Great Analysis! - Tumblr Posts

Do we all remember the sterek scene in 2x02 when they were about to go into the station and Derek is like

“I’m gonna distract her”

And Stiles is like

“gimme a sample”

And all we get is like

“dead silence”

That right there wasn’t dead silence, it wasn’t Derek being awkward or unsure or anything else of that sort, it was Derek giving The Look™️

This look

It was Derek saying “look at my face”

“look at all this beautiful, beautiful hotness”

“look at this and tell me you could deny me of anything”

Derek might be an incapable flirter with the love of his life because the stakes are so high and his true emotions are complicated and constipated in many ways

But Derek knows his physicality okay, it’s been used against his time and time again, and he has made it his fucking WEAPON

He knows what he’s got and he knows how to use it

And he was probably wondering “why doesn’t Stiles think I’m pretty enough to distract everything and everyone in sight”

Which was probably one of the reasons he fell for Stiles, because Stiles saw through him and saved him for who he was, helped him for him and not his physical appearance

Which is why we get The Stiles Look™️

JAIME IN THE RIVERLANDS II: Bluffs, Bargaining and Baby Trebuchets - Why Jaime Can’t Win at Riverrun

[lol sorry i've not updated this since Dec 2022 but i feel kind of compelled to finish it and this part was actually mostly done in back in Jan last year. I just got distracted. anyway part one here]

Following ASOS where Jaime’s character development came thick and fast, Jaime of AFFC is stalling by comparison, looking for an outlet and lacking one. He hopes to improve the Kingsguard as its new Commander but it’s in a poor state, saddled with men like Boros Blount and Osmund Kettleblack who are sworn to serve it for life. Meanwhile, his every move is undermined by Cersei’s erratic rule as regent, or the strange counsel she has built around her. He is beside his son, but Tommen can’t know it, and his daily duties involve tedium more often than not. Jaime’s scope has been drastically reduced: there are no bears, there is only Pycelle, and meanwhile his relationship with Cersei is undergoing seismic change that leaves him emotionally adrift. 

Jaime is also growing increasingly conscious of the risk that Tywin’s death poses to his family: joining the funeral procession for his father’s return to the Rock, ‘dead’ rings in his ears as he attempts reconciliation between Kevan and Cersei (JAIME II, AFFC) - Tywin is truly gone, and nothing stands in his place. Indeed, whilst we see throughout ASOS and AFFC that Tywin had the respect of his siblings, Jaime and Cersei are viewed by Genna and Kevan as little more than squabbling children far out of their depth. Kevan even regards the twins as a direct threat to he and his family’s security and goes so far to say as much, rending the family deeper. Worse still, Jaime is unsure whether or not Cersei does represent a true threat to their uncle, leaving him to play the game half blind:

Ser Kevan was a Lannister of Casterly Rock. He could not believe that she would ever do him harm, but… I was wrong about Tyrion, why not about Cersei? When sons were killing fathers, what was there to stop a niece from ordering an uncle slain? [JAIME II, AFFC]

It’s clear at this point to both Jaime and the reader that House Lannister is beginning to cannibalise itself, with each link representing a threat to the other: even Genna and Kevan compete for safer seats for their families, with Kevan leaving the poisoned chalice of Riverrun for his sister and her children. Meanwhile, Cersei’s growing paranoia and ineptitude as queen is setting off alarm bells: “The crows will feast upon us all if you go on this way, sweet sister” (JAIME II, AFFC). House Lannister’s vulnerability is hugely apparent, and now, far from Tywin’s vision of a single unanimous collective, each branch of the family pulls in its own direction. So we see that part of Jaime’s role at this point in the story is to somehow reunite his family with the singular object of their security: the trouble is that the security of House Lannister runs directly counter to the security of all others.

It is here that Cersei sends Jaime into the Riverlands against his will, to finish their father’s work in quashing House Stark and House Tully. Jaime goes reluctantly, knowing the Riverlands have already been ravaged by his father’s men: “scarce a field remained unburnt, a town unsacked, a maiden undespoiled.” Cersei’s request that he finish the work of men like Gregor Clegane and Amory Lorch “[leaves] a bitter taste in his mouth” (JAIME III, AFFC). Jaime is also mindful of his oaths to Catelyn Stark, i.e. that he will not take arms against Stark or Tully, and his own personal ambitions for betterment. But the dregs of the war aren’t going anywhere, and so begins Jaime’s attempt to balance his own personal ambitions with what his family needs to solidify their rule.

RETURNING TO THE RIVERLANDS

Jaime initially travels with little sense of direction. He hovers at Darry to see Lancel and settle the matter of Cersei’s infidelity. He returns to Harrenhal to restore order, and makes some attempts at a transformation into ‘Goldenhand the Just’: rescuing Pia, executing her rapist, punishing outlaws (be they of opposing camps or otherwise) and rehabilitating Ser Ilyn Payne. But as many have observed, these are small gestures - perhaps even misguided, in the case of the outlaws: Brienne’s chapters feature a sorrowful monologue on the plight of ‘broken men’, who have long suffered at the mercy of their high lords. This is Jaime attempting to do good within the scope he’s been afforded, but he is under no illusions that it is enough to transform his reputation, and it is certainly not enough to atone for his sins: 

"Wear [the golden hand], Jaime," urged Ser Kennos of Kayce. "Wave at the smallfolk and give them a tale to tell their children." "I think not." Jaime would not show the crowds a golden lie. Let them see the stump. Let them see the cripple. [JAIME III, AFFC]

“Men will name you Goldenhand from his day forth,” the armorer had assured him the first time he fitted it onto Jaime’s wrist. He was wrong. I shall be the Kingslayer till I die. [JAIME III, AFFC]

“He was not wrong," Ser Bonifer allowed, "but some sins are blacker than others, and fouler in the nostrils of the Seven." And you have no more nose than my little brother, or my own sins would have you choking on that pear. [JAIME III, AFFC]

After loitering long enough, Jaime finally continues his journey to Riverrun, where he finds the entire place at a standstill. The Freys have ruined negotiations by belying the bluff behind their threats, and now Riverrun will not fall without armed conflict. Jaime does not want armed conflict owing to the oath he swore to Catelyn that he would not take up arms against House Tully, but the danger to his house grows more pronounced: Lannisters and Freys can be found hanging in the woods, and Brynden Tully obstinately wants no peace with them. The contrast between the honourable Tullys and the impotent Freys is immediately made starkly apparent, and any reader would feel that Jaime is on the wrong side of this conflict. Yet even despite Jaime’s own obvious disregard for the Freys, we get to see the House Lannister he’s grown up with, and hopes to protect: the jovial Daven, the fond Genna, even the tragic Lancel. There is genuine affection amongst the extended tree of Lannisters, not easily dismissed for the sake of oaths.

Yet even so, Genna quickly notes Jaime is not the man to protect them: “Who will protect us now? [...] Tyrion is Tywin’s son, not you.” I’d argue that it is at this juncture, more than any other, that Jaime resolves to begin his performance as Tywin’s ‘true’ heir: he has entered this conflict lacking direction, and Genna has now provided him one that he has willfully ignored till now: House Lannister needs someone to protect them, and if not him, then who?

So begins the delicate balancing act between Jaime’s own ideals and oaths to Catelyn, alongside the dwindling security of House Lannister. 

