But it often helps to have a reason to break a rule, one that is purposeful and adds to the story you’re telling. Writers do this all the time, if you know where to look:
PUNCTUATION - Cormac McCarthy doesn’t use quotation marks in his novel The Road, even when characters are talking- but it contributes significantly to the lonely, desolate, ash-laden setting.
POV / LINEAR - In The Things They Carried, Tim O’Brien writes in third and first person narration, out of chronological order, with deliberately conflicting accounts of certain scenes- and this helps convey a “story truth” rather than a “happening truth“ (his own words), as well as the confusing reality of war for soldiers.
PASSIVE VOICE - Sir Arthur Conan Doyle frequently uses the passive voice in his Sherlock Holmes stories, adding a sense of mystery and more natural conversation between characters.
These are only a handful of the many examples that are out there- novels, short stories, poetry, all forms of writing have instances of this.
It’s never strictly necessary to have a reason, of course- as writers, we rarely deal in absolutes when it comes to rules. But if you can bend and break the rules in a way that enhances your story, you can add another layer of depth to it.
Repeat after me: “I don’t hate on characters other people enjoy, even if I don’t like those said characters, because I wouldn’t like my favorite characters being hated that way, because I’m a mature person and want everyone here to have fun and because I don’t want to cause more distress to people who have already problems and come here to forget about them for a while.”
i feel like modern allura would be the Book gay who spends an excessive amount of time reading lesbian romance novels while wearing poofy sweaters and falling asleep with glasses on. like she’d be that one person who goes out with the group like twice a month and does her makeup and hair flawlessly to keep up her reputation but then spends the rest of the month ‘recovering’ with frequent naps, lots of wine, and the occasional soap opera on a truly bad day.
When it comes to the debate about whether the ygo manga
or anime makes more sense, I think maybe the answer is that they each have
the manga the story/concepts come first and the characters come second, while
in the anime it’s the other way around. So the manga’s plot is fairly coherent,
but it’s willing to throw out previously-established characterization at the drop
of the hat if a cool new story idea comes along, and in the anime the plot’s a
convoluted self-contradictory mess but the characters feel more like real
people with natural development + arcs.
In the end, neither version makes total sense on its own. It comes down to what takes you, personally, out of the experience more:
plot inconsistency or inconsistent
It’s been a hot minute since I’ve been involved in ace discourse, so sit the fuck down, cause this has been bothering me for a while.
If you go around attacking someone for making a character ace/aro, or having a headcanon about it, or identifying with them because of ace/aro qualities, ask yourself why.
If you don’t think said character is ace/aro, don’t get involved with that post. Scroll on by, cause you have the free will to do it.
If you feel the need to question someone’s headcanon, bring evidence to them of why it isn’t true, proclaim fiercely that said character can’t be ace/aro because they’re something else instead, think really carefully about your need to do that.
That is acephobia/arophobia, and it needs to stop.
Ace/aro people have a right to make headcanons, too. We have a right to identify with certain characters without being questioned about it. If you don’t agree, don’t get involved.
Allosexuals and alloromantics are absolutely encouraged to reblog this.
So, would it be possible to hold long complicated legal cases while nude in the sauna? Cause that sounds like a pretty sweet weekend.
well apperntly to swedish politicans the answer to this is yes.
like here, in 1977, while having a offical state visit from Mozambique’s President between
-1986, Samora Machel.
[screenshot from“Sweden and National Liberation in Southern Africa, Volume 2″
by Tor Sellström]
talking about options to stay out of the cold war with the leader of a recently
nation? Have that discussion in the Sauna!
(they are most likely discussing the topic of option to keep out of the cold war during that state visit. swedish politicans back then had the idea that forging alliances with the states that were getting free from colonial rule, would protect both sweden and the countries we allied with against the influence of both Soviet and USA in the cold war. the idea were with hindsight, mostly a failure. but that were the idea anyway. so that why the are using a sauna togheter up there).
this was the easist example I could find on the web, but like, do swedish politican ever sauna ALOT through history, and make important agreements while doing so. and they are mostly, like in the example, in someones summer house.
this custom has btw been critized as a way to hold the female parliementarians outside important political descisions, because the male politicans can then always say: “but we just did not invite you, because we did not believe you wanted to be nude with us! Not because we wanted to exlude you!”
i have vague memories of this being such a topic back in like… the early 2000s.
furthermore! sometimes, they actually do not make the REAL decision in the sauna itself, but saying so to swedish journalists makes a good story, which the journalists LOVE and i really mean LOVE to repeat non-stop.
so! too answer your question
yes you can hold complicated legal cases while nude in sauna. swedish politicans appear to do just that all the time. perhaps though, i would not rec to have it has the very foundation of the parliementarian work. this can lead to complaints.