Well, this was definitely an experience. Thank you so much to everyone who stuck it out through this soul crushing story.
Chapter: 24 - CLICK HERE TO READ
Rating: Explicit
Relationships: Steve Rogers/Bucky Barnes, Tony Stark/Pepper Potts, Minor Bucky Barnes/random folks.
Summary:
I check the monitor again, just as Steve’s eyes slide open. He looks into the camera. He looks into me. And I— I don’t know how to do this part. I never planned for this. I never dared to wish it into life, because I knew it would only bring me pain. And I was done with longing for the dead people and the dead world behind me.
This is a different kind of pain from the one in my shoulder now, as the skin frays around the place where it meets metal. It’s a pain of my reality crashing into this, into Steve Rogers. Alive. Drifting back into my life as I begin to drift out of it.
I recommend that you read this chapter when you have time and space to do so.
Chapter: 23 - CLICK HERE TO READ
Rating: Explicit
Relationships: Steve Rogers/Bucky Barnes, Tony Stark/Pepper Potts, Minor Bucky Barnes/random folks.
Summary:
I check the monitor again, just as Steve’s eyes slide open. He looks into the camera. He looks into me. And I— I don’t know how to do this part. I never planned for this. I never dared to wish it into life, because I knew it would only bring me pain. And I was done with longing for the dead people and the dead world behind me.
This is a different kind of pain from the one in my shoulder now, as the skin frays around the place where it meets metal. It’s a pain of my reality crashing into this, into Steve Rogers. Alive. Drifting back into my life as I begin to drift out of it.
CW: This essay is about about trauma, including everything Bucky was subjected to, as well as mentions of interpersonal trauma, sexual assault, and incest. It also discusses victim-blaming at length. SPOILERS ABOUND.
I was already planning to write my opinions about Bucky in TFATWS, and then a lovely anon sent me the article by Rotem Rusak, “How Falcon and The Winter Soldier Villainizes Trauma.” So I figured I’d comment on the article and offer other opinions in a huge-ass essay that maybe five people will actually read.
I have real respect for Rusak, especially this essay on Stucky, much of which I agree with. I think Rusak’s most recent essay was well composed in many ways, and it seems like it was quite moving for some folks. I get where she’s coming from, I really do, and I can see why reading the show this way would be extremely upsetting. I respect this essay and its place in an ongoing conversation about the show. I also strongly disagree with pretty much her entire premise.
I’d like to offer a completely different interpretation of TFATWS where Bucky is not fragilized, is an agent of his own healing, and does not need to be the subject of our own interpretation of what his healing has to be. I’ll also attempt to make the argument that assuming his fragility and diminishing his many, many acts of meaningful agency in TFATWS is a disservice to this character.
I really like this interpretation of the show and it makes sense of some things that seemed inconsistent to me before. But (similar to what another poster said) I think it’s a flaw in the show that viewers have to put in a lot of work and already be super invested in Bucky to get something like this out of it. Because I don’t think this is an intuitive reading.
Just to zero in on Raynor because it’s an easy example of how ambiguous the show is. OP and I think she’s an intentionally written bad therapist. But if you go on a more general fandom space like the TFATWS reddit, you’ll see maybe 1/3 or ½ of people saying that Raynor is a good therapist who’s just tough on Bucky because that’s what he needs. With this level of disagreement, the creators didn’t do a good job getting across how we were supposed to see her.
Back to Bucky. IMO, there’s always been this discrepancy in the MCU between what we’re shown onscreen, and how Bucky is described verbally–not just by himself and other characters, but by the creators. We see that he’s forced to kill people, deprived of agency to the point that he (iconically!) doesn’t know his own name. But verbally, he’s framed like a redeemed villain, or a morally gray hero with a checkered past. To the point that I often see casual fans not knowing that Bucky isn’t a redeemed villain type of character.
Personally, I loved 90% of the Bucky content in the show–I loved Bucky’s personality in the show, the changes he went through, his relationships with Sam and Zemo, etc. The Wakanda flashback was great at showing how Bucky felt about being mind-controlled, from his perspective. But as usual, some of what I was told verbally seemed to contradict what I was being shown.
There’s a difference between Bucky understandably feeling guilt for what happened, and the way characters always avoid saying Bucky was mind-controlled. Instead, they talk about what Bucky is or does (i.e. “I don’t do that anymore”). I was just watching ep 2, and I noticed that Isaiah is left with the impression that Bucky’s affiliated with Hydra because Bucky gives a typically vague response–“I’m not a killer anymore”–instead of explaining that he wasn’t fighting Isaiah by choice.
In the world of the story, I like this particular instance. I can see it as a mildly self-sabotaging habit, where Bucky makes himself look like a villain because he’s uncomfortable sharing the details, or doesn’t want to seem like he’s making excuses. But if he’s not going to summarize his actual backstory for the audience, someone else has to do it. And no one does it. And it gets confusing what the intent is, because it affects how the show is read.
Like, any mildly attentive fan knows that Sam used to be a counselor. But when it was relevant in TFATWS, he had a line where the audience was verbally reminded that he used to be a counselor. Then we knew we were supposed to be thinking about that.
If it wasn’t for that line, less attentive viewers might not know that Sam used to be a counselor, and for fans who did know, we couldn’t be sure whether it’s supposed to be related to the scenes with Karli and Bucky.
For me, this is like if Sam being a former counselor was referenced in every episode, but no one would actually say the word counselor and kept saying, “Hey Sam, remember that thing you used to do? Maybe you should do it again.” Sure, there could be an in-character interpretation of why no one will say the word counselor, but it still would make it hard to follow the show.
As a side note, some of these conversations have an unnecessary element of treating Bucky as a real person and implying that people who criticize his arc are somehow criticizing a real survivor’s decisions. Sure, Bucky has agency in the story but in the real world where we’re discussing him, he’s just a character whose portrayal is crafted by everyone who works on the show. Fans aren’t disrespecting anyone’s agency if they don’t like how Bucky is portrayed in the show.
(And regardless of what our opinions are, I bet a lot of us are trauma survivors with that being tied in to our opinions. So can we all just be nice to each other about our Bucky feelings even if we don’t have the same ones?)
The project of my article had nothing to do with Bucky’s agency as a character in the world he himself inhabits, and everything to do with the choices the writers made in our world and why! While I appreciate the work done in the above analysis, I think from the get go, OP and I are simply not discussing the same things.
I don’t suggest Bucky is villainized, I suggest his trauma is, because instead of allowing him to come to terms with what was done to him, the narrative reckons only with the damage he did (while having not an iota control). This I believe to be a purposeful narrative choice made by Marvel.
While I confess I have not had time to fully read OP’s response, I believe, based on Assumption 2, that my project was perhaps misunderstood.
“Assumption 2: Bucky Barnes is fully capable of making his own informed choices. Because I focus so much on Bucky’s many, many acts of agency in TFATWS, I can anticipate concerns about how capable he is in making his own choices, especially after his history of brainwashing.”
In my article the overwhelming assumption is Bucky Barnes is not capable of making any choices because Bucky Barnes is a fictional character. Every decision Bucky makes is made for him by corporation and possibly, in my most generous imagination, a writing team. Bucky has no agency, not in TFATWS nor in any other work, just as no character has agency in the world because characters do not exist. My question is not why did a fictional character choose a set of actions, but why did a set of people in the world approach the story of Bucky in this specific fashion. I have no doubts Bucky would feel guilty about everything that happened to him, that he would want to atone and grapple with it. My question is where was a strong voice in the narrative reminding him he was not in fact morally responsible or guilty? Why are these the choices Marvel made in tackling his story? I don’t think that can be answered by discussing the character as an agentic figure who chose to do anything he did (because the whole point of the article is that he’s a written character), nor by looking at the intricacies of what we believe he might have felt. Television is a visual narrative and I cannot see Bucky’s thoughts. Of course, I can speculate about what they might be, but again, my project is not about Bucky’s inner state, it’s about what was made explicit on our screens and what wasn’t. Though one could say, well surely, it doesn’t all have to be spelled out. It surely doesn’t, but then it’s important to consider, what was spelled out? What wasn’t? Why is that?
I appreciate all the conversation around my piece and thank everyone for taking the time to engage with it!
Below is my edited response to Rotem Rusak’s (indirect) comments about my essay (see above), as well as additional comments. I just had to respond to the content, because some of it is totally boggling to me and my brain wouldn’t let it go.
/Begin edit, Rusak’s content in bold
“The project of my article had nothing to do with Bucky’s agency as a character in the world he himself inhabits, and everything to do with the choices the writers made in our world and why!”
The writers made those choices about Bucky’s agency. They chose to have him perform these acts of agency as part of the narrative. Everything Bucky says, does, and is shown to feel is a choice the writers made in our world about the narrative. Thus, everything in (and not in) the narrative is potentially relevant for the analysis of this “why” question.
