Saw This Guy And Now:

Saw this guy and now:

Gotta find and read/watch this.

Izutsumi “Asebi” (イヅツミ) - Dungeon Meshi - Episode 20

This is why this blog is one of my go-to's in my journey of Spanish. Clear and concise, and straight to the point, with examples too for extra clarification. Especially with that "yo me" and "me" stuff.

Definitely noting this down.

I'm doing Duolingo, but something that confuses me is when to use things like "yo ducho" and "me ducho". When translated, they both end up as "I shower" but I feel like contextually, there's something more. I've even come across something like "yo me ducho", which screws me up more.

HELP??!?!!?!?!?

Multiple things happening here so I'll break them down

First, duchar "to shower" is understood as "to shower (someone else)" or occasionally it's "to spray with water" like with a hose - though less common in my experience because there are other words like regar is "to water (plants/flowers)" etc.

What you're seeing is a reflexive verb - ducharse "to take a shower"

A reflexive verb is when the subject and the object are the same - the first one you typically learn is llamarse for "to be called" as in your name

So it's me llamo literally "I call myself"; rather than llamar which is "to call someone (else)" like to call the police, or to make a call

Another standard one is lavar "to wash" where you could wash dishes, but lavarse las manos is "to wash one's hands" literally "to wash oneself the hands"

...You COULD technically say lavar las manos (a alguien) as in you're washing someone else's hands though

This is also the difference between something like cepillar el pelo/cabello "to brush someone's hair" rather than cepillarse el pelo/cabello "to brush one's own hair"

-

I can't say I typically see ducho by itself; it's usually the reflexive me ducho

ducho by itself is like "I shower (someone/something else)", while me ducho is "I shower" or "I take a shower"

You can see this more as bañar "to bathe (someone else)" like giving kids a bath or giving a pet a bath; then bañarse is "to take a bath"... generally more difficult to "shower someone else", which is why you see ducharse or me ducho more

...

As for yo me ducho this reads as very emphatic as if it's "I'm the one who showers"

Because both me and ducho imply a yo, it's not considered strictly necessary and it reads as more emphatic than normal - this is also common without reflexives too like "I do this, but you don't"

In proper context it could make sense like - yo siempre me ducho después de nadar en la piscina pero ellos no "I always take a shower after swimming in the pool but they don't"

.......Typically though out of context yo me ducho sounds like an English speaker, where we are used to using subjects in every sentence, while Spanish grammar often makes use of sujeto tácito [silent subject; aka omitting the subject unless it's needed for clearing up vagueness, or for emphasis]

Which is to say that contextually yo me ducho is correct; but everyday Spanish will have you saying me ducho without the yo

*Note: As far as ambiguity or vagueness you often see this with 3rd person, singular or plural, where multiple subjects could be talked about - like ella lee todo pero su amiga no lee nada "she reads everything but her friend doesn't read anything"

In reflexive it could be like mis padres se levantan muy temprano pero mis abuelos se levantan tarde "my parents get up very early but my grandparents wake up late"

In these sorts of situations the conjugation doesn't give you enough information, so adding the subjects creates more distinction and clarity - you see this a lot with changing subjects. You might see a string of sentences with no subject if you're talking about someone, but then if you start talking about someone else you add that subject in so the listener knows who you're talking about; like Elena es muy alta e inteligente, y Ana es artísta y también sabe tocar el piano "Elena is very tall and smart, and Ana is artistic and also knows how to play the piano"

Orange

I have mixed feelings about this. I'm glad Marinette isn't the only one going through the super-talented completely-gifted virtuoso shtick, but I'm also kind of disappointed that there really isn't anything except the aforementioned plot device ice-skating and talking to Adrien.

But I definitely agree on the whole take of MLB trying to be both episodic and serialized (which was a take that I bitched about but didn't actually have a solid name for it, so thank you for that 😅) and how it screws up the writing.

