especially narratively

I pray we all find jobs after graduation.

Between volunteering, interning, working full time, going to school full time…these 4 years have flown by so fast. I know i’m not the only one with the same story, but with May literally around the corner I can’t help but begin to get nervous. We’ve all heard the post-graduation job search stories, I pray we don’t become part of that narrative.  Especially those of us in the social sciences…it’ll be hard but I hope luck favors us all.


My top 10 favorite Skater Family images in no particular order

because the official illustrations spoil us so much :’)

Okay so we all know that there’s no way there’s no way Anakin Skywalker could have had a Y chromosome because half his genetic code is propped up by midichlorians and bullshit, but consider now that he had twins.

Consider that Owen and Beru had no way of knowing that Anakin didn’t know anything about his children, because he’s got them space wizard powers don’t he? Consider that when Obi-Wan handed over a tiny child with a little patch of blonde hair and a big destiny, he probably neglected to mention the child had a sister. Consider that, hey, if Vader’s looking for a girl then I suppose it’s not too bad if she wants to cut her hair short. If she wants to wear boy’s clothing. If she wants to change her name.

What I’m saying is, trans dude Luke Skywalker, people.


you can’t believe every story you’re told

not even the ones you tell yourself

anonymous asked:

Do you ever feel like there's a conflict with modern science and polytheism? Like that it's impossible to hold a polytheistic belief system in light of our knowledge of the world?

Nah, science and religion are simply two different languages used to explain the same phenomenon. The Ancient Hellenes believed in science themselves, observing and measuring the world around them and attempting to make sense of our place in the universe. This hasn’t changed. Matters of the physical universe and the spiritual universe do not necessarily conflict with one another, unless you let them.

For example, I believe that the gods created the universe, via the Big Bang, that resulted in the formation of every structure, every star, every planet that has ever existed. Our world formed out of a messy cloud of atoms that was pulled together by nuclear forces, electromagnetism, and gravity. Sounds an awful lot like the primordial deity Khaos from which the earth (Gaia) eventually sprang. I see no problem with overlaying the two narratives, especially as a scientist myself.

To quote the netflix show Sense8: “Science does not preclude my faith. For me, science is another language we use to talk about the same miracles faith talks about.”

The Destiel of It All: Part I

Briefly before We Begin

Hello. I’m new. I’ve not been in this fandom for very long, but I’ve loved Supernatural for longer. I’ve now read some meta and have found it so uplifting and enjoyable to read through thoughts that reflect my own so perfectly that I felt inspired to begin putting my own impressions into actual words and sharing them with you all. Being in this fandom is like stepping out of the cold and into a warm, lovely, welcoming room of kindred spirits - all kinds of wonderful - so I do apologise for the repetition I’m undoubtedly going to bring to the table, but hopefully I may bring some fresh angles as well. 

Part I of, well, I honestly have no idea.

That said - let’s start.

Romance or Bromance?

The core premise of a romantic coupling, the idea that makes the Love Story so powerful, is two people coming together to open each other’s eyes to what they really need, rather than what they think they want. It should be said that the bromantic coupling is also rooted in this idea: the completion of an emotional puzzle, where the character traits of the one help evolve and, ultimately, unless it’s a tragedy, better the other. However, I will argue my point in the following posts that the relationship between Dean and Castiel is, and always has been, romantic. Not only because of how the showrunners have chosen to write these characters’ dialogue, or because of the blatant use of romantic subtext, evident in how they’ve set up the shots and how the actors act out the scenes and how those scenes are then edited (more on all of that later), but because of how the showrunners have chosen to angle these characters’ joint journey of self-discovery.

Here’s what I mean: in many an example of the romantic narrative, two Opposites will argue and refuse to see eye-to-eye, but unavoidably they will learn from the lessons the other is teaching. This growth is what finally allows them to see past what they’ve always thought they wanted (the conscious external motivation for their journey) to what they really need (the subconscious internal goal of that journey), which is right in front of them: in the case of a romantic narrative this is their other half. Pairing up with their other half and getting what they need, in a well-written story, will usually result in the characters also being able to attain what they truly want, which is typically a variation of the external motivation they’ve been striving towards all along.

