Okay guys, for writing/general reference, a bit about what a ‘blacksmith’ is and isn’t:
A blacksmith is a generalist, a person who uses tools and fire to work iron. Some blacksmiths work more specifically, so you get, say, an architectural blacksmith, who focuses more or less exclusively on things like gates, rails, fences, or an artist blacksmith, who makes wacky sculptures or what have you. These days, though, that’s a pretty blurry line. ‘Blacksmith’ is a pretty damn broad term, but it’s nowhere near broad enough to cover everything encompassed in ‘metalworker’, which is how I often see it used. There are a LOT of different skills for working metal, and no one knows them all. Some other terms:
A farrier shoes horses. They may make the shoes, or they may buy them and then size them, but they actually do the shoeing. Unless the blacksmith is also a farrier, they don’t know shit about horses’ hooves and are not qualified to deal with them and probably don’t want to.
A blacksmith works IRON (or steel), usually almost exclusively. They might work with bronze or do a bit of brazing, but those are really separate skillsets. If you work, say, tin and/or pewter, you are in fact a whitesmith. You could also be a silversmith or a coppersmith, and so on.
Knifemakers and swordsmiths have their own highly specialized and fairly complex specialties, and usually a blacksmith wouldn’t mess with that unless they want to pick up a new skillset or if they’re really the only game going for a long way around. By the same token, a swordsmith might never have learned the more general blacksmithing skills. They’re not the same thing is what I’m trying to say here. Likewise armorers. There’s overlap but it’s not the same thing.
If you make metal items via molds and casting, you work at a foundry and are a foundryman.
Look, when metalworkers and individual shops and masters were the height of industry, this shit got REALLY specific. There were people who spent their whole lives making pins. Just pins. Foundries specialized and made only bells, only cannon, only cauldrons, etc. This is scratching the surface, I just wanted to make the point that ‘blacksmith’ is not the same thing as ‘magical muscly person who knows how to do everything related to metal’.
It hasn’t been too obvious here on tumblr, but those who follow me on ig will know that I’ve been obsessed with this AU for months. So! I love the movie When Marnie was there, and while I was watching it for the nth time I thought “Hey, a victuuri AU would be nice!”, so I have like a ton of sketches about this, and I finally drew something “serious” lol. (*Spoiler*: I’llchangethefactthatMarniewastheprotagonist’sgrandmaforthisAUtho, cough)
i really hope this fanbase doesn’t demonize allura if there is some dark past of the old paladins that she isn’t telling them about because, you know what, I wouldn’t have told them either. imagine knowing that the original paladins who were “linked together by the ear” could be split apart by something so utterly disgusting that those paladins should have been fighting against. imagine knowing how those paladins that were so close were ripped apart and actually aimed to kill the other. do you know how terrifying that would be to know? the idea that these people that you’ve fought with could become your enemy at any given moment?
knowing that zarkon, the figurehead of the destruction and enslavement of hundreds, probably thousands, of alien species, was the black paladin is already bad enough. i would have kept it a secret too if i were in her position.
I’ve gotten a question about whether the process of plotting a single book is the same as the process of writing a series. The answer is: yes, but no. They’re similar in many areas, but there are some differences.
1. In the first book you’ll want to introduce the main conflict first, and then a smaller, less important conflict a little later in. The smaller conflict will be resolved by the end of the book; the larger conflict, which is the main conflict of the series, will not. As an example, take the Harry Potter series (I use it because it’s well-known and won’t take too much explaining). In The Philosopher’s Stone, the first couple of chapters are about Harry and who he is, how he ended up with the Dursleys, what happened to his parents – these chapters accomplish backstory by introducing Harry and his family situation, and introduce the main conflict by telling of the death of Harry’s parents, and by Dumbledore expressing uncertainty about how defeated Voldemort really is. Then, a few chapters in, after being admitted into Hogwarts, Harry finds out that someone is trying to steal the Philosopher’s Stone – the book’s short term conflict.
2. Each short-term conflict should move the long-term conflict closer to a resolution. For example, at the end of Philosopher’s Stone, the stone is safe (the short-term conflict resolved), but it’s been discovered that Voldemort is still alive and is still trying to gain power – the stakes of the long-term conflict are raised. At the end of Chamber of Secrets, the diary is destroyed, but we have some of Voldemort’s backstory, and it seems that Voldemort is gaining power. At the end of Prisoner of Azkaban, Wormtail is introduced – this seems to have nothing to do with the main conflict, but it’s important, because it brings some of Harry’s parentage back to him (although it’s secondhand, only stories of his parents), and because Wormtail turns out to be Voldemort’s right-hand man. At the end of Goblet of Fire, Voldemort regains his body, and at this point you could argue that the long-term conflict is about halfway through its rising action; at the end of Order of the Phoenix, Harry finds out that he must kill Voldemort or be killed by him, and that only he can defeat Voldemort; at the end of Half-Blood Prince, Dumbledore (the one person Voldemort was said to truly fear) is killed, Snape’s loyalty is in major question, and Hogwarts has been overtaken – Harry decides to continue Dumbledore’s work in looking for the Horcruxes. Finally, at the end of Deathly Hallows, Voldemort is defeated and a lot of the smaller loose ends (smaller-scale antagonists like Bellatrix LeStrange and Lucius Malfoy) are taken care of. Over the course of seven books, the long-term conflict – Voldemort trying to return to power and create a society that pampers purebloods and tramples poor wizards – has been resolved.
Basically, draw a circle on a piece of paper and put your main conflict in that circle. Then draw smaller circles stemming from that bigger circle and write your short-term conflicts in those. From there continue – subplots can be drawn stemming from your short-term conflicts. (If you don’t know how to create subplots, this post may help – in it I describe the same process of mapping out possible sub-conflicts to your main conflict, but probably describe a little better.) If you don’t know what your short-term conflicts are yet, then think of your long-term conflict as a straight line of rope – then ask yourself how you can knot up that rope. What processes do your protagonists have to go through to get to a solution, and how can your antagonists gum up the works? For example, in the Harry Potter series, the long-term conflict is that Harry has to defeat Voldemort. What gets in the way of that? I can name a few things, from various places in the books: Minister Fudge refusing to believe him when Voldemort comes back after the events of Goblet of Fire, having so much difficulty finding and destroying all the Horcruxes in Deathly Hallows, Dolores Umbridge preaching that Voldemort is not alive when in fact he is, and is growing stronger. (There are a million possibilities for your story’s short-term conflicts, because depending on your characters’ dispositions, they could cause a few themselves – for example, one of your characters could feel they have something to prove and end up getting themselves in trouble, and the plot of an entire book could be finding and saving that character before time runs out.)