ALLIES & ENEMIES

We frequently see Jaime struggle with the fact that he vastly prefers his enemies to his allies, even as the reader is encouraged to do the same. Jaime likes Jeyne Westerling, with her earnest devotion to Robb. He has admired Brynden Tully since he was a boy, and desperately hopes to win the man over himself (to no avail). He clearly prefers Tytos Blackwood to Jonos Bracken, despite (if not because of) Blackwood’s staunch support for House Tully, versus Bracken’s more malleable loyalties. Yet Jaime himself is encumbered by Freys of dubious loyalty and still more dubious character (if they are not altogether ineffectual), as well as lickspittles and violent rogues, such as the remainder of Gregor’s party he finds at Harrenhal. We see Jaime attempting to work with what he’s been given, but the disdain he feels towards his allies is always palpable - whilst his preference for his more honourable enemies is a recurring weakness.

Jaime’s ADWD chapter is an interesting exploration of both the strengths of Jaime’s character, and the ways in which he is ill-suited to his role in this conflict. He is instantly able to build some rapport with Tytos Blackwood, agreeing to privately manage humiliating dealings, and making allowances for the man where he can. He even goes so far as to allow Blackwood to choose his own hostage - Jonos Bracken advises Jaime that taking Tytos’ treasured daughter would give House Lannister the strongest hold over the family, but when Tytos emotionally protests, he allows the man to instead suggest a son he’s less fond of, and who would even enjoy the trip to the capital. The threat inherent in this exchange is so forgotten that when Hoster Blackwood emerges as though ready for summer camp, Jaime realises he has to remind the Blackwoods of who exactly they’re dealing with, else appear weak to a supporter who might easily turn: 

"I am not your friend and I am not your brother." That cleaned the grin off the boy's face. Jaime turned to Lord Tytos. "My lord, let there be no misunderstanding here. Lord Beric Dondarrion, Thoros of Myr, Sandor Clegane, Brynden Tully, this woman Stoneheart … all these are outlaws and rebels, enemies to the king and all his leal subjects. If I should learn that you or yours are hiding them, protecting them, or assisting them in any way, I will not hesitate to send you your son's head. I hope you understand that. Understand this as well: I am not Ryman Frey." [JAIME I, ADWD]

Here, Jaime directly counterposes himself with Ryman Frey: the man who almost lost Riverrun owing to his ineffectual bluffing. The reason being that Jaime and Ryman are dealing in the same currency: so far, Jaime has offered only threats that remain untested by his enemies, and Hos the hostage is only another of them. His role as Tywin’s heir is an elaborate performance, but Tywin’s reputation was earned through deed - Jaime so far relies only the memory of that. The second any one enemy does dare to test his resolve, the whole business could come crashing down - because this is a character who has yet to prove his resolve in the matter to either his enemies or himself, and is desperately avoiding doing so.

We see his lack of conviction again in subsequent conversations with his new hostage. Hoster reminds Jaime of his younger brother Tyrion, building his warmth towards the boy, and soon enough Jaime is asking him questions about the surrounding landscape and its history. At the end of the chapter, Jaime even shares a skin of wine with Hoster and his young squires (mostly hostages themselves) about a campfire, failing to enforce an emotional distance. The only instance where Jaime resumes his performance before Hoster is one where the pretence is palpable:

"My father had a saying too. Never wound a foe when you can kill him. Dead men don't claim vengeance." "Their sons do," said Hoster, apologetically. "Not if you kill the sons as well. Ask the Casterlys about that if you doubt me. Ask Lord and Lady Tarbeck, or the Reynes of Castamere. Ask the Prince of Dragonstone." For an instant, the deep red clouds that crowned the western hills reminded him of Rhaegar's children, all wrapped up in crimson cloaks. "Is that why you killed all the Starks?" "Not all," said Jaime. "Lord Eddard's daughters live. One has just been wed. The other …" Brienne, where are you? Have you found her? "… if the gods are good, she'll forget she was a Stark. She'll wed some burly blacksmith or fat-faced innkeep, fill his house with children, and never need to fear that some knight might come along to smash their heads against a wall." [JAIME I, ADWD]

Here, Hoster inadvertently tests Jaime’s resolve in the Lannister cause, and Jaime parrots obligingly, invoking his father’s darkest deeds as a reminder of what House Lannister is capable of. As Tywin’s heir, Jaime, is aware that he owes his audience a performance.

Yet what is coming out of Jaime’s mouth runs laughably counter to his own feelings and actions. He does not agree with his father’s methodry: the memory of Rhaenys’ and Aegon’s bloody bodies is clearly traumatic, and something Jaime has repeatedly wished he had prevented. And he has of course sent Brienne to rescue Sansa; in doing so, he may well have sown the seeds of the next Stark uprising himself, a consequence that could directly threaten his own family. This goes to prove how complex and contradictory Jaime’s objectives have become. He is attempting to preserve the security of both the Starks and the Lannisters, whilst struggling to avoid handing either side victory over the other. 

Jaime cannot make that struggle apparent to his audience, however, and so he says the words for Hoster: it is important Hoster believes them - that everyone does - yet once again, words are all Jaime has offered.

HALF MEASURES

Jaime’s sole ADWD chapter offers the best framework to unpack one of the most discussed episodes of Jaime’s Riverlands arc, and that is: Jaime’s threat to fling a baby over a castle wall.

"You've seen our numbers, Edmure. You've seen the ladders, the towers, the trebuchets, the rams. If I speak the command, my coz will bridge your moat and break your gate. Hundreds will die, most of them your own. Your former bannermen will make up the first wave of attackers, so you'll start your day by killing the fathers and brothers of men who died for you at the Twins. The second wave will be Freys, I have no lack of those. My westermen will follow when your archers are short of arrows and your knights so weary they can hardly lift their blades. When the castle falls, all those inside will be put to the sword. Your herds will be butchered, your godswood will be felled, your keeps and towers will burn. I'll pull your walls down, and divert the Tumblestone over the ruins. By the time I'm done no man will ever know that a castle once stood here." Jaime got to his feet. "Your wife may whelp before that. You'll want your child, I expect. I'll send him to you when he's born. With a trebuchet." [JAIME VI, AFFC]

As already mentioned, bluffs have been Jaime’s sole currency against the Tullys so far. The trouble is that he has entered an arena where bluffs have already been used to ill effect: the Freys have practically numbed Brynden Tully and his garrison to Edmure’s death, by threatening to do kill the man daily and failing follow through: this has led Brynden to frame his retaliation under the supposition that his nephew is as good as dead already. The best thing Jaime could do to assert his status over the Freys and dominance over the Tullys is demonstrate that he is a man of action, and will kill Edmure - but the action required is precisely that which he is not willing to take.

So Jaime enters this conflict with a bluff of his own, this time pointed at both the Freys and Edmure, as it’s necessary for both parties to believe he means what he says. Having covertly directed Ser Ilyn Payne to bluff, Jaime fools even the reader for a moment into believing that he meant to have Edmure’s head off:

The ferry had just started across with Walder Rivers and Edwyn Frey when Jaime and his men arrived at the river. As they awaited its return, Jaime told them what he wanted. Ser Ilyn spat into the river. [...] The sight of Ser Ilyn widened [Edmure’s] eyes. "Better a sword than a rope. Do it, Payne." "Ser Ilyn," said Jaime. "You heard Lord Tully. Do it." [...] "No! Stop. NO!" Edwyn Frey came panting into view. [JAIME VI, AFFC]

It’s here apparent that Ilyn Payne has been instructed to sever the rope suspending Edmure, making it seem to Edmure and onlookers that he means for Ilyn to behead the man. Jaime knows that Edwyn Frey will intervene before this can take place, but Edmure, who already bought into Jaime’s Kingslayer persona, has now had it reified by Jaime’s apparent resolve to behead him there and then. This lays the foundations for Jaime’s subsequent negotiations with Edmure: whilst treating with Brynden Tully, a man with nothing to lose, was a worthless pursuit… convincing Edmure, with everything to lose, holds more promise, and Jaime has now primed him to accept the carrot and fear the invisible stick.