For example: In the romantic comedy Leap Year, the protagonist ANNA has one main desire, which is to marry her boyfriend, but she also wants to gain access to a prestigious apartment building in central Boston, which is made easier by the fact that she and her guy Friday are a successful couple, and they’ve both wanted to live in that particular building for a long time: an internal goal (marriage) going hand in hand with an external goal (apartment).

When Anna goes to Ireland to surprise her boyfriend by proposing to him (since he’s seriously dragging his feet), bad weather leaves her stranded and at the mercy of Irishman DECLAN, who runs the small hotel she finds refuge in. Anna and Declan clash immediately, but as Anna needs someone to get her to Dublin, and Declan needs cash to pay off the debts on the hotel, their journeys intertwine. A battle of wills ensues as they go on the road and both clamour for control of the situation, questioning the other’s behaviour, challenging one another and, ultimately, growing to understand each other and lend each other support and encouragement. By the end of their shared journey, their joint external motivation: Dublin or bust, will lead them to call out truths about each other that has them see new truths in themselves, ending in them fulfilling their inner goals: Declan makes peace with his past and Anna let’s go of her expertly planned future. Their reward for learning their lessons and daring to evolve: sharing true love and finding happiness together.

Why am I outlining the plot of this romcom? Because this romantic structure is so applicable to the interlinked character journeys of Dean and Cas - to the point where it’s such an integral part to their narrative - that I cannot imagine it’s not used with every intent and purpose. I would go so far as to say that Dean and Cas being the central love story is very much canon, and have so been since Castiel’s epic entrance into the series, because visual and verbal subtext is every bit as important as the superficially stated - I’d argue it’s more important - to the intricate narrative of this show. When it comes to why the showrunners would need to, rather than outright choose to, keep this love story in subtext is something I’ll (also) discuss further on, so back to the topic at hand: the romance.

Let’s begin with the two most vital ingredients for any narrative, but especially for the romantic one - The Characters.

Keep reading

I’ve re-watched Storm In The Room a bunch of times already and I will probably do so a lot more for the rest of my existence but I just wanted to write down my feelings on how it highlights once again one of my favorite things in Steven Universe’s storytelling: patience. 

As creators, it’s always difficult to regulate how you show information to your audience. You know a lot more than they do about your story and you’re most likely eager to tell them everything, so choosing how to present it and when is very important for the flow of the narrative as well as to generate whatever effects you’re looking for in your audience. I always looked up to Steven Universe because it’s one of the most patient shows I’ve ever seen, when it comes to exposition and narrative flow, especially for a kids’ show. It’s not slow, because the plot moves perfectly and information is released at all times, but it’s done in such small amounts that, when you reach an important point, you realize how much you needed to know to get there and how much you’ve already learned without even noticing. That shows great respect to an audience, from those who create, and great trust in the show, from those who distribute; especially when we live surrounded by content that is incredibly fast-paced and immediate, and even more so in kids’ shows (this is why I’m upset by irregular releases and how in some countries it’s aired out of order, that’s disrespectful toward the show and the audience, but that’s another matter). 

Steven Universe uses this patience with clear narrative intentions. For example, I’ve always found brilliant how Garnet was introduced as an individual character first (and for 51 episodes, at that) and an experience of Ruby’s and Sapphire’s love second, so people (especially kids, the true audience of this) get to know their love before they know them individually, before any sort of prejudice they might be carrying could influence their perspective. And by the time that arrives, denying their love would be denying Garnet’s existence, and who would dare do that? 