“I don’t suggest Bucky is villainized, I suggest his trauma is, because instead of allowing him to come to terms with what was done to him, the narrative reckons only with the damage he did (while having not an iota control)”
I still don’t understand how the narrative has not allowed Bucky to come to terms with what was done to him. What does that even mean? What do people want, really? The narrative has amply attended to and established Bucky’s victimhood in two feature films. TFATWS is clearly not intended to be a stand-alone story, so the prior narrative content is also fair game in this discussion. If we know Bucky is a victim and Bucky knows he was a victim, what does this “full realization” of trauma look like and why is this so very important in determining whether the narrative is charitable or hostile to trauma?
“While I confess I have not had time to fully read OP’s response”
Kind of just a basic courtesy to read something before commenting on it, no? Perhaps this is why Rusak incorrectly assumes that we are talking about two different things when we are both talking about narrative choices made by the creators and what they might mean.
“Bucky has no agency, not in TFATWS nor in any other work, just as no character has agency in the world because characters do not exist.”
Everything I wrote about Bucky’s agency was in the context of the narrative acts of agency given to him by the creators. I don’t actually think Bucky is a real person.
“My question is not why did a fictional character choose a set of actions, but why did a set of people in the world approach the story of Bucky in this specific fashion.”
But here’s the thing - the character’s actions and the presented whys behind them are also products of the creators and are just as important as any other part of the narrative. They are fair game for evidence about what the creators may be trying to say about Bucky.
“My question is where was a strong voice in the narrative reminding him he was not in fact morally responsible or guilty? Why are these the choices Marvel made in tackling his story?”
Again, Marvel unambiguously portrays him as a victim in prior MCU installments. Both the viewers and Bucky know he’s a victim and not guilty even before TFATWS aired. So if the broader narrative has abundantly told us that he’s a victim and not guilty, why must this be belabored again? Why can’t the man just move forward with his recovery without it being labeled as creative hostility toward trauma?
If Rusak wants to discuss what’s narratively said about Bucky’s trauma, the entire narrative must be considered, not just the cherry picked parts. So much of Bucky’s arc in TFATWS is about coming to terms with trauma and moving forward from his traumatic past. This includes making peace with feelings of responsibility, discovering his post-Hydra identity, finding a valued place in the world, making meaningful human connections, etc etc. These creative choices run directly in opposition to the argument that the creators are actively hostile toward Bucky’s trauma and recovery.
“I don’t think that can be answered by discussing the character as an agentic figure who chose to do anything he did (because the whole point of the article is that he’s a written character)... “
Bucky’s agency as written in the narrative is completely relevant for discussion of how the creators view his trauma. If they show him making choices that support trauma recovery, why is this not evidence that the show has a positive view of trauma recovery? They wrote him making those choices.
“...nor by looking at the intricacies of what we believe he might have felt. Television is a visual narrative and I cannot see Bucky’s thoughts. Of course, I can speculate about what they might be, but again, my project is not about Bucky’s inner state,”
Bucky’s inner state (which is amply conveyed in dialogue, facial expression, action, etc) is actually imperative to any discussion of how the narrative views his trauma. For example, when Bucky communicates the internal thought “It’s not my fault,” that is a choice the creators made for him. It seems just fine for Rusak to accumulate evidence of malicious narrative intent through the spoken inner life and actions of Zemo and Raynor. But why are other characters and narrative components that support a positive trauma narrative dismissed as not relevant for the current discussion? Allllll of it was created by the creators! With intent! And Rusak’s entire article was an inquiry into the intent of the creators in their portrayal of trauma. Since the creators made the whole damn show, then anything in the narrative can be used to support any argument or counterargument that the show is perpetuating a trauma vilification narrative.
/End edit
All that said, I appreciate that we can all have divergent views on the same show and a different interpretation of the narrative, and I’m grateful for the opportunity for everyone to be able to share thoughts about this. I’m genuinely sorry for those who did not find Bucky’s recovery arc satisfying, and I can understand why. The only way for me to come away from this satisfied was to radically adjust my expectations for what Marvel should/would deliver in terms of Bucky’s recovery. After the devastation of Endgame, this was emotionally imperative for me. I think before Endgame I would have been much more inclined to protest the treatment of Bucky’s trauma in the narrative as well.
I think Rusak is right that Bucky’s trauma has always been too immense for the MCU to handle, but I realized I would be the architect of my own suffering if I held onto my expectations for due diligence. It was very emotionally convenient for Markus and McFeely/Marvel to present Bucky’s extraordinary trauma to whump everyone and inadvertently(?) launch a million very lucrative Stucky ships. But when the bill came due for so gleefully traumatizing him, Marvel kind of went 🤷 and implied intense healing and then chose to detail this particular part of his recovery process without the emotional satisfaction of really seeing him get there.
So I get it. I would totally watch six hours of Bucky doing all this implied repair work and probably still not think it’s enough, deep in my little emotional heart. So I’m not-not bitter about this. I just couldn’t keep wallowing in my bitterness, I guess. This interpretation was my way of drawing some enjoyment out of what they gave us, believing sincerely that it was enough to see him emotionally satisfied and knowing this is as good as it’s going to get. And I legit did see this as a very nice recovery and survival narrative, considering (as I think we should) his whole arc, even if it could have been executed better.
Anyway, I’m thankful to Rusak for writing this article (though less thankful that she commented on my essay without even fully reading it). It certainly was provocative and fueled some great discussion about the many ways to read this show and Bucky’s character arc throughout this wild MCU ride. And I have officially beaten this into the ground and am going to drop the rope now.
CW: This essay is about about trauma, including everything Bucky was subjected to, as well as mentions of interpersonal trauma, sexual assault, and incest. It also discusses victim-blaming at length. SPOILERS ABOUND.
I was already planning to write my opinions about Bucky in TFATWS, and then a lovely anon sent me the article by Rotem Rusak, “How Falcon and The Winter Soldier Villainizes Trauma.” So I figured I’d comment on the article and offer other opinions in a huge-ass essay that maybe five people will actually read.
I have real respect for Rusak, especially this essay on Stucky, much of which I agree with. I think Rusak’s most recent essay was well composed in many ways, and it seems like it was quite moving for some folks. I get where she’s coming from, I really do, and I can see why reading the show this way would be extremely upsetting. I respect this essay and its place in an ongoing conversation about the show. I also strongly disagree with pretty much her entire premise.
I’d like to offer a completely different interpretation of TFATWS where Bucky is not fragilized, is an agent of his own healing, and does not need to be the subject of our own interpretation of what his healing has to be. I’ll also attempt to make the argument that assuming his fragility and diminishing his many, many acts of meaningful agency in TFATWS is a disservice to this character.
I really like this interpretation of the show and it makes sense of some things that seemed inconsistent to me before. But (similar to what another poster said) I think it’s a flaw in the show that viewers have to put in a lot of work and already be super invested in Bucky to get something like this out of it. Because I don’t think this is an intuitive reading.
Just to zero in on Raynor because it’s an easy example of how ambiguous the show is. OP and I think she’s an intentionally written bad therapist. But if you go on a more general fandom space like the TFATWS reddit, you’ll see maybe 1/3 or ½ of people saying that Raynor is a good therapist who’s just tough on Bucky because that’s what he needs. With this level of disagreement, the creators didn’t do a good job getting across how we were supposed to see her.
Back to Bucky. IMO, there’s always been this discrepancy in the MCU between what we’re shown onscreen, and how Bucky is described verbally–not just by himself and other characters, but by the creators. We see that he’s forced to kill people, deprived of agency to the point that he (iconically!) doesn’t know his own name. But verbally, he’s framed like a redeemed villain, or a morally gray hero with a checkered past. To the point that I often see casual fans not knowing that Bucky isn’t a redeemed villain type of character.
Personally, I loved 90% of the Bucky content in the show–I loved Bucky’s personality in the show, the changes he went through, his relationships with Sam and Zemo, etc. The Wakanda flashback was great at showing how Bucky felt about being mind-controlled, from his perspective. But as usual, some of what I was told verbally seemed to contradict what I was being shown.
There’s a difference between Bucky understandably feeling guilt for what happened, and the way characters always avoid saying Bucky was mind-controlled. Instead, they talk about what Bucky is or does (i.e. “I don’t do that anymore”). I was just watching ep 2, and I noticed that Isaiah is left with the impression that Bucky’s affiliated with Hydra because Bucky gives a typically vague response–“I’m not a killer anymore”–instead of explaining that he wasn’t fighting Isaiah by choice.