Many readers do not regard Jaime’s villainous monologue to Edmure as any kind of bluff, but rather a promise that demonstrates that even if he isn’t Tywin’s ‘true’ heir, he’s capable of the same cruelties. However, we’ve now established that bluffs have become the currency at Riverrun, and are an especially vital currency to Jaime, a man who is determined to take no decisive action for the sake of his oath. His sole objective is to get Edmure to surrender peacefully, and violent words are his oddly pacifist method. 

It is also worth observing the improvised nature of the threat. Jaime mentions trebuchets specifically because they are trademark of Tywin’s from his feuds with the Reynes and the Tarbecks - as is drowning castles so that no-one would know they ever stood. The whole threat is heavy on Tywinian rhetoric, promising violent extremes that are atypical of Jaime’s own approach in war - but of course, they go the extra mile in pushing Edmure over the edge. Edmure knows what the Lannisters are capable of, and that is enough to frighten him into acquiescence before he begins to wonder what Jaime himself is capable of. 

Following Edmure’s surrender, Jaime self-consciously notes to himself his cynical invocation of Tywin’s trademarks, humorlessly marvelling at what came out of his mouth:

‘With a trebuchet,’ Jaime thought. If his aunt had been there, would she still say Tyrion was Tywin’s son? [JAIME VI, AFFC]

And of course, we see again here what has been on Jaime’s mind the whole time. Genna has told him she doesn’t believe he can protect their family, because he is no second coming of Tywin Lannister. Jaime is desperate to prove otherwise, whilst simultaneously desperate not to - and so, in thinking to himself that he has proved Genna wrong, Jaime has ironically proved her right: he is not willing to take decisive action, offering only words to suggest he could. 

Finally, there is a telling passage that precedes Jaime’s threat, suggesting the extent to which just saying the words pains Jaime:

Must you make me say the words? Pia was standing by the flap of the tent with her arms full of clothes. His squires were listening as well, and the singer. Let them hear, Jaime thought. Let the world hear. It makes no matter. He forced himself to smile. [JAIME VI, AFFC]

Jaime has built rapport with Pia and his squires over the course of AFFC - he gets to know them as people, they get to know him, and Jaime is a different person for them than he has been in the minds of those back at King’s Landing - he is a saviour to Pia, and a mentor for his squires. They are at the inception of the man Jaime wants to become for the rest of Westeros - someone honourable, and worthy of their respect. 

However, Tywin Lannister was not such a man - he was a man to be feared, and to sustain the Lannister regime, his heir must be feared as well. Jaime asks himself, ‘Must [Edmure] make me say the words?’, belying the fact that he had hoped to leave the threat implicit, offering Edmure a hand to his feet without having to show him the back of it. He is conscious of Pia and his squires listening, and how these words will impact their opinion of him; how the words will get out of the tent, and impact everyone’s opinion of him. 

But Jaime resolves: “Let them hear. Let the world hear. It makes no matter.” It’s apparent that it does matter to Jaime; he does not want to be a man feared and despised. Nonetheless, there is a futility in these lines. He lost the respect of Westeros long ago, and will not regain it in acting as Tywin’s heir. ‘Goldenhand the Just’ is a fantasy, and revealing his true motives to the world would be dangerous. He has to maintain his performance as Tywin’s heir for the sake of his family, and if that’s all the world will ever know of him… here, Jaime is telling himself to suck it up. “He forced himself to smile.”

The threat serves its purpose in the short-term, however. As much as Edmure hates Jaime for the words, it’s likely he requires them before he can sign Riverrun away to the Lannisters. Edmure needs to know the price of the carrot, cannot take it without asking. The price tells Edmure he’s making the right decision for everyone, albeit a bitter, humiliating one that reeks of injustice. Yet to refuse the carrot would be to surrender his family and people to something worse than injustice: in short Edmure needs to believe he’s saving his family from something. Jaime gives him that. 

THE PEACE

Of course, the greatest trouble for the Lannisters is that Jaime’s measures will not maintain the peace in his absence. Jaime did not take up arms against the Tullys, and so Brynden has escaped. In all likelihood, Edmure and his pregnant wife will shortly do the same - they travel with Jeyne Westerling to Casterly Rock, a character GRRM has told us will feature in TWOW’s prologue. It seems a foregone conclusion that that prologue will see an interruption to the hostages’ journey to the Rock, perhaps one orchestrated by Brynden Tully. 

It hardly helps that Jaime has even released a number of Tully men after having them swear an oath after the fashion of his own to Cat: 

Lady Genna suggested that a few of the men might be put to the question. He refused. "I gave Edmure my word that if he yielded, the garrison could leave unharmed." "That was chivalrous of you," his aunt said, "but it's strength that's needed here, not chivalry." [...] The Tully garrison departed the next morning, stripped of all their arms and armour. Each man was allowed three days' food and the clothing on his back, after he swore a solemn oath never to take up arms against Lord Emmon or House Lannister. "If you're fortunate, one man in ten may keep that vow," Lady Genna said. [JAIME VII, AFFC]

As we see, Genna does not regard Jaime’s measures as stringent enough for their ends, and she may well be right - the Lannisters’ pit of violence has grown too deep for the family to sustain themselves through pacifism now. But ultimately, these chapters serve to show that Jaime is not willing to consider the alternative: whatever method his family requires to survive, he is demonstrably not the character to implement it.

Needless to say, it seems pointless to argue that there aren’t clear ‘good guys’ and ‘bad guys’ in the Riverlands conflict - because even if there were, Jaime’s desire to protect his family is a sympathetic one. His attempts to do this solely through rhetoric are understandable, even laudable. And the fact that he has ultimately failed has a level of tragedy to it: we root for the Tullys and their return to Riverrun, and the downfall of the Lannister regime, but there is still a human cost associated. 

The coming of Red Wedding 2.0 is another foregone conclusion, but from the groundwork laid in AFFC and ADWD, it seems clear that GRRM will not intend it as a triumphant event: it was gruesome and cruel the first time, with many innocent lives lost in the crossfire - it can only be so different the second. 

As readers, we want Jaime to move beyond the Lannister cause to higher ideals, and in ADWD he has. But GRRM does not intend that this should be an easy path to take. Jaime’s loved ones remain embroiled in this conflict, and fighting for or favouring the other side has implications for all of them. Abandoning the Lannister cause is necessarily difficult, and there will be consequences for doing so.

NEXT PART: A Reckoning in the Riverlands!!! this won't be quick but i hope it won't be a fucking year

Wow, this chapter.

I think Hyuse would be great as a mentor or TED speaker.

Hyuse doesn't only focus on the strengths and weaknesses of a person, but considers the overall ability of the person at the right time and place. He sees where Osamu's true strength lies, and understands the process by which Osamu reached his current achievements. He also knows that Osamu might only march in place if he had more time, which means Hyuse does not ignore Osamu's possible shortcomings simply because he trusts Osamu as his captain. Then he also did his homework beforehand to interpret Rokurou's real strength, but he is still willing to obey Rokurou as the captain even though he knows that Rokurou's strength is low. He even explains the ways to grow, gives Rokurou something to think about in an almost encouraging way at the end.