But the reason why I end up praising this again now is because this show is, ultimately, a coming of age story. It’s Steven’s story. That’s why the balance between human issues and gem issues is so important, that’s why every episode adds something. One of the issues I come across in storytelling (especially for kids) when a parent figure is missing is the simplification of the relationship that character has with the idea of the parent, especially when the parent/s are regarded as heroes by whoever is around the character. Steven’s relationship with Rose is never simplified and it’s detailed in breadcrumbs of information throughout the show, since the very beginning. When I imagined an episode like this back in season 1, I would have never known it would advance to such emotional complexity and moral dilemmas, but it all resulted from the sum of parts that where carefully placed in our way. I saw from afar the fandom itself going from seeing Rose as a distant and mysterious figure to intense moral arguments on what she had done and what point in the good/evil spectrum she was on. Because not only we learn things at Steven’s pace, we see how things affect him directly, not in a detached manner but in a close perspective. This is also influenced by the fact that Steven is a main character which people really like in general, which is something that doesn’t happen as often as it should. A lot of writers struggle when creating lead characters, they tend to end up with bland or simplified characters people aren’t as interested to read as the flamboyant side kick or the cool mysterious partner. Steven’s character development, the treatment of him as a complex individual and the way in which we see information as it’s presented to him, whether he interprets it the way we do at the time or not, is a winning combination. It allows us to be more than observers, to get involved

That is storytelling at its finest, that transformation of people’s perspectives, the moment in which you question what you thought and wonder and ask questions and don’t stand still. When you’re not just entertained but you’re actively participating in what you’re witnessing. And this would have not happened if we had known all this in seasons 1 or 2. If Steven had known from seasons 1 or 2. This crew is patient because it trusts its show and its audience and it has a handle on information that I admire as a creator and as a part of the audience. Their patience allows this level of complexity with an organic flow in narrative, taking subjects as heavy as war, political turmoil, social rights, equality, grief, identity and love and breaking them down to small pieces, which add up to a very complex scenario and pushes you to question your perspective and analyse everything you thought you knew or learn it for the first time. I just admire this show so much. 


reblogged your post and added:

I’d rather discuss what you think of my argument.

Then I hope you don’t mind me putting this in an extra post, as the original thread is getting quite long. 

I’m copying/posting your last reply here:

I don’t think it’s a contradiction though. I think it’s a miscommunication, stemming mostly from privilege. The disconnect in this argument is over what, exactly, is problematic.

Fandom has always imagined itself as a place of progressive values - a place where (predominately) women can explore their own sexuality and recreate community in a way that isn’t hostile to them, as a lot of the real world is. But this world we’ve created still has all of the prejudices that each member was brought up with - there’s no way that it couldn’t, firstly because many of our prejudices are invisible to us, and secondly because a lot of fandom works were created specifically to remix that already-existing culture: fan fiction is a mirror that we bend to find stories that include ourselves.

I think that the expression “fandom has always imagined itself” is a bit of a generalisation that does not hold up to close scrutiny: fandom is extremely diverse, and I don’t necessarily think that everyone who participates in it - or even the majority of people who participate in it - frame their contribution in these terms, or see it in that light. 

So while such a narrative exists, especially when it comes to the defense and representation of fandom in media, I wouldn’t agree that this idea of “progressiveness” is at the center of fandom for a majority of fans - at least not for those who never engage on a meta level. People often politicize fandom, but I’d argue that fandom, as such, is personal rather than political.

I absolutely agree wtih you that fandom content reflects our perception of the world, and all of our biases. But for me, that’s pretty much a given, and I’d like to add that the same applies to every kind of art and literature: whether we try to avoid it or not, everthing that we create is a reflection of our environment (geographical, historical, political), our personality, our prejudices and biases, our personal issues. 

And since it’s squeezed through what could arguably be called a feminist lens (because it positions female sexuality and self-exploration at its center), we fool ourselves into thinking that all the bad stuff - the parts of the world we were so alienated by that we were compelled to fix them - all that ugliness, we think it all gets left on the other side of the glass.

