast and Reload are core skills not because of utility or reload, but because they're such hard to deal with panic buttons when strung together. Cannonball management is a total farce. Super spoiled, getting amazing tools and mod skills with each update. A few significant differences between them:

Comet: Basically indestructible. Will not die. A rocket powered turtle who can strike you from anywhere in the map and always has an advantageous position. The new goddess of PvP, stripping Yama Raja of the title. You could just tell that a couple of the tournament finalists were screwing around and winning anyway, and that flagrant disregard for consequences has been adopted by the bandwagoners. {I feel like having one of the IP semifinalists intentionally handicap himself of the class’ best skills, fool around, and still manage a strong victory.. Really says a lot about the class’ current standing.}

Phantom: Homing Ruthless attacks for days. Mod Shooting Star caused a lot of passive ruthless to get stripped, but I guess there was enough of a Chung tantrum that they got it back on base Shooting Star AND in M.Burning Punisher. Could probably win a game blindfolded thanks to all the high-damage homing at his disposal. A non-berserk awakening is so rare you honestly think it's a glitch. {Remember when it was only like a 25% activation chance. lmao.}

Centurret: After a long and arduous process of moderately intelligent cockroaches bashing on keyboards tested every possible configuration, tactics have been finely reduced to "if your dog craps on enough lawns, someone is going to step in it." Instant-hit Grav Shots are far more than any character deserves, especially when they have practically no vertical limit, and whoever approved of this as an Siege mode option should be spaghettified.

Ara:

Lately, the number of Aras who fully depend on the X or ^X loop has gone down. Devi is still incredibly oppressive, able to basically slam their face on the skill bar whenever they're in trouble to turn it around with any one of their many, many incredible utility actives (with skill storage). Shakti populations have been on the rise in comparison, though as a Shakti main myself I can't really comment on any other trends without being... more biased than usual. {Dead in PvE, though very willing to shell out money. More-so than other Ara classes, I find (even Devis, yes!)} Apsaras generally rely way too much on Kite or Suppression and barely have two brain cells to rub together, having godawful combo maintenance outside of the aforementioned X loop, despite Ara's strong kit. {They changed how ZZXX works how else am I supposed to do fancy combos nowwwww} It feels like if they did have any more to work with they would've job changed to Devi by now.

Elesis:

Population is in decline, but still powerful. Empire Sword still has some of the most safe combo maintenance in the game, and it's exceedingly rare for her to make anything remotely resembling a mistake. {The fact that she has such a high DPS ratio in PvP really hurts, what gives.} INJECTION finally got the nerf it deserved and is starting to sound like a word again. Fire Wallsis is still horrifically oppressive if it goes off, however, and reduces many games against her to "play perfectly or die."

Add:

Doom Bringers are vanishingly rare. Dominators basically all spontaneously ceased to exist once Charged Impulsar got nerfed and they realized they'd actually have to try in PvP again. Paradox is, once again, the most popular PvP Add, and for some reason still has an infinite. Purple is the color of bullies, it turns out. {Death to purples.}

Lu: Almost as Leeroy Jenkins as Elsword, but not a large sample to work with.

If the dive that magnetically homes in on targets wasn't enough of a giveaway, Lu's ability to zero in on a target is still very high. Diangelion's switch-attacks have the same bizarre hitboxes and gravity as ever. Lu in general seems to be about throwing giant hitboxes around the map and hoping they hit something, and her combo game is so safe that there really isn't need for precision there, either. {If she can’t hit you with a command normal or a skill, she’ll lag you out with her FPS-killing abilities. Surprisingly not very high up on the whale list, and even lower on the whales-for-fashion list.}

Ciel mains still don't exist. {Nobu would be sad to hear this.}

Rose: Rich, but shallow.

You're basically not even a Rose main if you don't have an 11+, the same way you're basically not a Chung main if you can't get 4+ X-drops in a single launch. {I am apparently no longer a Rose/F. Gunner main. Okay.} Their gameplay shows no personality to speak of, and you'll be fighting the same kind of Rose tactics at Rank C that you will at Star. Despite being the only non-Chung in the 1v1 Finals, Minerva has actually seen something of a population decrease lately. I imagine a lot of players disliked the fact that the player got to finals by using a Freeze Grenade infinite.