It has nothing to do with his original purposes and may even cause Rokurou, as their captain, to collapse in this environment (makes him less likely to achieve his goals). He simply respects Rokurou's wish to become stronger.

Just...wow.

To be honest, I think Ashihara-sensei might have referred to some books that teach people how to succeed, or he was recommended to follow a step-by-step approach because of his own illness... However, it is really unexpected for me that he used Hyuse to say these words, but it's also reasonable.

This month's World Trigger (ch.246-247) is meaningful even for people who are not its readers. What Hyuse said can also be used in study or work.

The live action writers hate Aang

I have given myself a lot of time to think about the live action, and reached the conclusion that the writers hate Aang. I dare you to read read this and tell me I'm wrong.

Let me start this by asking you a question? What's the most badass scene Aang has in the first season of the OG show? No matter what you answer is, I know for sure, that scene doesn't exist in the live action. Aang does absolutely nothing to prove the audience he is the right person to be the Avatar, he learns absolutely nothing throughout the show, he doesn't need to look into himself and change his way of thinking. Nothing. Most of the fundamental lessons Aang learns throughout the first season are gone.

The first mistake Aang does in the OG is staying at Kyoshi island too long, letting the attention go to his head, getting too comfortable. He realises he brought destruction to the island and tries to fix his mistakes by jumping onto the Unagi to help the village. That's how he learned the responsibly he holds as the Avatar and finds a unique way to help the village. Well that doesn't exist in the LA. Instead, Kyoshi takes over Aang's body to fight the whole fire nation for him. Aang, himself, does literally nothing.

The spirit world. In the OG show Aang is forced to face his Avatar duty for the first time by trying to save the village that's beeing attacked by Hei Bai. This is his first test as the Avatar and he fails. Not only that, he loses his friend. So Aang has to figure out himself how to get Sokka back from Hei Bai. He figures out who her bai is, himself, understands why Hei Bai is angry and gives him hope, the way Katara gave him hope. So we see that even though Aang failed at first, he kept trying and was smart and compassionate enough to realise what the problem is and solve it. This does not exist in the LA. Aang sees Hei bai in the spirit world, within a second realises who he is and just gives him the Acorn, without having to face him at all!

Another reason I'm convinced the writers hate Aang is the way all the avatars + Bumi treat Aang. Everyone is mad at him for disappearing for 100 years. And look, I get that, you can be mad at him if he ran away from his duties...but he never did! He went to clear his head on Appa and got caught in the storm. And if he hadn't run away he'd be dead, so why are you all so mad at him?! Bumi being mad at Aang could make sense, because in the OG show Aang did spend a significant amount on time of goofing around before he finds out about the comet. But here, it makes no sense! Bumi is mad for no reason. As soon as Aang got out go the ice he took his duty seriously, so please, make it make sense! And the show just glosses over the fact that if Aang hadn't run away he would be dead with the rest of the air benders. Instead of letting Aang feel guilty himself, which he does in the OG show, they just get these characters to hate on him, because they're incapable of making their characters have any emotional depth.

Aang doesn't learn water bending. At all. And there is no logical reason for that. I guess they thought it wasn't that important but please explain to me how you want to make Aang more serious and focused on the Avatar duties but not make him learn water bending? The literal next step Aang has to take to becoming the Avatar?? That is the only clear goal Aang has from the second episode of the show - to find a master and learn waterbending! Make it make sense!

Taking away Aang's talk with Koh. So I assume if most people didn't answer my question above with the Koi fish, they probably said Aang's journey into the spirit world and his meeting with Koh. In the OG show, Aang has to find a way to figure out how to save the water tribe. He does so by going into the spirit world and talking to Koh the face stealer. So Aang had to talk to Koh showing zero emotions so he doesn't have his face stolen. That scene is so creepy and so badass and shows that Aang is really capable, even though he is a kid, he is facing the creepy ass spirit and is doing an excellent job. So when Aang finds out who the moon and the ocean spirits are, it feels deserved, it feels like an accomplishment. In the live action he doesn't have to show zero emotions because Koh is not stealing faces, he's just stealing random people for whatever reason. Koh tells him exactly what to do, bring me a MacGuffin so I can release your friends, Aang just goes to see Roku, no problem, no obstacles to overcome, brings the McMuffin to Koh and he just releases his friends. Wow, really shows us how resourceful Aang is by making him...get an object and give it back to Koh...

And the very last point that I absolutely hated in the show. When Aang goes into the Avatar state and becomes the giant koi fish and wipes everyone out, the live action show goes out of its way to emphasise that that is not Aang in there. Aang is gone. The Koi fish is just rage. and that's that. Taking away ANY agency Aang ever had. Look, I know in the OG show Aang is not in control of the Avatar state either, but we know that's still Aang in there, that's his power he's showcasing. He might not be in control but that's him doing it all, being all powerful. But in the live action, they tell us Aang is gone, that's just his body the spirit is using. Plus Aang does no watebending himself, no gestures like the original where you can see aang in the sphere water bending, controlling the giant Koi fish, showing us how far he's come as a water bender. But in the LA he's just in the sphere...doing nothing because he never learned water bending so of course that's not him doing all this cool shit.

I am so angry over all of this. This is you MAIN PROTAGONIST. and you made him nothing but a vessel to progress the plot. You gave him no character, no growth, no struggles, no power! So no, you cannot convince me, at this point, that the writers of the live action don't hate Aang. Probably as much as they hate Katara.

We're going to scream about Nandermo all week, but right now I need to talk about Baron Afanas. Because the Baron's arc, so to speak, always felt like a big part of the series DNA for me - and oh fuck did this episode deliver on why.

I think we can agree: in the show, vampire society is fucked up, right?

Vampires on their own have plenty to deal with that can make them crazy. They have to live by killing. They lose everyone from their old lives. They have to find new reasons to keep going on, forever, so shit can get decadent really fast.

But holy shit, what that's turned into in vampire society? Where you actively put cruelty over mercy, and violence over solving your problems? Death cults and scam artists roam free, but if someone has depression the best thing to do is ignore them. Someone can get their mind wiped or be locked up for centuries, and that's just what you do to your species.

--

So: the Baron's arrival is the first conflict of the whole show. The joke is about an ancient powerful creature of pants-shitting terror, vs three lesser vampires who just want to live their lives and not get murdered for being too lazy to conquer humanity. There's a lot of talk about how to please him: do you keep to the old ways, or pick up some new traditions? Decorate with flayed skin, or with glitter? And the Baron says: who cares, you're all soft and useless. All that matters is getting more control over this world, until people are cattle and we have no reason to hide anymore.

But later he confesses: that shit stopped mattering ages ago. He's not even real nobility, he's literally impotent, and he talks about doing horrible things because he doesn't know what else to say. He's angry and half-crazy from boredom. And admitting that, owning those feelings, means suddenly he has three new friends and a whole new world of things to enjoy.

There's the Baron the rest of the vampire world knows, but for one night we see the ancient, unknowable terror was just a guy. Maybe he's always been just some guy.