Marinette's capabilities are never brought up again despite being featured in previous episodes, and teens like Kitty Section, Alya, Nino, Max, and all the others get their brief spotlight before they get plopped onto the shelf to wait again for their moment.

The whole virtuoso trope isn't inherently bad in and of itself. It's actually a frequent trope used in lots of serialized literature or media featuring kids or teenagers (manga/manhwa/anime come to mind) especially in fantasy settings, and can be used well when done right. Lots of content with super-cool-can-do-anything characters—an apt description for this trope—usually highlight this ability and make use of it to not only add substance to the character, but to also add depth to the story and further the plot.

For this, I think Kiki Strike (book series); Dress-Up Darling (anime/manga); I Was Just Having Fun With The Time Limit (manwha—might be debatable since it also includes isekai themes); and many characters of the Marvel/DC universe (Batfam, Spiderman, etc.)

The OC I mentioned, (as awkward as it is for me to use my own character as reference), not only get highlighted because of her genius, but it's also given focus in the story and used to give depth to her character and influence the plot into challenging the limits of said genius.

But you hit the nail on the head, as sad as that is to me (sometimes, I wish this show could prove me wrong on some areas). They basically use certain virtuoso abilities like Kitty Section being a phenomenal band or Alya being successful enough to be interviewed on TV or Nino's music catching attention on a popular gameshow or Max being the next Albert Einstein, just to make episodes, and then the rest of the writing fails to reflect this later on. These skills get ignored or receive fanfare for only that one episode, and is abandoned both in story and writing.

Or in Marinette's case, it's used as example as to how amazing and cool she is.

Like I said, this kind of makes me sad. I thought the bar couldn't get any lower for this show, but then it just shows me how naïve I am.

On a side-note though, really cool that you actually fenced for a few years! At least you know your stuff, so you can be the resident expert on the sport that Adrien is supposedly the best student at (have my doubts on that one now, since you just said MLB is laughably bad at portraying fencing), but I'm low-key disappointed that the show is also shitty at portraying fencing.

Curious, but do you know of anything Marinette is bad at? I didn't realize this until before, but Marinette always seems to be presented as amazing at everything. Like, I can get baking and designing, since they're things she's had personal experience in, but everything else? She's either super amazing or she needed five minutes of instruction and she's incredible.

Gaming? Absolute pro. Art? Amazing. Fencing? Just a little help from Adrien, and she's so good. So far, the skills she's presented to be absolutely amazing at: gaming, fencing, art, fashion, costume design (surprise surprise, fashion and costume design are two different avenues), baking, DIY, mechanical engineering (Miracle box hiding place and snapping diary box), fighting, leadership, decision-making, Guardianship, school (somehow straight-A student despite her tardiness and Ladybug issues).

And that's all I can get off the top of my head. I'm scared that there might be more. The only things I can think of that she's bad at is ice skating (which feels like a plot device for the Frozer episode, since she adapted so quickly to ice-skating as Icebug) and talking to Adrien.

I have a character (non-MLB) with the kind of genius that lets her master anything if she's seen it two or three times, but that genius has limitations itself that later compels her to actually think and work hard to master said subject. But Marinette is never even implied to be similiar to this, and everything she's good at is just passed off as "Amazing Marinette" and then left alone.

What do you think? If there's any other examples of things she's bad at, clumsiness nonwithstanding, please tell me, because this thought is driving me bonkers.

Nothing comes to mind, though I will say that Marinette wasn't a very good fencer. Then again, the show is actually laughably bad at portraying fencing, so I guess we just have to take Adrien's word for it that she was good. (I fenced for several years. May even have my old meddles somewhere as proof, though I doubt it.)

This isn't unique to Marinette, though. Most of the teen characters are absurdly talented. Kitty Section was so cool XY stole their music and their look. Alya runs a blog that's so successful that she was interviewed on national TV (end of PrimeQueen). Nino got to be on that TV competition in Simon Says. Max has tech in a literal space ship. The list goes on and on. Marinette just has more than most because she's the main character.