I don’t think that is the case, actually. At least I can’t confirm that from my own perspective and experiences. Very few people that I’ve spoken to - very few people who I argue with - would claim that fanworks are necessarily “better” or “less problematic” than the sources they derive from. Such a statment, I think, would be difficult to uphold when one takes a closer look at the average fanwork, the 90% between “My Immortal” and your Personal Favorite. 

I think that there might be a bit of confusion - or disagreement - about the nature and purpose of fanworks. In my understanding, fanworks are a form of wish-fulfillment and self-empowerment for those who create it. Fanworks can be progressive, sure, and they can be political, but I see that as side effect rather than a primary purpose. First and foremost, fanworks are hedonistic. They are the self-expression of individuals, the purely self-indulgent outlet for personal creativity. 

Of course, I have no idea what goes on in the mind of any given fan creator or writer. But speaking from my own perspective, when I write fanfiction, I write things for my own, personal enjoyment, for my own, personal amusement, or, if I wanted to be flippant: Because I can. Nothing inherently progressive about that. 

I’m saying “we” not just as a fan, but as a demographically representative one. Fandom is majority straight, white, and female - I’m two of those things, and can pass for the third. The reason I called this the White Feminism of discourse is because that’s where I think it comes from: a centering of a certain sort of narrative and victimhood to the exclusion of all others. Not necessarily out of maliciousness, but because a large proportion of fans don’t see the persistently racist problems in fandom - because it doesn’t affect them. Because they’ve never experienced racism personally, and are blind to the way they (we) perpetuate the microaggressions or outright racism that literally every fan of color has experienced in fandom. It’s a language we can’t hear unless we really, really listen.

Fandom is mostly white and female, though not necessarily straight, but that’s another matter. 

I think we need to make a distinction here, and that’s between fandom as a space for individuals, and the idea of fandom as it is currently presented in media by pro-fandom voices, which indeed often paints fandom as a beacon of progressiveness and female empowerment. 

When it comes to the individual fan and their contribution to fandom … I hate to say it, but there is no reason why any given fan should priotitize anything but their own, selfish enjoyment. I’m not in fandom to contribute to the joy and happiness of other people. I’m here for my own. 

Creating art of fiction is always a selfish act. No writer writes something they don’t want to write (unless they’re paid for it, or course), no artist paints something that they don’t want to paint. That’s how we create: it’s our personal, self-indulgent vision that we turn into something that other people might enjoy. Or not enjoy, whatever the case may be. 

The argument that I often hear is “if your personal enjoyment comes at the price of other people’s hurt feelings, it’s oppressive and immoral”, but that only applies when I actually force people to consume the product of my imagination. But as long as they have the freedom of choice, why should their feelings take precedence over mine? 

Especially, and I feel that this is an important point that doesn’t get stressed often enough, when I don’t even know who these people are? We’re on the internet. I have no idea whether the person I’m dealing with is actually who they claim to be. I have no idea what their life looks like. I have no idea whether they were actually “triggered” by something (I’m using quotation marks because the way the word is used here on tumblr, it can mean anything, from mild annoyance to great anxiety) or are just striving strive for power and control. 

I can totally get where the people who write this sort of positivity posts about fandom are coming from, and I can get why it seems like these are attacks out of left field. But when you (and not meaning you specifically, OP - all of us) claim essentially that all media/fandom is good, and all ways of consuming media/fan fiction are good, that ignores the way that media/fandom continues to be a really hostile and ugly place for a lot of people. You may mean, “There is no bad way to explore your sexuality,” but it can sound like you really mean “Even if it includes explicit, unqualified racism.”

But who says that media/fandom has to be “good”? Who made that rule when I wasn’t looking? When I “joined” fandom, I never agreed to limit my own, personal enjoyment to what minorities find acceptable. And while I get that some people think they’re entitled to that - that it should be my goal as a “decent person” to make them feel included, safe, welcome, and cared for - that’s not what I’m here for. 

You may find this a controversial statement, but actually, it shouldn’t be controversial at all. I get that some people would like me to sign a metaphorical contract, with the fine print written in their favor, but the truth is that such a contract does not exist within fandom.