That fun puts him in a vulnerable position, and he's killed by the most unwitting vampire slayer in fiction. But Baron Afanas is changed. He sucks dirt for a year and still comes out of it with a new lightness and joy to him. He saves the Sire, another ancient terrifying monster everyone was eager to kill or send away. They adopt the hellhound. They get cozy and give advice. They make popsicle stick houses and go on walks. They live.

And that seemed like the end of the story until last night - when the Baron suddenly felt like the butt of a joke everyone knew but him. Spurred on by someone else who feels lonely and ignored, the Baron felt vulnerable. And he snapped back to how he lived for centuries.

'What the hell are you all doing, enjoying yourselves? We're supposed to be unhappy. We're supposed to live centuries of unhappiness, bringing pain to everyone in our path, and we're definitely not supposed to cheer up our friend who's sad.'

--

Nobody liked the Baron before Guillermo killed him, not even other powerful vampires we meet; they saw the Baron as a crazy far beyond their own crazy. But this is also how vampire society values you. It's how they measure Nandor's worth when they think he's dead, too: how old and powerful you are, how much you've been able to conquer and kill.

Vampire pods are both cliquish and aren't expected to last in the first place. If someone dies, you literally paint them out of your lives and forget. Everything we see discourages feelings, sincerity, or even basic companionship. The only way to earn respect is to be cruel. The more cruel you are, the more powerful you are. The more powerful you are, the more feared you are - the lonelier you are, the crazier you are. It's practically designed to create the Baron, or worse.

But new vampires don't behave that way. And the vampires we follow in the show don't behave that way - because they have each other, because they've been encouraged to have each other, often by Guillermo. (Holy shit, Nadja saying maybe she'd be fine dying, and Nandor immediately asking if she's okay? Nothing changes in this house, except everything does. They're not going to almost lose one of their own ever again.)

The vampires in the heart of vampire culture never seem happy to be like this. It doesn't have to be like this.

--

The Baron doesn't become a tyrannical monster for long. Because he never actually was one - and because he spends two evenings and a fireball to the face, watching Nandor and Nadja fight for Guillermo. Watching them plead and cling and defy, seeing Guillermo's earnest feelings in spite of his bloodline and the mistakes he's made. Seeing Nandor's perfect trust, and then his grief, the way he insists that Guillermo was never 'just' anything. The Baron can't find real fulfillment in hurting someone (because that ship sailed ages ago). He can't deride them for caring, because he's cared for a long time now.

And when the Baron admits that's who he is, when he says it out loud, he only gains more in his life. He finds new depth in the happiness he'd felt for a while now, because he's admitted and allowed himself to be happy. And now he has the children he's always wanted. Living together, the Baron and the Sire are still ancient and powerful - and they're also family, finding real joy together in a world that was ready to dispose of them.

"I suppose with the right company, it can be beautiful, this eternal existence."

--

There's an inherent selfishness to being a vampire, taking from someone else in order to live. But there doesn't have to be inherent cruelty, or lack of love.

They're all ready to admit they care. The Staten vampires have all cared for Guillermo or each other in their own ways this season. And Guillermo doesn't lack for flaws, but loving his monster family has never been one of them. (When he and Nandor work their shit out, they're gonna be insufferable.)

Now they just have to let the Guide in. Because she's absolutely starved for love, and vampires get pretty fucked up when they're on their own.

TOH Spoilers!!

Time to tackle Hunter's identify crisis montage. It was bound to happen y'all.

I'm pretty sure Hunter has run into the Gravesfield statues of Phillip and Caleb so I'm wondering if that sparked his whole "I'm growing my hair out to reclaim my identity thing." Also because his little hair worm is a pretty distinctive character trait that's also associated with Caleb so he'd likely want to get rid of that. But let's take a closer look at the image sequences before we dive into all of that.

So first we see Caleb. Already, the likeness is uncanny, the poor dude's got the eye bags too. So it's pretty obvious why we see him in the reflection during Hunter's mirror identity crisis so I won't dwell too much on this.

Next up we have Belos. Now this is a little more interesting, until this point we really don't see too much of a resemblance between Hunter and Belos besides the fact that they're technically related. However, it's not until the next reflection there's a little bit more of an understanding on why Hunter is also seeing Belos besides the fact that he is obviously traumatized.

His hair looks exactly like Belos's hair. Like even the positioning of that single stray strand of hair, it looks exactly the same. It's really sad to see though because it's implied that he grew out his hair to try and step away from Caleb and also from the Golden Guard. Belos probably made him keep his appearance clean and orderly since he was in a position of power but also to keep him looking as close to Caleb as possible.

Him growing out his hair is an act of defiance. Hunter was actively working to reorient his identity only to be hit with the realization that he looks almost exactly like Belos. It's truly tragic to see. And Hunter just spirals from there. He desperately tries to grab control of his own identity by taking a pair of scissors and hacking away at his hair, cutting away all the reminders.

I think Hunter's realized that he's never truly going to be freed from those connections he desperately wishes to sever. It's sad but it's true. He's a clone of an evil genocidal tyrant's long dead brother. But, now he does have the control to reforge his own face and path forward. He's Hunter, not Caleb, not Belos, and also not the Golden Guard anymore.

Some Narinder character analysis for y’all.

This is a slightly re-edited excerpt from a much longer post of mine where I was specifically trying to provide a rebuttal to someone else. I’m kinda proud of some of my takes here and the write up took me hours so I’m gonna repost it here on its own.

I’m going into specifically into Narinder’s

Speech patterns and way of expressing emotions.

Implications of his post defeat dialogue

Relationship with Aym and Baal

Feelings on Ratau’s death

And a little extra on why do we “babygirl” Narinder

Full analysis under the cut.

The way Narinder expresses his positive feelings

First I gotta establish Narinder’s voice. Narinder seems almost incapable of giving a genuine compliment especially without turning it into something about himself.

Here’s three examples of him giving a complement to The Lamb. Taken from after defeating Amdusias and Shamura. He also complements The Lamb when you sacrifice Ratau but I’ll come back around to that.

I wanted to grab the entire quotes so it didn’t look like I was nitpicking.

"Very good, my vessel. It seems I chose well when I kept you from Death.”

First example, “very good,” is the complement, but immediately after he takes credit for this by calling you “my vessel” thereby claiming ownership over you. His vessel did well. And again “I chose well” doubled down and complemented himself.

“I admit, you have worn it (the red crown) almost as well as I could have myself.”

Again we see the complement layered in ego. “Almost as well as I” in other words you did well, but don’t forget I’m better. Also important to draw attention to is “I admit” this is a very explicit statement of his refusal to acknowledge the success of others.

"Your appetite for death is something I can admire, Vessel. But the Crown is mine, and none - NONE - are worthy. None other than I.”

Here he almost lays down a complement. “Your appetite for death is something I can admire” straight up, states his admiration. He seems to almost realize what he’s done and quickly pulls back into his ego, “But the crown is mine” “-none are worthy- None other than I.”

These are the three of the four ONLY times that Narinder ever says anything explicitly positive about someone else when he is a god. Thus establishing that the head ass cannot give out a compliment to save his life. The one time he gives you full credit for your actions he immediately pulls right back into his ego.

I cannot stress this enough. Someone who is characterized as cold and emotionally closed off as Narinder is WILL NOT suddenly undo this characteristic when they try and express a positive feeling.

Okay with that established we can look at his follower dialogue. Specifically these two examples from when you resurrect a follower and allow him to go on a mission.

“I cannot begrudge supplantation by one such as yourself.”