{POs seem like one of the most funded Rose classes, despite being lowtier in both PvP and PvE. About 20% of them have an elitist complex, and another 40% only play her because “OMG MECHA WAIFU”. I’ve only encountered like two POs who acknowledge that she feels and plays nothing like her DFO counterpart, and the fact that I had to argue with a super stubborn NA forumer about this is flat-out stupid. Ah, also. TBs are dead now. Unsurprisingly.} PvP Rose is actually mostly TB thanks to her pseudo-meditate.

Ain: I was horribly, terribly, no-good very bad wrong about the prediction last time.

PvP Ain is as homogenous across all three paths as Rena: {はい、はい。} Base Ain normals are so strong that the only ones his other classes really use are dives. Otherwise, you can treat all Ains the same. Watch out for airdashes, stomps, Xes, and basically a full kit of backwards melee hitboxes (we got rid of that on the Polar Bear suit for a reason, right? Right??) which are all so strong that, even though the bug has been patched out, Schwert Platzen is still a core PvP skill for all Ains. Bluhen is very rare in PvP, due mostly to the fact that he doesn't have a dive combo. Richter basically plays "The floor is lava" the entire game. The stomp noise is as annoying and stuck in my head as Aisha's "HYA" voice clip now and is a standout among Ain's generally obnoxious sound design. {Maybe if KoG gave us more combo options my fellow Richters wouldn’t have to sink this low.}

his german is off but i appreciate the effort.

#Elsword #elsword pvp #Neophix is rambling again #long post

6 notes · View notes

thisiswhereikeepdcthings · 2 months

Text

AU where Jason comes back to Gotham and begins his plan to confront Batman and all that. Except after only like a week the Joker gets hit by a bus and then shot by a little old lady with a shotgun and dies.

Jason’s plan is now in shambles because the dramatic climax of his plan is no longer possible. But that’s fine. He’ll think of some other suitable alternative. Granted, it’s not quite the same if he uses some other villain. Making Batman choose doesn’t mean nearly as much when it’s not about the person who killed him.

And really, is he going to try and get Batman to kill Black Mask or something? Scarecrow? Red Hood is competent; he could do it himself so why bother.

So Jason lays low continues to build his criminal empire with astounding speed and efficiency. If only he could think of a good way to announce his return. Nothing he can think of is dramatic enough.

Meanwhile, the Bats are freaking out because who is this guy that’s taken over half of the Gotham underworld in like a month? He’s obviously trained, but they just can’t seem to get any information on who he is or where he came from. It is beyond frustrating.

After a few months Jason is frustrated that he just can’t seem to find any dramatic good way of making Batman prove himself. It has to be something big! Something magnificent!

During his weekly chat with Talia he complains about his problems and she suggests he come back for a visit. He argues that he can’t just leave, but she says if he has competent enough lieutenants it’d be fine. He spends the next three weeks making sure that everything will be fine if he leaves for a week. He will not have all of his hard work falling apart and going to waste due to incompetence. Absolutely not.

So then once his lieutenants are sufficiently prepared (and the rest of Gotham’s criminal element sufficiently cowed), he heads to Nanda Parbat, only to find Ra’s on the phone with Bruce, who is demanding to know if the Red Hood has any affiliation with the league.

Oh. Oh. He can give them affiliation.

A new plan begins to form.

He’s going to be the most affiliated he can be. Jason immediately goes to Talia with his newest plan: Overthrow Ra’s and takeover the league. Talia whips out her forty step outline for overthrowing Ra’s and tells Jason she’s so proud of him.

Jason has a new goal now, so he gets to work. He checks on things in Gotham, but everything seems to be fine and there haven’t been any unplanned explosions so it should be fine if he stays here for a bit.

Taking over Gotham really was good practice, as it turns out. Thanks to Talia’s plans and previous foundational efforts the takeover happens in no time.