In the world of the story, I like this particular instance. I can see it as a mildly self-sabotaging habit, where Bucky makes himself look like a villain because he’s uncomfortable sharing the details, or doesn’t want to seem like he’s making excuses. But if he’s not going to summarize his actual backstory for the audience, someone else has to do it. And no one does it. And it gets confusing what the intent is, because it affects how the show is read.
Like, any mildly attentive fan knows that Sam used to be a counselor. But when it was relevant in TFATWS, he had a line where the audience was verbally reminded that he used to be a counselor. Then we knew we were supposed to be thinking about that.
If it wasn’t for that line, less attentive viewers might not know that Sam used to be a counselor, and for fans who did know, we couldn’t be sure whether it’s supposed to be related to the scenes with Karli and Bucky.
For me, this is like if Sam being a former counselor was referenced in every episode, but no one would actually say the word counselor and kept saying, “Hey Sam, remember that thing you used to do? Maybe you should do it again.” Sure, there could be an in-character interpretation of why no one will say the word counselor, but it still would make it hard to follow the show.
As a side note, some of these conversations have an unnecessary element of treating Bucky as a real person and implying that people who criticize his arc are somehow criticizing a real survivor’s decisions. Sure, Bucky has agency in the story but in the real world where we’re discussing him, he’s just a character whose portrayal is crafted by everyone who works on the show. Fans aren’t disrespecting anyone’s agency if they don’t like how Bucky is portrayed in the show.
(And regardless of what our opinions are, I bet a lot of us are trauma survivors with that being tied in to our opinions. So can we all just be nice to each other about our Bucky feelings even if we don’t have the same ones?)
I appreciate this thoughtful response and others like it, and I admit that I made assumptions about the viewing audience in writing this essay. And of additional note, I might not have even felt compelled to write this at all if Rotem Ruzak did not make a series of presumptuous statements about how Bucky fans and trauma survivors must have viewed the show. (e.g., we did not find this arc satisfying, we must have all been horrified by his therapy - which, as you note, we clearly were not!). That certainly rubbed me the wrong way, but it was definitely not my intention to speak for everyone in response. I tried to be up front that this is just an impassioned opinion piece from a person of a certain background, not a dictate. And yes, a good amount of my energy with this essay was directed toward a particular movement within fandom that seems to crave the ongoing victimization and fragilization of Bucky on camera, to the extent that I’m not sure what would ever be enough for them.
You’re right that this is definitely a critical reading of the show, not a passive one. I can see how the casual observer may take something different from it. But I have a nagging question in these discussions of whether the TFATWS narrative provides enough context for Bucky’s history: Is TFATWS intended to be a stand-alone story where one could and should be able to casually walk into it and firmly understand the characters and plot without consuming the MCU before it?
There seem to be plenty of signs that this is not intended to be a stand-alone, if we’re talking about what’s discussed and what’s not discussed expositionally. What happened to half the population? I don’t recall Thanos being mentioned in any meaningful way and, in fact, is hilariously (and confusingly) referred to as “Dr. Space Cape” by Sarah. Other things up for question for a brand new viewer: What happened to Steve Rogers? (Not even I know the answer to this one, and I wonder if I should.) Why did he give Sam the shield in the first place, practically speaking, and why does he sound like an old man? Is he dead? Is he really on the moon? How did Sam even get caught up in this Avenging business in the first place? Why does Bucky have a metal arm and what’s up with his relationship to Wakanda? There are so, so many unaddressed questions both in terms of plot and character. My understanding of this series is that it serves as an extension for loyal MCU fans and also an entry point for new fans with the expectation that they’ll do at least a bit of cursory internet research on the title characters, if not watch everything Disney+ has in their MCU menu.
I suppose I have a hard time believing that any brand new viewer who becomes even a little invested in TFATWS would watch this in a complete vacuum without at least Googling Bucky’s history and finding plenty about his victimhood, thereby being able to better understand and evaluate the show’s trauma and recovery content. We see plenty of legacy characters introduced with a similar degree of depth (or lack thereof, including Zemo and Sharon). So I’m not sure how many expositional lines would even be considered when writing this show. And I think they actually did a fair job of giving us a fair gist of the important parts as we follow Bucky through his distress around his past, his efforts to make things right in therapy, and the multiple references to getting his mind back from Hydra, among other things. And if someone is an even more casual viewer, to the extent that they wouldn’t do one bit of research on his past, I wonder if they would think about any of this very deeply at all and would just take the show’s word for it that bad things happened and he’s working on making things right.
On that note, as for Bucky’s portrayal as a bad guy versus good guy, I could definitely see how people could come away with a more ambiguous read than what I did, especially if they’re not deeply invested in his backstory. But I do think there is enough balance of evidence in the narrative to at least cast serious doubt on a straight villain read. He’s shown as a character who does good things and not good things and seems to have something to account for in his violent past with Hydra. This actually isn’t much of a departure from the way I read him through a much deeper analysis.
As for the assessment of the therapy, I also admit to having an unusually keen eye and strong opinions about what therapy looks like. As for people seeing this as a good portrayal, I don’t know if this is maybe because of assumptions of automatic competence due to her role as therapist or a product of almost universally terrible portrayals of therapy on in film and TV. It makes me wonder if people think that good therapy looks like a rapid exchange of condescension, dick-swinging, and provocation.
I don’t expect everyone to look at this show the way I do. Although coming at this from a cumulative experience of trauma work with many people, it was also never my intention to speak for all survivors. You do make an excellent point about my emphasis on agency and how that could come across as a presumption that folks with different opinions are unconcerned with it. That also was not my intent. I just found it a valuable fulcrum around which to position my argument.
If people want to read the show as an unfair portrayal or a victim blaming narrative, I think that’s just fine, and I would be concerned if we all looked at it the same way. I’m a big fan of agency, which I hope is obvious, and I don’t expect universal or even wide scale agreement with this. I just wanted to offer a strong response to this particular author’s assertions, especially the parts where she presumes to speak for me as a fan and as a person who has experienced trauma. And for as strongly as my essay is worded, I’m not deeply wedded to my opinions about this. As you point out, Bucky is not a real person we are arguing about. For me, it was more about what’s in the narrative and what is not, which is always an excellent subject for debate because we will all read different things.
I know I’m putting way too much thought and effort into this. But I find the debate and analysis enjoyable and one of the best parts of being in fandom. And though I vehemently disagree with what Rusak wrote, I always tried to stick to critiquing the analysis and not the author. I don’t bear a single ounce of ill will toward her or anyone who has a different opinion, not even the person who called me a talentless dipshit (I don’t totally disagree!).
CW: This essay is about about trauma, including everything Bucky was subjected to, as well as mentions of interpersonal trauma, sexual assault, and incest. It also discusses victim-blaming at length. SPOILERS ABOUND.
I was already planning to write my opinions about Bucky in TFATWS, and then a lovely anon sent me the article by Rotem Rusak, “How Falcon and The Winter Soldier Villainizes Trauma.” So I figured I’d comment on the article and offer other opinions in a huge-ass essay that maybe five people will actually read.
I have real respect for Rusak, especially this essay on Stucky, much of which I agree with. I think Rusak’s most recent essay was well composed in many ways, and it seems like it was quite moving for some folks. I get where she’s coming from, I really do, and I can see why reading the show this way would be extremely upsetting. I respect this essay and its place in an ongoing conversation about the show. I also strongly disagree with pretty much her entire premise.
I’d like to offer a completely different interpretation of TFATWS where Bucky is not fragilized, is an agent of his own healing, and does not need to be the subject of our own interpretation of what his healing has to be. I’ll also attempt to make the argument that assuming his fragility and diminishing his many, many acts of meaningful agency in TFATWS is a disservice to this character.
Excellent interpretation and worthwhile read. I think the arm moment was understandably disturbing from Bucky’s POV, but I don’t agree with the rest of the OP’s part of that analysis. There was an edit, but still.
To date, the Wakandan’s have been extremely generous to Bucky… and he ultimately betrayed them. Full stop. He released the man who extensibly killed their king. And even upon learning of his betrayal, Ayo still gave him time to glean what he could from Zemo because she trusted him (and they go way back).
I think it certainly was a power move to disengage Bucky’s arm like that, but only because she had already told him to stay out of their way in recapturing Zemo in the first place. And given the Dora’s extreme skill in inflicting violence on ppl, this seemed like a slap on the wrist compared to what they arguably could have done to anyone who wasn’t Bucky (i.e. someone they don’t have a personal relationship with).
Some argued that the Wakandan’s should have told Bucky about the fail safe, and yeah as a Bucky fan I felt bad that he didn’t know his arm could be disengaged like that, but should they have told him? Really? I mean, the royal family are clearly very sympathetic to his trauma, but they are still an agency who realizes the potential destructive capabilities that Bucky possesses. They’ve seen first hand what the Winter Soldier can do. And as much as they clearly want to help Bucky recover and kindly offered him a new arm, I think they’re still shrewd enough to realize that they don’t want that power to ever turn on them again.