No other person has the actual authority to tell me that my own enjoyment should not be my sole and ultimate goal. People might think they have the moral authority to tell me that, but there is no reason why I should have to accept that.

Why should I let other people dictate what my contribution to fandom should look like? Or, what’s more to the point, why should I let a bunch of strangers with funny urls do that, who willingly choose to engage with the content that I post on my blog or to my AO3 account? 

ESPECIALLY because, when confronted with that exact challenge, a lot of people double down on that and admit that yeah, the racism doesn’t really bother them. Which is what’s happening here.

It’s not a contradiction, but an unwillingness to confront an ugly truth about fandom because it doesn’t personally affect you. Fandom has a huge problem with racism, and pointing that out is not an act of The Morality Police.

Well, I’m one of these people. Though I think it’s fair to say that while racism does, in fact, bother me, my understanding of racism does not conform with the US American definition, and I’m not inclined to re-frame my worldview according to US American sociological theories just because fan culture happens to be dominated by US Americans. 

It’s not only racism, though, is it? It’s  “abuse” and “homophobia” and “transphobia” and “ableism” and “misogyny” and so on, and I can tell you that most of what I’ve written and published would raise the hackles of one minority or another, if they came looking. 

Or rather, raise the hackles of some individuals, which is another issue: very rarely, in my experience, has there been an agreement within a minority group on whether something was actually “harmful” or “offensive”. So, when I’m faced with a couple of people who come to my inbox, often in a very hostile manner, to tell me that something is offensive to people of color, or Jewish people, or trans people, or disabled people, and so on, they might be making a lot of noise, but I have no real means to say whether they are actually representative of the minority they claim to speak for.

In reality, it might look a little like this: My piece of dark fic, which was clearly labeled as such, got twohundred hits. Ten people left kudos, one left a positive but trivial comment, and now suddenly three people, one after the other, leave their comments in quick succession, neiher politely worded nor inviting a discussion, informing me that this piece of fiction is problematic and needs to disappear. Because they say so. 

That’s the point where I have to ask myself: if I give in to that kind of intimidation and pressure, am I doing it because these people are in the right, or because I’m afraid? Am I willing to follow their moral code, which apparently includes dogpiling, intimidation, and name-calling, or do I trust my own? 

Meanwhile, the people in my comment section are in all likelihood not willing to take my opinion into account. Any attempt on my side to justify myself just leads to statements like “check your privilege”, “you’re a nazi apologist”, “white (cis, straight, abled) people don’t get a say in this”. Disagreement is not an option. They’ve decided that my content problematic, that I am problematic, and that’s that.

I’ve seen this play out in a variety of instances, and quite honestly, I think it’s very important that people don’t give in to that kind of bullying. 

Finally, let me just add, for good measure: I think you’re right in one point, and that is that we might want to stop pretending that fandom is all about progressiveness, when progressiveness is mostly accidental, and yes, we can absolutely point out that fandom content reflects the preferences of those who contribute to it. If that’s mostly white women, the content will reflect that, as we’ve basically agreed above. 

On the other hand, if everyone keeps making the kind of content that they want to see, instead of bemoaning that others don’t make it for them, fandom will continue to change.

Just don’t expect fans to go to great length to make fandom a better place for others if that’s not what they signed up for. 

Edmure Tully and Narrative Superposition

Or: Edmure Tully Did Nothing Wrong And Everything Wrong.

One of the big bones of contention among those of us who take imaginary fantasy battles and politics seriously is the degree of culpability, or lack thereof, various actors involved in the Battle of the Fords have. I’m gonna wade into this morass myself and see if I can pull anything of value from it.

Strap in. This is under the cut, and it’s going to be a long one.