Meanwhile the bats are still freaking out. Red Hood hasn’t been seen in three weeks, he may or may not have league of assassins connections, and even in his absence his goons seem to be managing things competently.

Back in Nanda Parbat, Jason and Talia finish their takeover. And now, finally, he’s ready to confront Batman.

He arrives in Gotham as the new head of the league. His arrival is loud, elaborate, and dramatic enough to fulfill his inner theater kid’s dreams.

Batman is speechless. And not his usual grunts instead of words, but actual surprised speechless. Jason is alive?!?!?!?

Jason was not expecting all the tears. And hugs. And mother henning. Goodness gracious, this was not part of the plan.

Bruce is obviously struggling with Jason’s revelation that he took over the league, but the newest little birdie seems almost relieved at that(?) and Dick and Alfred both seem strangely proud. Whatever. Even Bruce seems to be at least mostly ignoring that for now.

Then someone asks him if he knows Red Hood. Jason blinks. Says that yeah, he knows Red Hood. Everyone seems to ease at that. One mystery solved. Jason quickly realizes that most of them have no idea he is Red Hood. Cass seems to be the only exception but also appears amused and willing enough to not mention it.

Dramatic appearance complete, Jason now has a new goal: see how long he can keep the bats (minus Cass and potentially Alfred) in the dark about his crime boss identity.

He will bribe Cass as much as it takes to keep her on board with the causing chaos plan, but she seems eager enough. Favorite sibling status definitely unlocked. (The whole killing thing is fought over at great length and a truce of sorts is eventually made)

David Cain is never heard from again.

Damian shows up at some point.

At least one league member has suddenly found themselves as an HR rep for Gotham criminals? They’re still not quite sure how that happened.

#Jason takes over the league of assassins #because it’s the most dramatic option available #jason todd #red hood #theater kid Jason Todd #batfam #talia al ghul #batman #cassandra cain #bruce wayne #ra’s al ghul #league of assassins #Jason comes back au #what do you mean dc doesn’t stand for disregard canon

5K notes · View notes

batbusiness-schooldropout · 1 year

Text

I know nothing about Canon Krypton but I've just decided that by almost every scale there is, Clark is considered extremely attractive. On Earth

On Krypton he looks average, if not a little ugly

Lois: This man right here is the absolute pinnacle of the perfect form. Ask any earthling and they'll tell you that they'd gladly smash (except for Luthor, who will lie)

Some random Kryptonian: Are you kidding me? He looks like my hillbilly cousin. Pass

#dc #what do you mean dc doesn’t stand for disregard canon #superman #clark kent

246 notes · View notes

emeraldnebula · 6 years

Text

Thoughts on the comic book industry, Part 4

Having talked about how the comic book industry is still clinging to creative and marketing tactics that are at least 2½ decades out of date, there's really only one other place to go with this line of rambling. And in the age of social media, it's the most self-evident of all.

Not only is the comics industry stuck decades in the past, but it's hopelessly out of touch with reality, both creatively and politically.

It goes beyond being unwilling to look outside the box from a business standpoint. That's bad enough on its own, but it's a by-product of the creative side of the equation. Creatively, the major publishers are not only stubbornly devoted to outdated and stagnant methods from decades past, but they're stubbornly devoted to their own pet ideas at the exclusion of all else. It doesn't matter how unpopular their ideas are even from the beginning, it doesn't matter how poorly their pet directions sell, it doesn't matter how much the vast majority of fans object to those bad ideas. It's what the company wants, therefore it's inherently good and to hell with anything else. If the audience makes it clear they don't like the company's pet ideas, that's just all the more reason for the major publishers to cram it down the readers' throats. If the readers don't like where the major publishers are going with their products, the publishers aren't above bullying, insulting, and pressuring readers into caving in and supporting them regardless.