Bucky is a fav sure, but being a fav doesn’t mean the Wakandan’s were totally wrong or that Bucky was completely right. Both are operating from their own perspectives and as such, are following various courses of action that suit their purposes best. Bucky knew what he was doing by releasing Zemo and therefore has to deal with the potential fallout of his actions.
Agreed with all else. Certain ppl in the fandom want Bucky’s fragility and victimhood to be the main component of his personality. Like forever. They can’t seem to wrap their minds around the person Bucky can be unless he’s having a breakdown in a corner somewhere, and/or others aren’t halting their lives to prop up Bucky’s breakdowns. Who is Bucky Barnes if not a poor meow meow who’s trauma must constantly be revisited (lest we ever forget that it happened), and whose agency can never fully be his own (because he has to be taken care of by <insert x>)?
The trend I see of ppl reacting like this to Bucky are Stucky’s. Not all, but a lot. There’s something very toxic in their interpretation of Steve and Bucky’s relationship that lends itself to Bucky being in a state of perpetual victimhood. Don’t understand it, can’t wrap my mind around it, want nothing to do with it.
Re: the arm scene - I really appreciate a more thorough explanation of this. Thank you for elucidating this concern, because I keep seeing it pop up and was curious about what, specifically, people disagreed with.
You’re right that I was writing this from Bucky’s perspective specifically as it pertains to his ability to act with agency, as well as my perceived violations of his autonomy. I don’t disagree that Bucky betrayed Wakanda and Ayo. In fact, I note it in my essay, and I think this represents an interesting moral convolution for Bucky. He was willing to betray the country that helped him over and over, in addition to the woman with whom he has clearly built a strong bond.
It’s not the fact that this was done to him at all that upsets me so much (though I would still find it disturbing). It’s the fact that it was Ayo specifically. For context, my work with people with trauma has highly sensitized me to the amount of trust and safety that must be established to do this work. It’s a deeply intimate and vulnerable process. I can only imagine how much Bucky would have had to entrust her to allow her to do that with him, to use his code words on him, to see him be that vulnerable. All in the service of helping him reclaim his autonomy. Also, in an arrangement like this, the therapist figure is also absolutely in a position of power. And we see Ayo in the Wakanda scene as a figure of both emotional AND physical power.
That is why this move, conducted by Ayo, felt so egregious to me. She was instrumental in helping him become free, and here she is invading his bodily autonomy because she was (very rightfully) upset with him. I’m not arguing that this wasn’t a betrayal. There is a lot of betrayal going on here, so I understand her actions. However, I had a very strong reaction to this in the context of previously built trust and safety. This betrayal was also intensely personal, individualized, whereas Bucky’s was a betrayal of Wakanda generally rather than Ayo singularly.
I suppose I’ll just ask this: Is it okay for someone in a position of power to violate someone’s bodily integrity (through amputation, of all things) when feeling betrayed, even if their feelings are justified? Is it okay for anyone to violate another person’s bodily integrity when they’re upset with them? This crosses a line for me.
My initial reaction to Ayo disengaging his arm was more wtf, in that I didn’t realize that was a thing that could happen, and less wtf concern for Bucky. We’d only just been given the flashback earlier in that episode, so the connection the two of them obviously have, hadn’t resonated enough for me to feel like she betrayed him. Upon rewatch and further review:
Ayo: the man who chose us, who chose me to protect him
Bucky: I understand
Ayo: Vey little of our loss and our shame
So she’s like, the man that chose me to protect him is dead and now you broke the man responsible for his death (zemo) out of prison - wtf. Line crossed. In that convo, she had also reminded Bucky of how they helped him to deprogram the Winter Soldier trigger words, ostensibly to show imo, that Bucky’s actions betrayed both her position as a Dora (the shame that she spoke of) and her personally (because she’d been the one to help him root out Hydra’s control). So Bucky’s betrayal to her was both singular and general.
I don’t have anything in real life to fairly compare Bucky’s bodily autonomy with, so I’ll just stick to what we’re presented with in the MCU. The MCU universe is filled with ppl who have immense destructive capabilities. Some are on a micro level (Natasha, Bucky, etc) others are macro (hulk - world destroyer, Scarlett witch, etc). In Bucky’s case, he has immense lethal skill without any enhancements, but ultimately, his arm is his biggest weapon. That’s the position the Wakandan’s clearly take as well seeing as they built a fail safe into his arm.
In the fight between Ayo and Bucky, she doesn’t attempt to harm him or damage any part of his body or mind other than to disengage his arm. Their existing relationship aside, this is the actual reason Shuri/Wakanda put the fail safe there in the first place. So he can’t use his arm against them or can’t be forced to use his arm against them. For me, it would be similar to the hulk going berserk and his friends using their hypothetical surprise fail safe to disengage him so he reverts back to Bruce banner. Does this sorta violate Bruce/Hulks autonomy? Maybe, but it’s also par for the course in their world, (not saying it’s right), and can’t really be compared with anything from our irl lens.
To answer your last question I don’t think it’s ‘fair’ for someone to do this to a non-super powered human. Do I think it’s understandable, given the super powered ppl that exist in their universe, if still ethically ambiguous at its core? Yes I do.
To summarize, the whole exchange between them is murky, but if anything, Bucky and Ayo both violated each other’s trust. I don’t think what Ayo did to Bucky was any more or less severe than what Bucky did to her, and I’m kinda triggered by the implication that this great wrong was done to Bucky without taking into account the great wrong that Bucky did as well. That’s really my overarching point.
I’m going to make one last comment on this, because I honestly don’t think I have any more points I could make. We very well might just fundamentally disagree about this, and that’s totally okay. I think it’s a good conversation to have. I welcome any response you have to this, especially if you have an alternative interpretation to offer.
I wholeheartedly agree that this whole situation is very morally murky. You make a great point about the level of betrayal against Ayo. I definitely missed the extent to which this was also deeply personal and an immense betrayal against her specifically as well as generally. I also completely agree that having a fail-safe on this arm makes total sense, in the event that Bucky is out of control and violent.
But I just want to present the actual events of this scene:
-Walker and Hoskins come to claim Zemo
-Dora Milaje also come to claim Zemo
-Walker stupidly lays hands on Ayo, despite being amply warned by Sam to not be an idiot
-Walker and Hoskins fight with Dora Milaje while Sam and Bucky watch and comment
-Ayo is about to run Walker through with a spear. Bucky stops her spear physically and asks her to stop so they can talk
-Sam tries to stop another member of the Dora Milaje from running Hoskins through with a spear while he lies on the ground
(Quick reminder - Walker, Hoskins, and the Dora Milaje are there for the exact same reasons and are actually allies in this scenario)
-Sam defends himself against Dora Milaje attacks
-Ayo continues fighting Bucky with her spear. He tries to get her to stop. Every move he makes against her is a defensive one. He does not make a single move to fight her back
-She decides she’s tired of him defending himself against her attacks and amputates his arm
Literally all she had to do was stop attacking him. But she decided that she was going to activate her “fail-safe” to stop his actions of self-defense against her. She took away his ability to defend himself simply because she could. To show him that she has this power.
I mean, A++ intimidation. If I’m being objective about it, like, holy shit.
Watching this all again, I personally think this is a pretty disturbing portrayal of Ayo and the Dora Milaje that doesn’t seem consistent with anything we’ve seen from them before. We have always seen them as a group of very highly trained, disciplined, and ethically upright people. But this scene shows them as being willing to stab people while they’re lying helpless on the ground (Hoskins) and do what Ayo did to Bucky. I love the Dora Milaje. They are pretty much the most badass humans on earth, and I actually squee any time they show up. But something feels off about this sequence. I dunno.
Anyway, I’m really not trying to woobify Bucky here, God knows I don’t want to do that. But even setting aside the topic of whose betrayal is worse (which may not be possible to decide, since it’s subjective and complex), I don’t think I’ll ever conclude that what happened here wasn’t shitty.
Yes, I’m going to fundamentally disagree on this one.
Ayo and the Dora made their position very clear. Time was up and they were taking Zemo back (don’t get in our way). Period. Citing how we were first introduced to the Dora in Civil War wherein Ayo told Natasha “move or you will be moved.”
Not really sure how any part of their interaction with Sam, Bucky, Walker and Hoskins shows behavior or a position that’s different than how they were first presented to us…don’t get in our way. The following is kinda circular and wordy, but here goes: Ayo really didn’t need to just stop attacking Bucky. He’s defending himself from her attacks bc he put himself in the middle. She’s attacking him because he put himself in the middle. She removes his arm because he put himself in the middle. I mean that’s really the long and short of it. Getting Zemo is what she’s been tasked to do (and also a matter of pride), and nothing will get in her way. As a favor to Bucky, she gave him extra time to use Zemo as he saw fit, but he still just. Gets in the middle.