Literally saying I don’t resent you for taking my place. It’s not an explicit statement that he respects you but this is he weird fucked up little way of saying it. Of course he still lays it out in a way that’s self centred but we know from the way he has spoken that this is about as much verbal praise he is capable of giving.

The other one is a less explicit statement but I think it’s a interesting reflection of the final place of his character.

“…my thanks, Lamb.”

Being his last bit of unique dialogue, it’s an incredible ending to a character. He thanks you. That’s all he needed to say.

Narinder’s reaction to his defeat that he would rather die.

Let’s go over his dialogue in some depth.

"You weak, snivelling, foul thing. You - wait! Waaaiiiiiit!"

I’m starting with this line as it compels me the most. I find that there are two separate readings of this and I can’t really point to one above the other. On my play through I had assumed his wailing was more in reference to being denied death. It could also be read as him not wanting to be reduced to a follower and realizing what your mercy really means for his future.

“-are you to be a vengeful false idol, or a merciful coward? No longer can you blame your vile acts on me."

Okay, looking at the way he presents your two options he seems to push more for the murder action. “-vengeful false idol,” is how he refers to murder. It’s not exactly a glowing review but his use of the word vengeful is important. We know that one of Narinder’s main goals in the game is revenge, we he already acts with revenge I can’t say that he’s using this word as an insult. The false idol part of this statement seems like he’s attempted to separate himself from you, again for is ego.

Then he presents the spare option by calling you a “merciful coward.” The flow of this full sentence puts more pressure on this option. He presents it as the “or” the second option. This is the bad option, the option of a coward.

“So. vou are no different to me after all. You have become as I am."

I know this is a deranged order to go over these quotes but last we got murder. Compared to his spare dialogue this is incredibly sombre. We know from already establishing how big his ego is that saying you are the same as him is almost a compliment. I do find this dialogue incredibly interesting tho, I can’t exactly explain why but I can’t help but read this as damning as well. It’s like he means it in both ways, the ultimate fuck you. You are just as I am, for better and worse.

But from what we know about Narinder his edgy ass cannot express emotion. He wraps his statements in layers of irony and selfishness. Unless it supports the persona he puts on or inflates his ego he WILL NOT right out state his feelings or needs, especially when he was a chained god.

Relationship with Aym and Baal

Aym and Baal are incredibly hard to characterize. They don’t have much dialogue to work off of and only three characters every speak on them, Shamura, Narinder and Forneus. The context of the game does present them as more Narinder’s first (and second) hand, less followers more apprentices, almost, but where’s the fun in assuming.

"Intended as keepers, perhaps, but they were young and in need of guidance. Must I be blamed for my influence?"

I wanna draw attention to the specific wording of keepers. Again, based on the way Narinder speaks its safe to assume he means the formal meaning of a keeper, meaning a caretaker. It is unclear if Narinder was told they where his keepers or if he assumed so, but either way he still speaks on them as such.

For the sake of argument (and I don’t wanna rewrite this bit entirely) I’m gonna put the idea that Narinder brainwashed Aym and Baal against my presented idea of them being his keepers or apprentices.

The proposed idea of the brainwashing angle can be developed based on Narinder saying that “they where young and in need of guidance, must I be blamed for my influence.” This implies that, as much as Aym and Baal may have been sent as keepers, they where still young and Narinder could not help but be an influence on them. I am gonna come back around to this thread so hold onto this for a moment. Moving on.

“Two kits I did have, true love found! And yet one lackadaisy summer day, my beautiful children were taken away... a gift, they said, for the one they loved most, the one that waits...”

“Ooh, kits... I remember, I remember... two kits in my claws... a gift.."

It is unclear and morally dubious how Aym and Baal came to Narinder. First we’re not 100% where Narinder is chained. The wiki lists it as the afterlife and in dialogue Narinder refers to it as “at the gates between this life and the next, trapped at the nexus of what was and what wasn't.” (When he asks you to send him on a mission.) We can travel there both by dying and being summoned there by him.

Either way the assumption is that Aym and Baal had to die. (As an aside I have my own speculation on the conditions required for a person to be presented to Narinder or to be resurrected but that’s off topic.) The horrific implications being that either Shamura themself killed the kits or that they where already dying. However you cannot blame the reaper for ushering the dead away from life.

I’m going to work off of the cult specific definition and characteristics of brainwashing. It’s hard to characterize where Aym and Baal sit here as, again they have little dialogue and due to the nature of brainwashing it’s hard to spot. First I wanna grab my brainwashing resources.

I’m using Encyclopedia Britannica’s page on brainwashing, cults, indoctrination, manipulation as my primary resourse.

Again I kinda wanna apply a layer of irony to how literally I apply real life tragedy to this game that obviously uses cults in a comedic manner. I wanna focus in on the characteristics displayed by victims of brainwashing and the techniques used in brainwashing by an abuser.

Looking at the elements used in brainwashing the only one I can say off the bat that is present is isolation, obviously. But with that let’s grab all of Aym and Baal’s dialogue.

What is clear from their dialogue is their obedience to Narinder. They call him master while his keepers and still when you meet them later when adventuring. And physically we do see them by Narinder’s side the entire main game and they fight the Lamb first. But if we add some nuance and look at their role as keepers or my own theory of being apprentices both actions of obedience make sense still for those roles. On the same note they also don’t display traits you would expect for someone fully under Narinder’s control. They speak to the Lamb out of turn and attack without prompting from Narinder.

Other characteristics are hard to imply. With torture I do want to pass it off an unlikely as based on the way Narinder tries to manipulate the Lamb it’s only verbal and he cannot attack while chained and I don’t see that changing with the keepers. Traits like sleep, water and food deprivation can’t be applied for various reasons (mostly the being dead one) and we don’t know anything about Narinder and the keeper’s interactions in the past so I’ll have to disregard other traits like suggestion.

Baal: "It's you. Usurper of the Red Crown. The one who freed us."

Aym: "Ha! You are nothing compared to our Master. We have not been in this world long, but already I can tell you are weak. You lack discipline. Our Master wielded Death with precision and control. You allow chaos to reign."

Baal: "What my brother means to say is thank you."

Moving onto groupthink I can pretty comfortably say that this is not a present characteristic of Aym and Baal. In their limited dialogue we can easily characterize Aym as more outwardly defensive of Narinder but Baal is more reserved and even contradicts Aym and is able to speak freely of Narinder.

Looping back around to the way Narinder speaks on his influence on Aym and Baal. Again we know how Narinder speaks, he cannot give honest compliments and dodges affection like it’s a professional sport. With the way he will outright tell the Lamb to manipulate followers and then uses the words “guidance” and “influence” about Aym and Baal, he has to be avoiding admitting affection to the keepers. He does follow that up with “Do what you wish, scornful God. I care not for them.” But again does Forneus not also allow her kits to do as they wish?

My own reading of Narinder’s relation to Aym and Baal is that of mentorship but it could also be read as parental. But saying brainwashed is a big stretch.

His feelings on the death of Ratau

This is like another example of like, yeah, wow, an evil character does evil? Who could’ve possibly foreseen this? Sarcasm aside I do see his comments on this being a lesser evil.

First I do have to ask why, if Narinder held strong sense of unrest against his former vessel, did he not have him struck down? The main reason I can see is that Ratau is still devoted to the red crown, most clearly seen by the statue at the lonely shack which generates devotion.