Now keep in mind, I'm not talking about the kind of fans who scream bloody murder over an old costume design being updated sans trunks, or who throw screaming hissy fits over creatively stale and burned out creative teams being replaced with fresh blood. I'm not talking about the kind of fans who cry havoc and protest when a franchise needs to be rebooted, or just needs some freshening up. Those are the kind of fans DC and Marvel actually WANTS, and largely caters to. I'm talking about DC and Marvel actively alienating, insulting, and belittling the vast majority of what once was/should be their readership – the fans who truly love the characters and object when the major publishers actively crap all over their characters, betray everything the characters stand for, pull event-gimmicks and stunts that are just purely hateful and serve no real creative purpose, and actively reject and disregard legitimate criticism. Little by little, DC and Marvel have whittled their readerships down to the tiny, selfish minority whose tastes mirror that of the companies. And in no small part has it contributed to the downfall of the industry.

This isn't a new thing by any means. Even as far back as the Iron Age, DC and Marvel were dismissive of anybody who objected to their pet directions. Batman fans for years had objected in the letter columns to Catwoman being retconned by Frank Miller as a hooker, as well as to Batman's increasing devolution from a heroic man of honor to a paranoid, hostile asshole. DC repeatedly disregarded those concerns, insisting that Miller's conception of the characters was canon and would not be changed. (And once Miller's go-to editor Bob Schreck took over as Bat-editor and brought Miller back to DC, everything Batman fans had been objecting to got ramped up a thousandfold.) The Superman books were levied with complaints about Lois Lane's abusive behavior toward Superman before and during their Iron Age marriage, as well as nonstop objections to Lois' '90s-era loverboy Jeb Friedman. DC blew off those complaints as sexist backlash to a "strong woman," even though comic book creators had similar complaints about the direction of the books. Even before "One More Day/Brand New Day" used a satanic pact to end Spider-Man's marriage to Mary Jane Watson, the '90s-era Clone Saga was conceived primarily to force Spider-Man back into bachelorhood, even if it meant claiming the Spidey people knew for years was a clone and the real deal was AWOL. The Green Lantern books respoded to fan concerns about the Parallax-possessed Hal Jordan being reduced to a one-note crazy bad guy...by doing just that and asking fans if they were pleased with the results. And so on.

Jump forward to the 2000s, and what do we have? Stephanie Brown/Spoiler seemingly tortured to death in the Batman books for no real reason, and the writer responsible, Bill Willingham, bragging about how much he alienated the fandom and how "golden" it is to turn your fandom against you. Marvel editor Tom Brevoort claiming on message forums that angering and alienating your readership translates to better sales, because a happy fandom makes your sales too "soft." (Never mind how blatantly untrue that is, especially since the '90s comic boom ended.) The aforementioned "One More Day/Brand New Day," where Joe Quesada and Dan Slott not only went out of their way to insult, bully, and disregard anyone who dared disagree with their vision, but also opened one of the "Brand New Day" issues with a character ordering the readers to "just shut the fuck up and give me your money!" Cry for Justice/Rise of Arsenal, where backlash to the ruination of Green Arrow and Black Canary's relationship was met with a sales pitch for a new Gail Simone Birds of Prey book and where complaints over the needless deaths in the story were dismissed with excuses that DC could have killed off even more Green Arrow characters. The current situation with Marvel's SJW-leaning comics, where anyone who voices objections to bad far-left propaganda and blatant mouthpiece characters is hit with every politically charged insult in the book. Or DC's "Rebirth," where anyone who voices disagreement with DC's current direction dismissed for being "fake fans" or being mocked for calling out how nonsensical and malicious the company's pet ideas are.

Do you see where this is going? Where it's been going for the last couple decades? Over and over again, the major publishers have made a point of ignoring legitimate criticism and feedback, disrespecting a readership they badly need, and insisting on pursuing what they personally want no matter how much it fails ansd how much it drives readers away. The idea that what they're doing is wrong, or at the very least misguided, is utterly foreign to them. If sales are plunging, they don't take it as a sign that they're screwing up or that what they're doing no longer works. They take it as a sign that they're shedding undesirables and that what's remaining are the true believers. They'd rather have total control and a shrinking minority of ass-kissers whose tastes mirror their own than to make the effort to appeal to a broad audience. And for what? Deservedly bad reputations. A dying industry for which history will ultimately blame them. Franchises that have been rendered toxic, or at the very least laughable.