The only thing that feels kinda ‘off’ in that sequence to me was how stunned Bucky looked when his arm came off, because of how non-emotive (prob not a real word) he’d been in episodes prior. His look of shock (and maybe betrayal) was palpable. I mean, I felt that. It was f****d up, but Bucky ultimately made everything jump off by breaking Zemo out of prison, and then getting involved in the Dora’s fight to bring Zemo back in the first place. All 4 men inserted themselves in the Dora’s retrieval, which is why all 4 were put down. What would have been actually ooc/disturbing is if Ayo had fought Bucky upon first seeing him (no questions asked), disengaged his arm, taken it for misusing it, beat up the remaining 3, and grabbed Zemo. Same result, very different approach.
I think it’s totally fine to think what Ayo did was shitty (the whole thing is ambiguous and left up to interpretation), but what Bucky did was really just as shitty - arguably more depending on perspective. Every time I read something about this particular showdown, I feel like that part (Bucky’s involvement), is being left out of the conversation.
Again that’s really my only point. To emphasize that the things happening to Bucky in ep 4 (up to and including his confrontation with the Dora), aren’t happening to him in a vacuum. They’re a direct result/response to his actions.
I love this. Touché with the “move, or you will be moved” framework, because that helps me understand their actions in this scene a lot better.
I’m going to go back to the original essay and reference our conversation, because I think it’s super important to fairly consider a) how both parties play into this, b) what’s at stake for both of them, and most important for my thesis, c) that Bucky did something really dick. I’m all about Bucky doing bad shit of his own volition, in addition to good shit, and I’m really glad it was written into the show. Hooray volition!
In terms of my view of this scene, I’ve settled in some gray space where I think the whole thing just sucks for everyone. I think that’s not a bad place to be.
CW: This essay is about about trauma, including everything Bucky was subjected to, as well as mentions of interpersonal trauma, sexual assault, and incest. It also discusses victim-blaming at length. SPOILERS ABOUND.
I was already planning to write my opinions about Bucky in TFATWS, and then a lovely anon sent me the article by Rotem Rusak, “How Falcon and The Winter Soldier Villainizes Trauma.” So I figured I’d comment on the article and offer other opinions in a huge-ass essay that maybe five people will actually read.
I have real respect for Rusak, especially this essay on Stucky, much of which I agree with. I think Rusak’s most recent essay was well composed in many ways, and it seems like it was quite moving for some folks. I get where she’s coming from, I really do, and I can see why reading the show this way would be extremely upsetting. I respect this essay and its place in an ongoing conversation about the show. I also strongly disagree with pretty much her entire premise.
I’d like to offer a completely different interpretation of TFATWS where Bucky is not fragilized, is an agent of his own healing, and does not need to be the subject of our own interpretation of what his healing has to be. I’ll also attempt to make the argument that assuming his fragility and diminishing his many, many acts of meaningful agency in TFATWS is a disservice to this character.
Okay, I cannot stress enough what a great, insightful essay this is, thanks so much @dreadnought-dear-captain for putting in the time and effort to write all of this down and put some things into perspective! It definitely helped me a lot in getting a better understanding of what’s going on in the show, so I genuinely appreciate your thoughts.
I’ll also share my two cents here, mostly because I need to sort through and revise some of my own takes and interpretations, and because I’d like to address a problem I keep coming back to when I examine the storytelling at play here. Of course I’m nothing like an expert on trauma, so everything I can attribute here comes from the perspective of a literary scholar and will focus on narratology, the pacing and the writing of the story and Bucky as a character. I don’t pretend to have any kind of psychological insight that would allow me to comment on the exellent above analysis of Bucky’s arc.
Let me start by saying that I wholeheartedly agree with what OP said. I agree with the reading of Bucky wanting to take responsibility and making amends, and that it actually helps him and has a positive effect on him. I agree with him having probably worked through a lot of his trauma off screen before and after Civil War, and that he had already reached the understanding that he wasn’t to blame by that point.
The thing is, all of that is really just a matter of interpretation. The narrative could and maybe even should have been tweaked to address and validate this reading of Bucky’s recovery process, which in my opinion is sadly mostly kept as implications. This is why I also agree with the idea that the general audience needs some more on-screen cues to support that reading of Bucky working through his trauma as it’s outlined above.
Everything that’s said by OP about moral injury and repair work, trauma and responsibility vs. culpability makes perfect sense now that it’s been very comprehensively and perspicuously explained here. I learned a lot, reading through all of it. But I’d argue that, in order to reach any of these insights, you have to put in a lot of time and thought, which many viewers of the show won’t do, so Bucky’s arc is definitely still ambiguous and at the very best merely hinted at to a large chunk of the audience. And yes, I know that casual viewers generally don’t watch for deep character studies of what they see on screen, but there’s a case to be made that that’s especially why it’s important to make certain narrative points more explicit.
I’d say that one easy way in which this could’ve been achieved would’ve been the inclusion of more flashback scenes of Bucky’s coming to terms with his victimhood or choosing to engage in reparative actions. Seeing him struggle and coming to terms with certain aspects of his past would’ve helped tons to fully grasp what Marvel is trying and only somewhat succeeding to do here. That Wakanda scene with Ayo was so powerful and meaningful, but to me it still feels like they only included it to remind the audience that Bucky’s triggers are supposed to be gone. This wasn’t necessarily a character-driven decision.
Why would more scenes like this have been helpful? Because while it’s not strictly necessary for us to see him in other, and especially earlier stages along his journey to recovery, the more casual viewers won’t have put in the same thought and reasoning with Bucky’s situation or mental state. We as devoted fans have reached conclusions that help us comprehend these insights; the average audience would’ve arguably needed more pointers by on-screen acknowledgements of certain implications, especially from previous movies. This isn’t a problem specific to Bucky, or even the show itself - it’s just how the MCU works and, in some cases, it simply doesn’t work well.
On a little side note: This is why one or two more episodes would’ve been extremely helpful to un-rush this process. The show starts off with a slow pacing, and the first episode does a very good job of establishing both Bucky’s and Sam’s situation. I just wish they would’ve returned to this slow pace towards the ending, to really drive home how far they’ve come over the course of the series.
As it is, the narrative may not directly (re-)inforce any victim-blaming reading, but in my opinion it doesn’t do enough to fully negate a reading to that effect either, as a lot of reactions to the series have clearly shown. I also agree with the claims that the show doesn’t seem to even understand some of the implications towards either interpretation.
One thing I’d like to stress is that I also absolutely agree with the take that Bucky shouldn’t and needn’t be kit-gloved by either narrative or viewers; him getting to use the skills he was forced to use as the Winter Soldier for his own purposes instead sends the right message of him reclaiming himself, and fuck but him being such a badass while also showing his complex characterisation was a joy to watch! And at no point did I get the impression that he’s fragile or needs to be wrapped in blankets and reassured of his inncence at all times.
The thing about storytelling is that it lives from the audience seeing and experiencing emotional situations with the characters; ‘show don’t tell’ is a thing for a reason. And yes, you could argue - and I’d agree - that the way Bucky’s portayed in the show is an example of this. However, it’s an example that only works with a high level of background knowledge and investment in the character. Again, this isn’t a problem for us here on tumblr dot com, but the casual audience may draw 'wrong’/more problematic conclusions because of it.
Anyway, to wrap this probably very incoherent collection of thoughts up, everything that OP said does make sense to me now - but that’s only after repeated and intense rewatching and seriously engaging with secondary sources. And I’ll be honest, some of those did more harm than good in helping me make sense of things, and death of the author should definitely be applied here.
In short, I agree with the wonderful above analysis; all I can add is the fact that the plot, the characters, and the dynamic of the show altogether would’ve benefited from occasional reminders or explicit confirmations of the things that were or are implied in the writing and acting. I understand that that’s not always possible, but given that it’s a show that lives on things that were established as far back as 10+ years ago, it wouldn’t have hurt to put in the time and effort.
First off, thank you for the kind words. I love a literary/narratological take on this, because I do not have training or education in this. I agree with a lot of what you’ve said here, particularly as it pertains to what the casual viewer would take from this. I do wonder if the casual viewer would be as invested in Bucky’s recovery arc - as in, I wonder if they would even see anything gaping in the recovery narrative - if they haven’t been super emotionally invested in Bucky’s journey for years. Like if I pulled someone in off the streets and showed them everything, would they feel like there was something missing in his recovery arc, or would they be fine with what’s there? I really don’t know.
