If the yellowjackets got stuck on the island in lord of the flies (let's say for the same amount of time) I don't think they would've turned into a cult because a major contributor to that was the hunger which they don't really have to deal with there so honestly I think the body count would be very low. That being said if the lotf boys got stuck in the Canadian wilderness everyone would've been dead by first winter
"Hawkins seeing will as the antichrist" that's beautiful, but have we considered hawkins seeing will as the second coming of christ and el being publicly named and blamed so the town turns against her and sees her as an antichrist as an attempt to make locating her easier (strength in numbers). Can we talk about that like just for a second plssss
I think there are certain times where you cannot watch a show but then treat a particular main character as an afterthought. Like even if you hate that character, you can't try to gaslight me into thinking they don't matter at all and then expect everyone else to see you as a well-articulated human being like that's not how it works. This also applies to certain ships/dynamics. Because respectfully why are you watching the show if you don't wanna pay attention to any scene involving taivan I'm ctfu
The sentiment that you can't like byler without liking Mike is one that only really makes sense if mike was 1. Likable and had reasons for acting the way he did from s3 onwards and 2. If mike was an actual character from season 3 onwards. Neither of which are true in his case. And this is why I kinda giggle a little when people say this becuase guys, name one deep thing about post-s2 mike that's made obvious to us in the show and actually goes somewhere. Characters like will and lucas that mike stans are insanely bigoted towards have much more depth than he did even if they got fumbled in season 5 alongside the rest of this show. Mike Wheeler is literally to some bylers what Steve harrington is to steddies. All his depth is fanmade you guys!!! We don't have to care about him!!!
Whether you feel what Shauna did to Mari holds racial implications or not, it's not your place to harass or belittle poc fans of the show for feeling this way, dismissing how that scene made them feel. While the writers were very tone deaf and probably didn't understand the implications behind that scene, it still doesn't matter when it's coupled with how many times the show has done all their poc characters dirty. Telling poc fans that, after watching a brown girl be butchered without dignity, different from her counterparts, and have her hair taken as a trophy by a yte girl who has been antagonizing her so aggressively, they shouldn't feel uncomfortable by that or that they should just accept it because "violence is the show" is very disingenuous and misses the point. Especially when factoring how these same Shauna defenders will get up in arms for other fans wishing for her end, coming up with all the reasons why she should make it out, even though, in some of their words, "violence is the show."
You know the yellowjackets fandom is overwhelmingly white when they try to say that there are 0 racist undertones to a white woman hunting a latina woman like its a sport, stripping her corpse and hanging it up like livestock, cutting her hair off, wearing it as a trophy and then flexing the fact she's became a warrior. Like, genuienly, did some of you skip history??? And then they'll jump you for thinking shauna is racist like idfk what did you want me to take from that? And it'll always be some cracker telling you that you're "missing the point of the show" and that it's not a big deal since its a show where people die. And then there's how they treat tai and travis aswell. This fandom is seriously miserable to be in if you're not a self-victimising white queer.
The whole "shauna is/isn't racist" discourse isn't one that should really exist 1. Because we all watched episode ten with our eyes, not our ass holes and 2. I think some of you are too confident in saying that a white character is not racist, at all, to any extent or at any percent. Because, in my experience, every white person has unchecked biases and every white person I know has said something veeeery casually racist and saw no issue with it like I fear these are people who were born at the top of what is more or less a hierachy they created, were raised to have these racist attitudes and utilise their white privilege. So no I don't think any white character or person can be 0% racist/biased.
im shy to comment; but when you brought up the veil for jack, did you mean you think Jack wearing that specific thing has symbolism? Like uhm idk.. getting married = a grown up thing..? Hes hiding behind the veil..? Hes stuck like smth forever..? His fate is doomed..? His relstionship is doomed with simon..?
Were you implying something like that? If so id love for u to expand here/in a post!! — i love ur observations!!
thank you for the ask!! id LOVE to expand on this i havent done lotf analysis in forever 😭 i think theres a few ways to view jacks veil lmk if theres anything i didn't bring up
tl;dr simon and jack are romeo and juliet (but society... society calls them gay /ref), the party is a rite of passage and lowkey a wedding without the wedding part, jack is really allegorical all the time
first off. what even is jacks veil. its a bridal juliet cap/veil! these have been around for a while, but considering the timeframe of lotf, it's probably from the 20's or 30's. how does this matter to jacks story? how is this symbolic?? well.