This isn't necessarily a flaw. It's normal for kids shows to have kid/teen characters who are super cool and talented because the goal is to inspire real kids to try things. The only reason it feels like a flaw in Miraculous is that this type of super-cool can-do-anything character is usually reserved for low-stakes episodic shows. Serialized shows (aka, shows with an overarching plot) will still have kid and teen characters who do the things adults usually do because that's what the target audience wants to see, but these kid and teen character will be a lot more nuanced and flawed. They're allowed to fail because their stories can take multiple episodes to resolve whereas characters in episodic shows have to have everything figured out and wrapped up in 20 minutes, allowing for way less nuance to their characters.

Because Miraculous is trying to be both an episodic and a serialized show, you get a lot of awkward characterization and writing. Sitcom drama with prestige TV stakes. We want Miraculous' cast to feel like they belong in a serialized drama because Miraculous has a serialized plot, but the individual episodes must stand alone, so the characters can't have the depth they need. It's messy, ugly writing.

I don't remember the exact phrasing anymore, but I remember seeing something that said: plot twists are not there to surprise the audience or shock them. They're there to enrich the story.

Basically, don't focus on the shock value. Focus on how the plot twist impacts your story and the characters in it. If your audience guesses your plot twist from subtle foreshadowing, then that's good. If your plot twist has shock value but none of the enrichment, then it's a useless foreshadow.

I miss the "Gabriel is Hawkmoth" foreshadow during Simon Says and the book Adrien found in Volpina. Since the episodes are pretty close together, it works. But then later episodes with plot twists just fail miserably, with no other answer except "we already wrote the script, so deal with it".

I think part of what fails in the Chloé betrayal and Adrien/Felix sentimonster thing is that in order to foreshadow correctly, attention needs to be paid to these specific characters, so the screen has to shift to them and their personal lives. But 99% of the episodes center around Marinette and how she navigates life, so there's next to no focus set on them unless she's involved—and unfortunately, putting her in the loop would be too problematic to address in the show's long run.

The reason behind using Chloé early on is actually pretty simple. The writers for ML have never met a twist they didn't like. they seem obsessed with outsmarting their audience. ( target 6-10yr olds, go team) Everything is a red herring of some kind until it isn't bit it is but not and whoa did we blow your mind yet?

I'm reminded of an OSP quote along the lines of 'You can only surprise your audience on the first viewing, but a good narrative can be enjoyed any number of times.'

Exactly. Plot twists aren't just there to surprise the audience. They also give rewatch value to the work.

Take Puss in Boots: The Last Wish for example. The twist of the Wolf actually being the Grim Reaper is shocking, yes, but rewatching the movie gives new meaning to the things he does. Just rewatch his first scene and see what I mean. Not only does the Wolf appear from out of nowhere like a ghost, he also points to the word "Dead" in the "Dead or Alive" on Puss' wanted poster, and wields a pair of sickles as his weapons.

It also makes you rethink the things he says to Puss during their conversation.

"Been following you for a long time." - The Wolf has taken eight of Puss' nine lives, so he's more than familiar with him.

"Everyone thinks they'll be the one to defeat me. But no one's escaped me yet." - Being Death itself, the Wolf has been there for everyone's eventual passing.

"So I've heard..." - A direct response to Puss' claim that he laughs in the face of death, which the Wolf is naturally insulted by.

Plot twists and foreshadowing go together well, but you need to make sure the audience has enough hints to either figure it out themselves or to recognize the buildup to the twist on a second viewing. Miraculous Ladybug does neither of those. Things like Chloe's betrayal and the other rich kids being Sentimonsters just come out of nowhere and don't hold up when you rewatch earlier episodes and see no foreshadowing for those revelations.

Bruh.

I'm with you. Catholic here, and oh my Lord.... Please, let this not be true. Let it be ragebait or something else, just not true.

Just popping in to remind you that asstwat has publicly stated that Jesus was a miraculous wielder. Not the ladybug though, he made sure to mention that

Trust me, I’ve been holding back my catholic indignation