Second, Ratau’s death isn’t on his hands, it’s on yours. I find his pride here is from The Lamb’s actions not the death of Ratau. You killed your mentor, he describes your actions as “treacherous opportunism” and says “A great Vessel takes their master's will as their own.” Based on his later dialogue this is likely more foreshadowing the Lamb becoming as Narinder is. Narinder tried to kill his siblings, and you did kill your mentor. “You have become as I am."

I’m gonna tangent quickly cause there’s a line here that is incredibly interesting.

"He renounced his position after striking a bargain that resulted in the sacrifice of a Follower. He was weak."

Incredibly interesting the way he condemns Ratau’s sacrifice of a follower. Narinder directly contradicts himself. It is implied that the follower was lost to another being that did not benefit Narinder, but the Lamb also sacrifices followers to the Fox and Midas. Just something to chew on.

Why do we “babygirl” Narinder and other evil characters?

This is kinda the last bit I’m gonna get into before I cap this off. It is incredibly funny for me to say “I babygirl Narinder” only to get a reply that’s like “I don’t think you babygirl him on purpose.” But I wanna talk about why this happens and why it happened to specifically Narinder.

When people complain about the fandom interpretation of Narinder I think they forget the tone of cult of the lamb. The closest thing I could think to call it would be a dark comedy kinda energy.

The game has very dark themes going on. Mentions of real horrible things like genocide, cults and religious abuse. But also just like look at the game, it’s visual style is so cute and non threatening, the bird characters have two mouths to commit to the bit. If you look at the way it depicts cults it’s very surface level, it’s more focused on being a satire on the common satanic media kinda look of a cult. Visually it bathes in its aesthetics, taking names from books like The Lessee Key of Solomon, uses villainous depictions of symbols like the pentagram or old Hebrew script, disregarding its nuanced origins.

And then they go onto do the funniest thing ever. The other bishop’s? Gross little freaks, based on commonly disliked animals, worm, frog, squid and spider. And then- and then they make the god of death, who they characterize and manipulative and evil, they make him a catboy. You cannot tell me they did not know what they where doing.

Why have I shot Narinder with the babygirl beam? CAUSE THE GAME DID IT FIRST!

I’m gonna call the god of death my little meow meow and point out his status as a Tumblr sexy man cause he’s a little guy and I wanna give him head scritches. But I’m also gonna call him a layered, fucked up and an incredibly interesting character in the same breath.

Time for me to write an essay on Mallek and MSPA Reader’s relationship. Hiveswap Friendsim spoilers down below!

Keep reading

So, picture this:

Here I am, sat in an internet-less room, twiddling my thumbs and waiting for time to crawl ever so slowly by. For lack of a better alternative, I start flipping through the pages of Chamber of Secrets and I notice A Thing.

"My, how peculiar" I say to myself, fully intending to let The Thing be, but alas; time moves slowly, boredom persists and, not unlike the tell-tale heart, The Thing calls to me.

"Come," it beckons, "notice me further". "Compile some data" it begs, "that's surely the most productive way to pass the time"; like a moth to a flame, I am caught.

This, dear reader, is how I found myself tallying all the different ways the word "mudblood" is used in canon. So gird your loins and let me introduce you to

The Mudblood Chronicles, or what's in a name?

part 1: methodology

Since the purpose of this exercise is to analyse the use of the term "mudblood" as a slur, I'm not going to count the times in which the word is not being used with malicious intent. Throughout the books this happens on several occasions, those being:

during the course of the narration (it happens once in the context of "everyone present knew mudblood was a very offensive term")

when Harry uses the term, since it only happens when he either recalls someone else saying it (one time with Draco and once with Snape) or he's forbidding Kreacher from using it (twice).

when Ron uses it; it happens once to explain the slur's meaning and once (in conjunction with Ginny) to demand Kreacher stop using the term.

when someone is quoting themselves. Draco quotes himself to Dumbledore once ("you care about me saying mudblood when I'm about to kill you?"; incidentally, it's also the last time he ever utters the word)

I am counting instances in which a muggleborn character uses the term to refer to themselves, since it happens in the context of reclaiming the insult and I am interested in who the author chooses to highlight thusly.

part 2: the results/ WHEN

The word "mudblood" and its plural "mudbloods" are used as an insult a total of 62 times in the Harry Potter books. Here we can see the book by book breakdown:

Unsurprisingly, The book where "mudblood" is used the most ( a total of 34 times) is Deathly Hallows since it takes place during a war about muggleborns. Chamber of Secrets, where the term is introduced, follows with 10 mentions, after which is Order of the Phoenix (7 mentions), followed by Goblet of Fire (6 mentions) and Half-Blood prince (5 mentions). The term "mudblood" is not used in either Philosopher's Stone or Prisoner of Azkaban.

part 3: the results/ WHO

So who is our biggest culprit?

Draco Malfoy is our uncontested lead, having both the advantage of appearing in all books and of orbiting around our narrator. Both Bellatrix and Kreacher make a good showing, with Bellatrix's 6 times being especially notable since they all occur during the course of Deathly Hallows.

Let's break this down further, shall we?

Despite introducing us to the term, Draco appears to scale back his usage of the slur as he ages.

Before partaking in this experiment, I was under the vague impression that, in the wizarding world, "mudblood" is seen as a childish insult. I can now see why: in times of peace (i.e. before Voldemort's resurrection), Draco is the only person in Harry's day-to-day life saying it and he himself peters off in the usage of "mudblood" as things get more serious. To Draco, it appears, "mudblood" IS a childish insult, and we'll see further proof of this at a later date.

part 4: the results/ HOW

Let us now look at how the term is used:

Unsurprisingly, the person "mudblood" is hurled most often at is Hermione. As a main character, she is the most visible muggleborn in the narrative and, if that wasn't enough, she is more often than not the only muggleborn present, even when it doesn't make much sense (Hermione is the only known muggleborn member of the order of the phoenix, an organization whose supposed aim is the fight for muggleborn rights.)

There are no known instances of the word "mudblood" being used to refer to any other muggleborn student during Harry's time at Hogwarts. Lily Evans is the only other school-aged character who gets the dubious honor of being a "mudblood".

Let's break this down further and look at who people are referring to when they say "mudblood":

*= Walburga's portrait never directly addresses Hermione, she only alludes to the presence of various filth (muggleborns, blood traitors, werewolves..) in her home. That said, Hermione is the only muggleborn we ever see in Grimmauld Place so it must stand to reason that Walburga is referring to her, just like she's indirectly referring ro Remus Lupin when she mentions werewolves.

**= Both Hermione and Lily use the term mudblood to refer to themselves in an attempt to reclaim the slur, they both do it twice.

***= Our only "other" is mr Ted Tonks, who Bellatrix only mentions in order to disavow when Voldemort talks about the birth of Teddy Lupin.

Interestingly, the only people who ever refer to Lily Evans as "mudblood" to her face are Severus Snape (one instance recounted three separate times) and Lily Evans herself. Voldemort uses the insult when talking about her with Harry long after her death.

Of further note, our only written "mudblood" comes by courtesy of a ministry pamphlet Harry finds in Diagon Alley, heavily implied to have been written by one ms Dolores Umbridge.

part 5: a brief interlude/ Draco's language

Draco refers to Hermione as “Granger” 13 times and, while their interactions often consist of him talking about her blood status, he uses "mudblood" instead of her name only 4 times. Furthemore, there are 4 additional times where he uses both mudblood and Granger (as in "that mudblood Granger").