And what's worse, the Big 2 absolutely refuse to learn from their mistakes, instead doubling and tripling down on them. If an idea is conceived and executed in bad faith and it deservedly fails, DC and Marvel don't recognize it as such. They view it as the readers being too stupid to know what's good for them and dial it up to 11. If they lose readers with their bad decisions, they view that lost readership and that lost money as being fair weather phonies. And if readers speak up as to why they're giving up on the books, if they're lucky and don't get insulted or mocked, they'll get a sales pitch for DC and Marvel's other wares. Again, this isn't a new thing. During "Knightfall," when a fan wrote in expressing how he felt Superman's death and Batman's impending spinal injury (a leaked plot point early on) felt like cheap gimmicks, what was the response he got? A sales pitch for The Flash, Legion of Super-Heroes, and DC's Vertigo line. No reassurance that Batman's temporary paralysis would be purely a test of character, no explantion that "Knightfall" was intended to be an examination of what it truly meant to be Batman, just a cheap attempt to cajole an unhappy fan into buying books he may not want.

The prevailing mindset of the last 26 years – if not longer – is twofold. On the one hand, there's the idea that if the characters' lives are made to be endlessly tragic and miserable, the readers can feel better about their own lives. In fact, a DC editor (Kevin Dooley, if I recall) said just that in response to a fan who wrote in about his dislike of the abritrary tragedy that had piled onto Aquaman leading into the Peter David revamp. On the other hand – and this one's arguably the more pervasive – there's the idea that if you make certain characters outright selfish assholes who always get their way no matter how unrealistic it is or how many people they have to stomp along the way, the reader will be inspired and empowered by them. Again, this shows just how out of touch the Big 2 are. Nobody saw anything inspiring about Spider-Man's deal with Mephisto. They saw it for the selfish, short-sighted, cowardly act it was. Lois Lane has been regarded as a hostile and unlikable character for decades, and her reputation only worsened when DC made her a "strong" (re: abusive) woman. Batman's degeneration into a insufferable, arrogant Marty Stu figure was harshly criticized even as far back as the late '80s, with people writing in begging for his heroism and humanity to be restored. And the meanspirited treatment of Superman, Green Arrow, Arsenal, the Green Lanterns, Aquaman, and others hasn't made the vast majority of fans feel better about themselves. It's angered them. It's made them feel betrayed. People go to art forms like comics, movies, TV, theatre, and radio drama for escape. They want to take a break from the bad stuff in their lives. They don't want to go from their regular troubles and see something even worse play out before them. Again, out of touch. The publishers are only playing to a tiny minority that's more or less in total agreement with them.

Now, you could argue that during the '90s, the big comic book boom more or less gave DC and Marvel the freedom they needed to pull off this kind of crap. Event-gimmicks and shock value being big sellers at the time and all. But 26 or more years later, what's the excuse? The industry is bleeding readers not just by locking itself decades in the past, but also by actively driving away anyone who isn't of the exact same tastes as the Big 2 or isn't a social media ass-kisser. Bad press doesn't equal big sales anymore. Aside from the odd milestone issue and maybe #1 issues of certain titles, people aren't buying anymore. And even at comic book conventions, talking to comic book creators past and present...they're fully aware of how far the industry has fallen, and they have their own horror stories to share about some of the bad decisions that have led to this point. But those who are still in the industry have to go along with those bad decisions simply because they've got to pay the bills. And those who aren't so active in the industry know full well that it's unwilling to change for the better.