I think I’m really interested to know, genuinely curious, as to which missing part of his recovery journey would hit the mark for folks who want more on-screen stuff. This also includes me.
As I was writing this, I had a thought - I wonder if part of why I am so adamant that Bucky’s word is good enough is because of the burden victims often have to “prove” that they were victimized. Like, “ok, prove to me you were sexually abused 10 years ago,” or “okay, prove to me that you actually said no.” Does that make sense? Like, shit, why do we need to see all the evidence for victimhood to be believed? This is a very emotional response, of course. From a narratological perspective, I do see what you’re saying.
Okay, so back the question about what we might want in these illustrative scenes. Do we want to see Bucky experiencing big emotions like sadness and despair? Do we want to see full-on anguish porn? Do we want to see him actively coming to the realization in a big ah-ha moment? Do we want more moral repair acts? Do we want to see him communicating his victimhood to someone? And what do we want him to say? If we had the chance to write three scenes to show missing parts, what would we pick and why? I imagine we might get a dozen different answers if we asked a dozen different folks.
I think I would watch a whole limited series of Bucky just puttering around his various apartments over the years, thinking and journaling and making ramen noodles and eating snack cakes and pacing around and playing the piano and watching soccer. I would also watch a whole series of him doing effective psychotherapy with a competent therapist, just because I just really want to know in more detail how his mind works.
CW: This essay is about about trauma, including everything Bucky was subjected to, as well as mentions of interpersonal trauma, sexual assault, and incest. It also discusses victim-blaming at length. SPOILERS ABOUND.
I was already planning to write my opinions about Bucky in TFATWS, and then a lovely anon sent me the article by Rotem Rusak, “How Falcon and The Winter Soldier Villainizes Trauma.” So I figured I’d comment on the article and offer other opinions in a huge-ass essay that maybe five people will actually read.
I have real respect for Rusak, especially this essay on Stucky, much of which I agree with. I think Rusak’s most recent essay was well composed in many ways, and it seems like it was quite moving for some folks. I get where she’s coming from, I really do, and I can see why reading the show this way would be extremely upsetting. I respect this essay and its place in an ongoing conversation about the show. I also strongly disagree with pretty much her entire premise.
I’d like to offer a completely different interpretation of TFATWS where Bucky is not fragilized, is an agent of his own healing, and does not need to be the subject of our own interpretation of what his healing has to be. I’ll also attempt to make the argument that assuming his fragility and diminishing his many, many acts of meaningful agency in TFATWS is a disservice to this character.
Excellent interpretation and worthwhile read. I think the arm moment was understandably disturbing from Bucky’s POV, but I don’t agree with the rest of the OP’s part of that analysis. There was an edit, but still.
To date, the Wakandan’s have been extremely generous to Bucky… and he ultimately betrayed them. Full stop. He released the man who extensibly killed their king. And even upon learning of his betrayal, Ayo still gave him time to glean what he could from Zemo because she trusted him (and they go way back).
I think it certainly was a power move to disengage Bucky’s arm like that, but only because she had already told him to stay out of their way in recapturing Zemo in the first place. And given the Dora’s extreme skill in inflicting violence on ppl, this seemed like a slap on the wrist compared to what they arguably could have done to anyone who wasn’t Bucky (i.e. someone they don’t have a personal relationship with).
Some argued that the Wakandan’s should have told Bucky about the fail safe, and yeah as a Bucky fan I felt bad that he didn’t know his arm could be disengaged like that, but should they have told him? Really? I mean, the royal family are clearly very sympathetic to his trauma, but they are still an agency who realizes the potential destructive capabilities that Bucky possesses. They’ve seen first hand what the Winter Soldier can do. And as much as they clearly want to help Bucky recover and kindly offered him a new arm, I think they’re still shrewd enough to realize that they don’t want that power to ever turn on them again.
Bucky is a fav sure, but being a fav doesn’t mean the Wakandan’s were totally wrong or that Bucky was completely right. Both are operating from their own perspectives and as such, are following various courses of action that suit their purposes best. Bucky knew what he was doing by releasing Zemo and therefore has to deal with the potential fallout of his actions.
Agreed with all else. Certain ppl in the fandom want Bucky’s fragility and victimhood to be the main component of his personality. Like forever. They can’t seem to wrap their minds around the person Bucky can be unless he’s having a breakdown in a corner somewhere, and/or others aren’t halting their lives to prop up Bucky’s breakdowns. Who is Bucky Barnes if not a poor meow meow who’s trauma must constantly be revisited (lest we ever forget that it happened), and whose agency can never fully be his own (because he has to be taken care of by <insert x>)?
The trend I see of ppl reacting like this to Bucky are Stucky’s. Not all, but a lot. There’s something very toxic in their interpretation of Steve and Bucky’s relationship that lends itself to Bucky being in a state of perpetual victimhood. Don’t understand it, can’t wrap my mind around it, want nothing to do with it.
Re: the arm scene - I really appreciate a more thorough explanation of this. Thank you for elucidating this concern, because I keep seeing it pop up and was curious about what, specifically, people disagreed with.
You’re right that I was writing this from Bucky’s perspective specifically as it pertains to his ability to act with agency, as well as my perceived violations of his autonomy. I don’t disagree that Bucky betrayed Wakanda and Ayo. In fact, I note it in my essay, and I think this represents an interesting moral convolution for Bucky. He was willing to betray the country that helped him over and over, in addition to the woman with whom he has clearly built a strong bond.
It’s not the fact that this was done to him at all that upsets me so much (though I would still find it disturbing). It’s the fact that it was Ayo specifically. For context, my work with people with trauma has highly sensitized me to the amount of trust and safety that must be established to do this work. It’s a deeply intimate and vulnerable process. I can only imagine how much Bucky would have had to entrust her to allow her to do that with him, to use his code words on him, to see him be that vulnerable. All in the service of helping him reclaim his autonomy. Also, in an arrangement like this, the therapist figure is also absolutely in a position of power. And we see Ayo in the Wakanda scene as a figure of both emotional AND physical power.
That is why this move, conducted by Ayo, felt so egregious to me. She was instrumental in helping him become free, and here she is invading his bodily autonomy because she was (very rightfully) upset with him. I’m not arguing that this wasn’t a betrayal. There is a lot of betrayal going on here, so I understand her actions. However, I had a very strong reaction to this in the context of previously built trust and safety. This betrayal was also intensely personal, individualized, whereas Bucky’s was a betrayal of Wakanda generally rather than Ayo singularly.
I suppose I’ll just ask this: Is it okay for someone in a position of power to violate someone’s bodily integrity (through amputation, of all things) when feeling betrayed, even if their feelings are justified? Is it okay for anyone to violate another person’s bodily integrity when they’re upset with them? This crosses a line for me.
My initial reaction to Ayo disengaging his arm was more wtf, in that I didn’t realize that was a thing that could happen, and less wtf concern for Bucky. We’d only just been given the flashback earlier in that episode, so the connection the two of them obviously have, hadn’t resonated enough for me to feel like she betrayed him. Upon rewatch and further review:
Ayo: the man who chose us, who chose me to protect him
Bucky: I understand
Ayo: Vey little of our loss and our shame
So she’s like, the man that chose me to protect him is dead and now you broke the man responsible for his death (zemo) out of prison - wtf. Line crossed. In that convo, she had also reminded Bucky of how they helped him to deprogram the Winter Soldier trigger words, ostensibly to show imo, that Bucky’s actions betrayed both her position as a Dora (the shame that she spoke of) and her personally (because she’d been the one to help him root out Hydra’s control). So Bucky’s betrayal to her was both singular and general.
I don’t have anything in real life to fairly compare Bucky’s bodily autonomy with, so I’ll just stick to what we’re presented with in the MCU. The MCU universe is filled with ppl who have immense destructive capabilities. Some are on a micro level (Natasha, Bucky, etc) others are macro (hulk - world destroyer, Scarlett witch, etc). In Bucky’s case, he has immense lethal skill without any enhancements, but ultimately, his arm is his biggest weapon. That’s the position the Wakandan’s clearly take as well seeing as they built a fail safe into his arm.
In the fight between Ayo and Bucky, she doesn’t attempt to harm him or damage any part of his body or mind other than to disengage his arm. Their existing relationship aside, this is the actual reason Shuri/Wakanda put the fail safe there in the first place. So he can’t use his arm against them or can’t be forced to use his arm against them. For me, it would be similar to the hulk going berserk and his friends using their hypothetical surprise fail safe to disengage him so he reverts back to Bruce banner. Does this sorta violate Bruce/Hulks autonomy? Maybe, but it’s also par for the course in their world, (not saying it’s right), and can’t really be compared with anything from our irl lens.