The very first time Draco mentions Hermione in the books occurs during this exchange with Lucius:

I find this interesting because, even in private, his first instinct is to use her given name. It's only after he is scolded by Lucius* that we get our first "mudblood", in a scene where he is once again feeling threatened by her.

*= Guess who never utters the word "mudblood"? Lucius. Even Narcissa does once (in DH, when she recognises Hermione at the manor)

part 6: conclusion

I am not a linguistics expert, I cannot tell wether JKR uses the slur she made up in a way that mimics real world slurs. What I can do with the data I compiled is try to track various characters' attitudes towards muggleborns in the books by looking at what they call them.

People whose views remain unchanged (Voldemort, Kreacher, Walburga) remain consistent with their usage of "mudblood"; Draco, who grows up as the books progress, scales back. Snape only ever uses the word once, in the past, and the incident is retold multiple times to signify its importance.

As the situation in the wizarding world worsens, more people feel emboldened to use an otherwise taboo term, as seen by how most one-off utterances of "mudblood" take place in book7, during wartime.

Finally, I would like to note that we only ever hear two muggleborns' (Lily and Hermione) opinions on "mudblood" as a slur, the rest of the time it's mostly purebloods (and the occasional half-blood) telling us how to feel about the insult; I find that very interesting.

There. Now all this useless information is out of my brain and into the aether, where other nerds can ponder on its significance while this nerd here sleeps the sleep of the truly righteous.

xoxo

The sad thing is that we don’t even get to see any uncomplicatedly happy memories of his innocent childhood friendship with Lily. There’s this pervasive sense from the start of that chapter that JKR thinks that even 9 year old Lily was too good for him (the horrid judgemental use of the word ‘greedy’ and that quote she once gave where she said Snape’s tragedy was that he was drawn to but couldn’t emulate Lily’s innate goodness makes me hurl - what was so innately different about them aged 9 other than her good looks and middle class parents?) and so every single scene is her chastising him for something or other. Like she couldn’t allow saintly Lily to be seen as genuinely choosing and enjoying the company of someone as prickly and offputting as Snape, so she time skips 5 years and just tells us instead of showing us that they’re best friends. Unfortunately by failing to show any gentle, unspoiled moments the whole thing comes off like Lily sees him as a charity case she condescends to hang out with on occasion, while Severus fails to get the picture that clinging hard to someone who doesn’t want that is always going to end in a toxic place for both parties. Sorry for the super long post! It’s just rare to find someone who doesn’t buy into JKR’s intended reading of the Potter parents.

This is quite an interesting topic because even years ago, when I re-read the series at 19 or 20 and was quite involved in political groups and unions at university, I got the impression that Rowling creates a world where classism is constantly justified unless you are on the side of the bad guys. That is to say, Draco being a classist is wrong because he’s Draco, and he’s bad, and he’s Slytherin. But then you have quite a few characters who have clear classist attitudes and nothing happens because they are part of the heroes of the story, and so we’re going to completely overlook it. For example, Sirius is a classist; he always has been and even has nothing against slavery and treats his house-elf like rubbish. He doesn’t even consider him a conscious and independent living being; he’s just a bug to him. The Weasleys have a clear class resentment; they are humble and are sold to us as open-minded and tolerant people, but the reality is that if someone doesn’t fit into their narrow standards of “goodness,” they shut down and are just as petty and prejudiced as any blood supremacist. The best example of this is how the Weasley women treat Fleur simply because, instead of being a humble pick-me girl, she’s posh. But the fact is that Fleur has done absolutely nothing wrong for Ginny and Molly to treat her that way; her only sin is being beautiful and feminine, end of story. It’s supposed to be a story to learn that prejudices are wrong, but Hermione spends her life labelling other girls like the Patils or Lavender (before Lavender gets involved with Ron) as frivolous because they like doing things that are traditionally classified as feminine, which reveals that Rowling has quite a few prejudices against certain groups of women and their attitudes, stemming from a clear internalised misogyny that is present throughout the novel. You only have to look at how she glorifies motherhood as the pinnacle of female fulfilment and the real way to become a moral and brave example within the saga (Lily and Molly, Narcissa being redeemed ONLY because she loves her son) compared to the female characters who either haven’t seen motherhood as a dream come true (Merope Gaunt) or who have no children (Bellatrix), who are portrayed as little less than the worst of the worst in the story.

What I mean by this is that Rowling has quite a significant cognitive dissonance when it comes to establishing the moral values of the story. Because this is not A Song of Ice and Fire; it’s not a multi-voiced story with various perspectives from which you can develop your own complex criteria. It’s a story told from a single point of view where the dichotomy between good and evil is a central point of conflict, but is often blurred by quite a few contradictions that have no explanation, not even theoretically. I mean, the social themes in this story are terribly mismanaged and portrayed in a very superficial way. In the end, the conclusion you draw is that Gryffindor’s mission, the Order, or Harry’s is basically to defeat Voldemort to continue preserving the same status quo in which the magical world has always been immersed, with no intention of going to the root of the problems and taking action for real change. But well, we’re talking about a story written by a woman who turns her protagonist into the magical equivalent of a cop. I mean, LOL. I mean, ACAB, what can I say.

I say all this because when we talk about James and Lily, all of this applies in the same way. James and Lily make no sense. James and Lily are an example of what should NOT be done when writing a script, for instance. In screenwriting, the premise is always show, don't tell. But Lily and James are purely the tell. Lily and James are known for what other characters tell us about them, totally subjective characters, especially those who were friends with the couple. They are presented as great heroes when the reality in canon is that they did nothing. They joined the Order, were in it for a year, and then spent a year and a half holed up at home with their child, then they died, and that’s it. They can be treated as something tragic, but heroic? I wouldn’t say so.

They are also shown as paradigms of "the good ones," of the "correct morality," especially Lily, who is basically the Virgin Mary of this story and seems to have no flaws at all. But the reality is that if we go to canon, everything Lily does is a constant failure. Lily is condescending to Severus from the very beginning, probably because he is poorer than she is. Then she treats him as a charity case, which is already annoying her because he’s too geeky, odd, and marginal, causing her problems in her social circles. Then she half-smiles at his abuser while he is mistreating and humiliating him in front of the entire school. And then she marries that abuser. You can tell me whatever you want about Lily Potter, but what you’re showing me is rubbish, and if you show me rubbish but tell me wonderful things, there’s something that doesn’t add up, and for me, that’s the greatest failure of all.

If I have to be honest, I go back to what I mentioned before: for me, Lily had a huge inferiority complex. She felt inferior in the Muggle world because perhaps she wasn’t poor, but her family didn’t live in a good area either; they were probably lower middle class, without status or a promising future. At Hogwarts, she felt inferior for being the daughter of Muggles, so throughout her life, she secretly wanted to be part of the elite, to stand out, to be popular, to be seen as something important. That a boy like James Potter—handsome, wealthy, popular, with pure-blood status—would take an interest in her never displeased her. Deep down, she liked it; it was what she wanted. In the end, she gave in and married him, and she was probably very happy with her decision because that way, she ended up at the pinnacle of the social ladder. Of course, she liked James deep down for a long time; as Rowling once said. She liked what James represented, what he could mean for her. She would no longer just be the good student, pretty, nice, and popular; she would also have one of the most popular boys in school as a partner, who was also rich and of pure blood. I think that deep down, she and Petunia are quite similar in that regard, both seeking social ascent, each in their own way. After all, they were sisters.