What makes it even worse is that beyond the creative stagnation and selfishness, there's also a political bent to the way the industry carries itself. In the age of bad feminist/SJW/PC politics, comics have swung very hard in that direction, with Marvel going whole-hog into it. Many of the more prominent creators are very openly far-left, and very active in the social media mob mentality. Some, like Mark Waid, have been very open about running anybody – creator or fan – out of comics if their political leanings aren't far-left. Again, this is an industry that's wildly out of touch with reality. Not everybody shares the same political beliefs. Not everyone who's right-leaning or a centrist (my own stance) is a monster. Not every far-left talking point or goal is a good or even practical thing. Art – a even commercial form like comics – as with all things, NEEDS differing viewpoints, needs differences of opinion, needs all walks of life to be full-bodied and valid. Nope, the current comics industry wants a hive mind in all respects, politically aligned in one direction and mindlessly cheerleading whatever it is the Big 2 decide they want.

None of this is remotely viable. Aside from the major publishers going out of their way to do stuff they know the vast majority of people do not want at all, how do they expect to sustain themselves on an audience that's purely of their preferred political stance? Especially when, as social media and even the behavior of some comic book pros has shown, the far-left is just as extremist and reprehensible as the far-right? (Aside from admitting to leading purges against creators who aren't far-left, Waid also recently violated anti-trust laws to shut down an indie comic called Jawbreakers simply because its creator disagrees with Waid's/the comics industry's politics.) Speaking from personal experience, it gets really tiresome listening to comics creators you like endlessly bitching and moaning about anything even slightly center-of-left, or mindlessly spouting anti-Trump propaganda regardless of whether or not it's true. I as a fan don't like being talked down to, and I as a person don't like anyone trying to bully me into converting to their personal politics. Most people, when they read a comic, listen to music, or watch movies, TV, or plays, just want to be entertained for a little while. If you keep hammering away with bad far-left bullshit and getting mad when people don't just fall in line at your say-so? You're out of touch. You're ignoring the reality of your audience, and of day-to-day life in general. And you're alienating fans and/or potential fans in that way as well.

"But," you say, "if the Big 2 are this far gone, why not just support other publishers? Surely there's other stuff out there to devote your time to!" And that is true to a degree...but with the decline of the comics industry has also come a major atrophy of what's available out there, and how the distribution monopoly has limited the playing field in favor of the Big 2. And this will be where we go next.

1 note · View note

screechthemighty · 6 years

Text

Random Thinky Thoughts Post About the Concept of “Bringing Balance to the Force”

Both the Jedi and the Sith need to go in order for there to be Balance To The Force. Allow me to explain.

The concept of “bringing balance to the Force” has been kind of ill-defined throughout the history of Star Wars. Like, that’s supposed to be the thing Anakin (or Luke, depending on your textual reading) is supposed to do, and the implication at the end of Return of the Jedi is that the task was accomplished because Sideous was finally thrown down an elevator shaft. But the actual concept of what balance means was never really defined. The most commonly accepted belief is that it’s about Light vs Dark users in terms of numbers, in which case the Jedi are massive hypocrites who didn’t realize that bringing balance would mean culling their own numbers. But I don’t think it’s about numbers. I think it’s more about power...specifically, how that power is used and what it’s used in service of.

There was a loose, not very well followed up on plot line across the prequels (especially in Ep. II) about the Jedi Order beginning to rot from the inside out. There were blind spots in their perceptions and connection to the Force. This was kind of low-key explained away by being due to Palpatine/Sideous’s influence and the reason why he was able to sneak in and take over the galaxy without the Jedi realizing he was there and stopping him. While I can definitely see Sideous exploiting that blindness, I think it actually points to something more significant--the Jedi are no longer serving the Force, or at least, they’re not doing it as well as they should. They make lip service to that idea, sure, but think about what we see of the Jedi in the prequels:

They possess a huge amount of political clout. What’s especially significant about this is that they often use that clout in service of a specific governmental body, the Republic.

In fact, the relationship between the Republic and the Jedi is so intertwined that it’s kind of ridiculous. Imagine if the Vatican were stationed out of DC, if St. Peter’s Basilica were paid for with taxpayer dollars, and if the Pope periodically dropped into like, smaller countries and was like “so the President wants things to be this way and we agree with him, so, do it.” That’s basically what the Jedi are like to the rest of the Galaxy.