"For evening wear, a favourite and becom-ing adornment for the hair is a cap made after the fashion of that worn by the hapless heroine of the world's best known love story." x
starting off VIOLENT today with the specific type of veil used. its a reference to romeo and juliet! because of COURSE its a tragedy and doomed romance reference! you probably know where i'm going with this. simon and jack are stand ins for romeo and juliet (respectively). regardless of if you interpret their relationship as platonic or romantic, their relationship is forbidden and doomed. because of society (society.... society calls them gay... /ref). the main difference between simon/jack and romeo/juliet (besides their ending lmao) is that jack actively wants to assimilate into the choir group. ("i need to disguise myself, i need to blend in") he wants to be a respected leader because that is how he thinks he will be loved. he wants to be "manly" or like his father because that's what he's been taught.
(somewhat related tangent)
jack likes simon in spite of himself! in spite of whats expected of him. even when they're with the others he continually glances at simon for his reaction or his approval (the voting scene, the diary scene, etc.) the other's approval doesn't matter nearly as much as simon's, but alas. "he said he did not know which tree i talked of" amirite ah ah ah
ok the shakespeare segment is almost done but there are 2 other segments i want bring up: the tryst and the diary entries. simon and jack's tryst is super sweet!! it's basically their balcony moment. where art thou. simon continually challenges jack's actions and ideas and jack doesn't shut him down. "it's ok to scare the littluns if youre a hunter?" + "your father isn't coming for you" + "do you think this is a test?". at the same time he offers alternatives to jacks ideologies. "a jolly good time" + "you will be saved" + "you don't have to be brave." jack has a choice between these. he doesn't choose the alternative even though it was safer AND more responsible.
(end of somewhat related tangent)
"Proposals for a main theme include a discovery by the characters that human beings are neither wholly good nor wholly evil, but instead are more or less alike, awaking out of a dream and into reality, the danger of hasty action, or the power of tragic fate." x (yes its wikipedia)
the latter half referring to dreams, hasty action, and tragic fate all have connections to (say it with me!) the party scene and simon's death. this is a GREAT segway into my cultural anthropology rant
what do the party scene and weddings have in common? theyre both rites of passage! rites of passage mark transformations of the self. they also tend to include ceremonial garb. ex. jacks veil. ceremonial clothing is meant to separate normal life from major events like these. jack wears the veil outside of the party scene BUT his personal transformation starts with the end of the pig hunt and ends with simon's death.
veils have historically been used to indicate social status, mourning, or to generally hide your identity (among other things). jack merridew over here indicates everything listed with his veil. good for him honestly. he hides his face when he's stealing the fire to look more intimidating and hide his reactions. he's mourning the loss of his best friend. most notably, he sets himself apart from the rest of the crew with his veil.
at the party, jack emphasizes how ralph is a guest. he should be treated with respect! he gets first pick of the meat! but what he really means is that ralph isn't the person with authority. he is no longer in a space where he can have meaningful power over the others. instead, jack is the one with power! he's at his own home turf. yippee for him
back to cultural anthropology! there are 3 main stages of a rite of passage:
seperation -> liminality -> incorporation
separation is when a person is taken away from their old life and the supports of their old life. in this case, it's physically being away from the shelters, away from the conch, and away from ralph. liminality is when the actual change occurs. a fun add on is communitas, when an entire group is in liminality and has a sense of community. in this case, it's when everyone is dancing, singing, feeling the vibes?? lastly is incorporation, where your new self assimilates into a new space. you can't go back. you're also accepted by the community and have a change in status. this is simon's death and the transfer of power from ralph to jack.
merging this with the veil/wedding bit. you guys know the saying "it's bad luck to see your bride before the wedding?" thats also why the veil traditionally stays on until the deal is sealed. i don't think jack is getting married to simon's death that would be a weird thing to try to prove. but the deal IS sealed when jack realizes he and the group killed simon. and he lifts his veil to reveal his face. his rite of passage is done and he's a new guy!
not really sure how to end this.. i left out a lot about jacks whole macho deal but i think that speaks for itself... hope this was interesting?? hope you learned about a random type of wedding veil and a bit cultural anthropology today?? i don't think i came to any conclusions with this but jacks very fun to talk about
have we thought about the fact that jack couldve used his knife on simon when they were attacking him. probably grabbing his hair to bear the throat to get rid of the beast once and for all? but maybe he'd be jerked forward by all the action and his knife would merely graze simon's throat, but it's enough to sting and draw innocent blood
and maybe simon would briefly remember when those same hands cared for the same skin they tarnished, when their bodies would meet in tenderness rather than violence