To answer your last question I don’t think it’s ‘fair’ for someone to do this to a non-super powered human. Do I think it’s understandable, given the super powered ppl that exist in their universe, if still ethically ambiguous at its core? Yes I do.
To summarize, the whole exchange between them is murky, but if anything, Bucky and Ayo both violated each other’s trust. I don’t think what Ayo did to Bucky was any more or less severe than what Bucky did to her, and I’m kinda triggered by the implication that this great wrong was done to Bucky without taking into account the great wrong that Bucky did as well. That’s really my overarching point.
I’m going to make one last comment on this, because I honestly don’t think I have any more points I could make. We very well might just fundamentally disagree about this, and that’s totally okay. I think it’s a good conversation to have. I welcome any response you have to this, especially if you have an alternative interpretation to offer.
I wholeheartedly agree that this whole situation is very morally murky. You make a great point about the level of betrayal against Ayo. I definitely missed the extent to which this was also deeply personal and an immense betrayal against her specifically as well as generally. I also completely agree that having a fail-safe on this arm makes total sense, in the event that Bucky is out of control and violent.
But I just want to present the actual events of this scene:
-Walker and Hoskins come to claim Zemo
-Dora Milaje also come to claim Zemo
-Walker stupidly lays hands on Ayo, despite being amply warned by Sam to not be an idiot
-Walker and Hoskins fight with Dora Milaje while Sam and Bucky watch and comment
-Ayo is about to run Walker through with a spear. Bucky stops her spear physically and asks her to stop so they can talk
-Sam tries to stop another member of the Dora Milaje from running Hoskins through with a spear while he lies on the ground
(Quick reminder - Walker, Hoskins, and the Dora Milaje are there for the exact same reasons and are actually allies in this scenario)
-Sam defends himself against Dora Milaje attacks
-Ayo continues fighting Bucky with her spear. He tries to get her to stop. Every move he makes against her is a defensive one. He does not make a single move to fight her back
-She decides she’s tired of him defending himself against her attacks and amputates his arm
Literally all she had to do was stop attacking him. But she decided that she was going to activate her “fail-safe” to stop his actions of self-defense against her. She took away his ability to defend himself simply because she could. To show him that she has this power.
I mean, A++ intimidation. If I’m being objective about it, like, holy shit.
Watching this all again, I personally think this is a pretty disturbing portrayal of Ayo and the Dora Milaje that doesn’t seem consistent with anything we’ve seen from them before. We have always seen them as a group of very highly trained, disciplined, and ethically upright people. But this scene shows them as being willing to stab people while they’re lying helpless on the ground (Hoskins) and do what Ayo did to Bucky. I love the Dora Milaje. They are pretty much the most badass humans on earth, and I actually squee any time they show up. But something feels off about this sequence. I dunno.
Anyway, I’m really not trying to woobify Bucky here, God knows I don’t want to do that. But even setting aside the topic of whose betrayal is worse (which may not be possible to decide, since it’s subjective and complex), I don’t think I’ll ever conclude that what happened here wasn’t shitty.
CW: This essay is about about trauma, including everything Bucky was subjected to, as well as mentions of interpersonal trauma, sexual assault, and incest. It also discusses victim-blaming at length. SPOILERS ABOUND.
I was already planning to write my opinions about Bucky in TFATWS, and then a lovely anon sent me the article by Rotem Rusak, “How Falcon and The Winter Soldier Villainizes Trauma.” So I figured I’d comment on the article and offer other opinions in a huge-ass essay that maybe five people will actually read.
I have real respect for Rusak, especially this essay on Stucky, much of which I agree with. I think Rusak’s most recent essay was well composed in many ways, and it seems like it was quite moving for some folks. I get where she’s coming from, I really do, and I can see why reading the show this way would be extremely upsetting. I respect this essay and its place in an ongoing conversation about the show. I also strongly disagree with pretty much her entire premise.
I’d like to offer a completely different interpretation of TFATWS where Bucky is not fragilized, is an agent of his own healing, and does not need to be the subject of our own interpretation of what his healing has to be. I’ll also attempt to make the argument that assuming his fragility and diminishing his many, many acts of meaningful agency in TFATWS is a disservice to this character.
Excellent interpretation and worthwhile read. I think the arm moment was understandably disturbing from Bucky’s POV, but I don’t agree with the rest of the OP’s part of that analysis. There was an edit, but still.
To date, the Wakandan’s have been extremely generous to Bucky… and he ultimately betrayed them. Full stop. He released the man who extensibly killed their king. And even upon learning of his betrayal, Ayo still gave him time to glean what he could from Zemo because she trusted him (and they go way back).
I think it certainly was a power move to disengage Bucky’s arm like that, but only because she had already told him to stay out of their way in recapturing Zemo in the first place. And given the Dora’s extreme skill in inflicting violence on ppl, this seemed like a slap on the wrist compared to what they arguably could have done to anyone who wasn’t Bucky (i.e. someone they don’t have a personal relationship with).
Some argued that the Wakandan’s should have told Bucky about the fail safe, and yeah as a Bucky fan I felt bad that he didn’t know his arm could be disengaged like that, but should they have told him? Really? I mean, the royal family are clearly very sympathetic to his trauma, but they are still an agency who realizes the potential destructive capabilities that Bucky possesses. They’ve seen first hand what the Winter Soldier can do. And as much as they clearly want to help Bucky recover and kindly offered him a new arm, I think they’re still shrewd enough to realize that they don’t want that power to ever turn on them again.
Bucky is a fav sure, but being a fav doesn’t mean the Wakandan’s were totally wrong or that Bucky was completely right. Both are operating from their own perspectives and as such, are following various courses of action that suit their purposes best. Bucky knew what he was doing by releasing Zemo and therefore has to deal with the potential fallout of his actions.
Agreed with all else. Certain ppl in the fandom want Bucky’s fragility and victimhood to be the main component of his personality. Like forever. They can’t seem to wrap their minds around the person Bucky can be unless he’s having a breakdown in a corner somewhere, and/or others aren’t halting their lives to prop up Bucky’s breakdowns. Who is Bucky Barnes if not a poor meow meow who’s trauma must constantly be revisited (lest we ever forget that it happened), and whose agency can never fully be his own (because he has to be taken care of by <insert x>)?
The trend I see of ppl reacting like this to Bucky are Stucky’s. Not all, but a lot. There’s something very toxic in their interpretation of Steve and Bucky’s relationship that lends itself to Bucky being in a state of perpetual victimhood. Don’t understand it, can’t wrap my mind around it, want nothing to do with it.
Re: the arm scene - I really appreciate a more thorough explanation of this. Thank you for elucidating this concern, because I keep seeing it pop up and was curious about what, specifically, people disagreed with.
You’re right that I was writing this from Bucky’s perspective specifically as it pertains to his ability to act with agency, as well as my perceived violations of his autonomy. I don’t disagree that Bucky betrayed Wakanda and Ayo. In fact, I note it in my essay, and I think this represents an interesting moral convolution for Bucky. He was willing to betray the country that helped him over and over, in addition to the woman with whom he has clearly built a strong bond.
It’s not the fact that this was done to him at all that upsets me so much (though I would still find it disturbing). It’s the fact that it was Ayo specifically. For context, my work with people with trauma has highly sensitized me to the amount of trust and safety that must be established to do this work. It’s a deeply intimate and vulnerable process. I can only imagine how much Bucky would have had to entrust her to allow her to do that with him, to use his code words on him, to see him be that vulnerable. All in the service of helping him reclaim his autonomy. Also, in an arrangement like this, the therapist figure is also absolutely in a position of power. And we see Ayo in the Wakanda scene as a figure of both emotional AND physical power.
That is why this move, conducted by Ayo, felt so egregious to me. She was instrumental in helping him become free, and here she is invading his bodily autonomy because she was (very rightfully) upset with him. I’m not arguing that this wasn’t a betrayal. There is a lot of betrayal going on here, so I understand her actions. However, I had a very strong reaction to this in the context of previously built trust and safety. This betrayal was also intensely personal, individualized, whereas Bucky’s was a betrayal of Wakanda generally rather than Ayo singularly.
I suppose I’ll just ask this: Is it okay for someone in a position of power to violate someone’s bodily integrity (through amputation, of all things) when feeling betrayed, even if their feelings are justified? Is it okay for anyone to violate another person’s bodily integrity when they’re upset with them? This crosses a line for me.
CW: This essay is about about trauma, including everything Bucky was subjected to, as well as mentions of interpersonal trauma, sexual assault, and incest. It also discusses victim-blaming at length. SPOILERS ABOUND.
I was already planning to write my opinions about Bucky in TFATWS, and then a lovely anon sent me the article by Rotem Rusak, “How Falcon and The Winter Soldier Villainizes Trauma.” So I figured I’d comment on the article and offer other opinions in a huge-ass essay that maybe five people will actually read.