They also serve as military leaders in a prolonged conflict which, granted, involved at least one Sith Lord that they knew of, but that doesn’t change the fact that they were serving as military leaders in a conflict between two governmental systems. The Jedi, at most, should’ve focused their efforts on going after Dooku and then stayed the hell out of it. But as we’ve established, the Jedi have an obvious vested interest in the wishes of the Republic, so they fight for the Republic.

In doing so, they encounter several moral blind spots, including the fact that they were literally leading an army of enslaved child soldiers to their deaths, which I’m still pissed about and it’s been like, twelve years.

The narrative always presents the Republic as unequivocally good, just being corrupted by an individual evil entity, so this we can largely chalk up on a meta level to George Lucas having no sense of nuance or subtly and expecting us to just go “Republic = good, Will of Force = good, therefore Republic = Will of Force.” But that doesn’t make a ton of sense, and if we disregard it on the sense of being illogical and not at all what the real world (or, hell, even what the narrative presents of the Republic) is like, what we’re left with is what should be a religious organization serving as a governmental agent, blind to their own power because they’ve deluded themselves into thinking that they’re servants of an entity that they have actually abandoned. They have grown bloated and corrupt on their own power as a result.

Now, keep in mind, the Sith aren’t any better. They canonically use the Force solely to further their own power. It’s in the Sith Code, it’s in the oft-broken “only two” rule (fewer Sith means greater consolidation of power), it’s in the fact that they use the Force to the ends of necromancy and galactic domination. The big difference here is that they, at least, are honest about it.

Therefore, as of the Prequels, the two big factions involved with the Force are a) the faction that uses the Force in service of a governmental body that grants them power, and b) the faction that openly uses the Force to attain their own goals and for no other reason. This is where the lack of balance comes in, because the Force is not being served by anyone involved. If Anakin was able to, for however short a time, achieve balance in Return of the Jedi, he only did so because the Jedi were dead and the last major player using the Force was a Sith Lord who openly uses his connection to the Force to subjugate everyone. Anakin’s own death left Luke the only one standing--Luke, who, though he declares himself a Jedi, is not affiliated with the Jedi, never completed his Jedi training, and uses his abilities not for his own power, but for the protection of others and the defeat of the Empire.

Luke is not in it for power. He is in it to protect other people and fight space fascists. That, if you view the Force as a benevolent entity, would seem to be more in line with the will of the Force than what the Jedi were ever doing. Thus, balance was brought to the Force, for however short a time it lasted.

But the problem becomes, can we reconstruct the Jedi without bringing back the desire for power innate in it? If you are trying to construct the Jedi solely as they were, I don’t think you can. They would, inevitably, become a governmental arm again and serve the Republic--which, as we’ve established, does not always mean serving the Force, which is the important thing here. I think you would have to create an organization more like what we see of Guardians of the Whills in Rogue One--a religious group not opposed to fighting injustice, but operating solely in service to the Force. The Guardians of the Whills never served the Republic; they served the Force. I don’t think Chirrut even really talks about the Jedi much (though it’s been a while since I’ve watched Rogue One so I might be mistaken). He definitely talks about the Force, though.

If the Jedi were more like Chirrut/the Whills, there might be something worth saving here. As it is, they weren’t, and bringing them back as anything different would be extremely difficult. Kylo Ren and Snoke are bringing the Force out of alignment by using it to serve their own ends and power, this is true, but bringing back the Jedi would only make it worse. They would eventually do what they did before: grow fat on their power and serve entities outside the will of the Force. The Force would be out of alignment again for completely different reasons.

So, basically, let the Jedi die along with everything else, be Chirrut Imwe, serve the Force. There’s your balance.

ETA: For the record, I leave Leia out of the conversation because she has never associated with the Jedi or anything like that and has only served as a political and military figure. She is super Force sensitive and important as hell, I just don’t think she has any interest in serving the Force or using it the way Luke or Chirrut do.

#this has been a post #I'm sure this has already been said but I want to say it anyway

2 notes · View notes