Keep reading

you’ve heard of “black sails” now get ready for

acknowledging that some of the characters are bisexual

anonymous asked:

sorry im a bit new to the sw fandom, but is it really that important that rey is wearing a bit of black underneath her clothes? i know visualization is important but i was wondering if it's _that_ important, especially in sw narrative

I think it probably is significant. The best comparison is Luke’s costume in Return of the Jedi, which looks like this:

Initially, it appears to be pure black. However, in the final scene with Luke and Vader, we see that there is some white underneath. In Return of the Jedi, Luke is heavily tested by the dark side and even flirts with it briefly at Jabba’s Palace. Nonetheless, he ultimately remains committed to the light side. The costume reflects this - Luke deals with abundant darkness, but the light is at the core of his being and is ultimately what triumphs.

So given Rey’s costume - which appears to be a light exterior covering a dark interior - I don’t think it’s unreasonable to speculate that she might follow an inverted trajectory - starting out in the light, but gradually recognising her inner darkness and potentially even giving into it at the end of the film.

anonymous asked:

So, what I'm getting from that post you made about why you no longer call yourself an "antisjw" is: Many of the earlier "antis" were people who were general supportive of social justice, but critical of the way "sjws" would twist facts to suit their narrative (especially about men), but the community eventually deteriorated into having many legit racists and people who think that there "are no inequalities in the system". Is this correct?

yes. and also the unspoken rules that one does not disagree with the proverbial leaders or the set beliefs.

anonymous asked:

It was easier to believe they are together when we could actually see them. Now there has been no indication they are together for the longest time. And they dont owe us to show us that!! I know that! But it gets a bit dishearting tbh. There are some days I think they are completely still together, but others not so much. All that's happening nowadays could be because they are both gay and closeted, but nothing indicates they are still together. Only the bee tattoo but it isnt certain it's a bee

Again, I’m not trying to convince anyone here. I get that people have moments of doubts! this isn’t a movie, they’re real people that can have real struggles and yes break up. But I choose to believe the contrary. Not because I’m a digger that is going to prove it to you with my big larrie wall of receipts (even though I could) but because it makes me happy in the dark place that is this world to believe that love can win sometimes, and that ‘I think they’re going to win this time’.

I can say that because I have distance and as I said as much as I love them, I chose to look at things with a very particular lense. (bear with me I’m going to sound like a cynic but it works for me me to keep my sanitiy)

I’m watching the shitshow like a tv show (and the narrative has a lot in comon with a tv show mind - it’s just not really well plotted)

  • We have the star-crossed lovers (Harry and Louis)
  • We have a big bad (Simon/Syco/label)
  • A whole lot of obstacles to cross and vanquish (babygate, beards,…)
  • A whole lots of lovalble side kicks (James, Steve,…)
  • The will they/won’t they that keeps you on the edgo of your seat
  • angst/doubt/problems along the way that pour heroes fight against with songs and significant tattoos.

and that leaves us with

  • THe big finale when the protagonists get together (in our case the big mistery is when we get to see it ) w

 once the main protagonists get together in a tv show, the rantings always drop. ALWAYS. Which is why I think the shit show is still going on. And that makes perfect sense form a story telling stand point.

In any case, I think they’re together, I’m not going to war over it with anyone but unlike a whole bunch of people here, I’m still having fun and enjoying myself.

anonymous asked:

You should rlly watch crazy ex-gf! aside from the main narrative that deals with mental health in a v good way... the bi-representation of Darryl is So Good! especially because the bisexual narrative is so often just like LOOK AT THESE PROGRESSIVE MILLENNIALS DOING WHATEVER/ WHOMEVER THEY WANT-- SEXUALITY ISNT REAL YOU GUYS! and here's this old lame dad-type who's like "lol I'm a real-life bisexual in my 40's and I exist"

It’s on my watchlist! Plus I just watched a bunch of the musical number on YouTube and I love it. Where can I watch?

but-have-you-considered  asked:

I've been reading through TES in-game books and a question came up- how do you tell if a book is historical or fictional? Granted, there's historical fiction like Marobar Sul's dwener stuff, but how do we tell that as the player when it's not stated?

Much of the time, you can’t. Not reliably, at any rate. You’ve got to use context and your own judgement. Often, books that are fictional still contain important historical details, and books that are historical are, in part, fictionalized. 

That said, here are a few things I think about when trying to make the determination. 

Notes. Books sometimes include annotations that speak to their origin or veracity. Marobar Sul’s works, for example, have big ol “this stuff is fictional” disclaimers at the bottom of each text. Other texts state their historicity outright, or are noted to be historical documents. 

Format. If something is a narrative, especially if it features dialog, it is more likely to be fictional or fictionalized. 2920, for example, is based on historical events, but it’s author had no way of being in all those places at once and knowing what exactly the characters said. Similarly, if the story features characters who aren’t the sorts of people to be remembered by history, it is more likely to be fictional. An essay (a work not featuring characters or a storyline), on the other hand, is more likely to be about a historical subject.

Comparisons. How do the events and characters of the book, as well as its general tone, stack up to what we’ve seen in the rest of lore? Obviously, there’s some leeway here, since games cannot depict things as the “truly” are in lore, and lore has changed quite a bit in the nearly 20 years since Daggerfall. To cycle back to Marobar’s stuff, it doesn’t really mesh with everything else we’ve seen and been told about the Dwemer, so we can safely assume that it is mostly fiction. 

anonymous asked:

(1/3) "You guys don’t understand how important the main relationship of a show is, this is their money maker." Bingo. I agree, and wanted to add something if that's okay? As shippers, we can overreact and read too much into some things, but the things we interpret as romantic and deep? It's there for a reason, and the reason is narrative. It's not outright explicit like a kiss or sex, but there's enough evidence to where casual viewers are outright pointing out the same things we're noticing.

(2/3) If the casual viewers are seeing it too, it’s because the writers WANT them to notice it. Like many of you guys, I was pissed and felt done with the show after the gun reveal and twist in 4.10. But ask yourself - why would they show that? Why would they take that narrative risk? Especially near the end of the season and not earlier? Bellarke is a core (if not the) core relationship on this show, and the writers know they have very little room to fuck up with. If they were going to

(3/3) blow them apart after all this buildup, it would be like a betrayal to the narrative done out of shock value. Or? They want to ramp up your investment and attention. And lbr, we are now very interested in the next episodes? It’s gonna get ugly for a bit, but the tension and intensity of Bellarke’s relationship has increased. They want you invested in next season, and in order to do that, the payoff has been good enough in the finale to where we would be willing to suffer through 4.11.

A good read ^^ totally agree

anonymous asked:

Do you have any advice for writing fanfic about characters dealing with issues of faith and religion without giving the erroneous impression that you, the fic author, are putting your own ideas about religion into the characters' mouths or portraying one interpretation as the 'correct' one via the narrative? Especially concerning fictional faiths, like for example, in star wars, or in tolkien's legendarium?

Hmm, I can go for general suggestions! 

This is one where I don’t see much difference between fanfic and original, except that you’re interpreting the character’s beliefs in canon as well as depicting them in general. But fundamentally, it comes down to the same two things: honesty and purpose.

Keep reading

“Why is there so little information available on Alkahestry?! At this rate, I’m thinkin’ we might as well go to Xing…”

OH! So they did know what it was? Edward didn’t explicitly call May’s techniques Alkahestry, so I thought he didn’t know. As I’ve said, I have trouble remembering what each individual character does and does not know… Especially in a narrative this complex and deep.

#homestuck #this makes me more interested in vriska terezi dave and drik narrative parallels #especially bc dirks situation growing up is way more similar to terezis than vriskas but copes very differently than terezi #anyway good post op 

@madchen yeah definitely - dirk has parallels w terezi too, and dave and vriska are both survivors of child abuse who deal w their trauma in opposite ways (dave internalizes, vriska externalizes). theres a much longer and more thorough post to be written about the complementary arcs of the strider brothers & scourge sisters. i just banged this one out bc ive been thinkin about it after That One Particular Person who thinks vriska is evil and dirk did nothing wrong lol