I have real respect for Rusak, especially this essay on Stucky, much of which I agree with. I think Rusak’s most recent essay was well composed in many ways, and it seems like it was quite moving for some folks. I get where she’s coming from, I really do, and I can see why reading the show this way would be extremely upsetting. I respect this essay and its place in an ongoing conversation about the show. I also strongly disagree with pretty much her entire premise.
I’d like to offer a completely different interpretation of TFATWS where Bucky is not fragilized, is an agent of his own healing, and does not need to be the subject of our own interpretation of what his healing has to be. I’ll also attempt to make the argument that assuming his fragility and diminishing his many, many acts of meaningful agency in TFATWS is a disservice to this character.
First, my bona fides (for whatever they could possibly be worth):
I’m a longtime Bucky fan with a longstanding interest in the treatment of Bucky’s trauma. I have also done eight years of advanced graduate work in the field of trauma psychology, with a focus on trauma in military personnel and veterans. I am extremely familiar with theories of trauma and recovery and have years of experience working directly and deeply with highly traumatized people. For relevant personal context, I have also had the childhood experience of being blamed by my own parent - I was screamed at and threatened by them - after telling them about an act of sexual abuse perpetrated against me by their adult friend. So I’m not just talking about victimhood and victim blaming from some ivory tower here. These professional and personal experiences deeply inform my read of TFATWS and my response to Rusak’s essay.
Up front honesty: I’ve historically been a strong critic of the way Bucky’s trauma has been handled in the MCU. (Vibranium brain magic rants, anyone??) So I was prepared to be disappointed again by TFATWS. But I’ve since watched the entire series three times, and I’ve continued to be largely pleased with what they did with Bucky’s character. Given my past rants, I could see why people would see this essay as a major reversal of my opinions on the subject. And it is. This is the product of long reflection on my previous rigid beliefs about what Bucky’s trauma and recovery should look like.
Assumptions Made Herein
Assumption 1: Bucky Barnes is not “fragile,” as Rusak asserts. One of the biggest mistakes I think we can make is to assume that people with trauma are fragile and need to be treated as such. Listen, we’re talking about survivors of the worst shit that humanity has to offer. I think people with severe trauma are a very particular kind of incredible, though they might feel the opposite. So many people with trauma, despite crippling symptoms, still make a living, go to school, take care of people, and otherwise basically operate in a world that feels goddamn terrifying. Living with PTSD/CPTSD can be excruciatingly hard, and yet so many folks show tremendous grit and power their way through it every day, even if sometimes a good day is just getting out of bed. I think this is amazing and extremely admirable.
Very importantly, people with significant trauma already feel like they don’t have power, control, and agency in their lives. Thus, I’m absolutely not going to take any more of that away from them by assuming that they are “fragile” (unless they inform me that this is their own self-assessment). I find this frequent characterization of trauma survivors to be both paternalistic and potentially harmful. After working with so many trauma survivors, I see so much strength and resiliency there, even with the most traumatized folks. And I absolutely see the same in Bucky.
Assumption 2: Bucky Barnes is fully capable of making his own informed choices. Because I focus so much on Bucky’s many, many acts of agency in TFATWS, I can anticipate concerns about how capable he is in making his own choices, especially after his history of brainwashing. In TFATWS, we see Bucky on many occasions:
Say no to requests and readily assert his opinions and will. I started making a list of all the evidence for this, but it got so long from just the first couple of episodes that I stopped tracking it. In short, he makes lots of choices, he actively drives the plot, he sets boundaries, he acts from a strong moral compass, and he is not afraid to ask for huge and arguably unreasonable favors from others.
Leave situations he doesn’t want to be in, both personally and in the context of work/missions.
Stop himself from acting out of violence.
Choose to use force/violence - including his skills obtained as the Winter Soldier - for both self-protective and valued activities.
Assumption 3: Bucky’s situation cannot be compared to most forms of victimhood in the contexts of sexual assault, IPV, or other interpersonal traumas. Bucky was a victim, yes. He was unwilling, yes. But unlike most survivors of interpersonal trauma, he was an unwilling victim directly involved in acts of violent perpetration.
The closest real-world analogy that I can think of that resides in the neighborhood of interpersonal trauma is the work I’ve done with folks who were both victimized and coerced into acts of perpetration, often in the context of childhood incest (e.g., oldest brother abuses middle brother and uses coercion/threat to get middle brother to sexually abuse a younger brother). And in every single one of these cases, the person in treatment, the middle brother, felt both victimized and recognized that they caused harm to someone, even if the circumstances were understandable and worthy of compassion. They still felt the need to make amends, even if we could argue that a young child threatened into acts of abuse is not to blame. They still acted in some way and knew harm was caused, even if they came to a place where they didn’t blame themselves. Healing for these folks required both the understanding that it wasn’t their fault and an act of moral repair that was healing for both the victim/perpetrator and the victim. This is not a precise analogy, but it’s one that I think is closer to Bucky’s particular trauma than “I was abused/assaulted and I’m not to blame for that and I shouldn’t ever be blamed for it” (hard agree).
Assumption 4: Bucky’s opinions, interpretations, and actions are more significant than those of untrustworthy others. I think centering any analysis on the survivor and their own words and experiences is of utmost importance in the context of discussing trauma survivorship. This will become especially important when addressing Rusak’s emphasis on the importance of outside assessment and interpretation of Bucky’s storyline.
In order to minimize the chance of misrepresentation of Rusak’s words, I used excerpts from the original essay to address various points.
Part 1: What the Narrative Reliably Says about Bucky’s Trauma
I think the thrust of Rusak’s argument about this is well-embodied by these quotes:
“... the show turns the trauma that Bucky suffered into trauma he caused.”
“In a six episode-arc (sic), he transforms from a victim into a victimizer who “deserves” his shame.”
… “the audience is asked to agree that he is at fault for his trauma.”
I fundamentally disagree that the narrative is asserting that Bucky is to blame for his trauma and that he deserves shame. I also don’t believe that the audience is being asked to agree with this. I’ll explain in much more detail below.
“In a new flashback, he kills an innocent man and utters, ‘Hail Hydra.’ The Winter Soldier had always been a silent, muzzled figure. In the described scene, he not only speaks, but affirmatively declares his allegiance to his captors. The emphasis on his alleged agency feels intentional, underscored by depictions of the violence Bucky was forced to commit in lieu of visuals of his decades-long torture.”
First, the Winter Soldier has not always been a silent figure. He’s been seen giving orders to people to kill Steve while indicating that he was going to kill Natasha. I’m not trying to nitpick, but this has been presented as a meaningful deviation, even though Bucky’s verbal participation in Hydra activities is not new.
Second, this flashback to Bucky’s Hydra past in TFATWS serves to introduce an important figure in Bucky’s healing process (Nakajima) and to illustrate how ineffective his revenge tour is in offering him relief from his trauma. I’m not sure how this “underscores” Bucky’s alleged agency or offers any real hint of Bucky’s villainy or culpability. As for the suggestion that flashbacks should be featuring his torture instead, flashback was used in Captain America: The Winter Soldier and Captain America: Civil War to show the terrible ways Bucky was treated. Why do we need to see more torture to prove that he was victimized? We know already that he’s a victim. (And Bucky knows this too - more later.)
In her essay, Rusak uses two characters in particular - Bucky’s therapist, Dr. Raynor, and Baron Zemo - to make the case that the creators are speaking this trauma-as-villain narrative through them. I’ll explain why I don’t think either of these figures represents a reliable resource for information, especially not about Bucky and his trauma recovery.
“For anyone who has suffered trauma or engaged with the sensitive project of mental health, [the therapy] is painful to witness.”
I have both experienced trauma and engage daily in deep mental health work with traumatized folks. I did not find Bucky’s therapy process particularly painful. Cringy, yes, but not painful. Here’s why:
I found it impossible to take his therapy at all seriously. I did scream (literally) when I first saw him with a therapist, but it was soon clear that there isn’t actually any therapy going on. Why would there be? Bucky is being forced into government-mandated psychotherapy as a condition of his pardon. Dr. Raynor is making reports of his “progress” to whatever goon squad is monitoring this process. All Bucky has to do is give the impression of compliance for a predetermined amount of time, and that’s it. This context alone calls into suspicion anything transpiring therein.
As far as I can tell, Bucky was quite deftly running his own therapy, even though he maybe allowed Raynor to believe she was doing “work” with him. Through the magic of dramatic irony, we get to see all the ways in which he’s concealing things from her, despite her assertion that “I know when you’re lying, JAMES.” He lies to get her to believe that their completely ineffective therapy - engaging in acts of therapist-facilitated revenge - is “working.” I saw Bucky’s therapy session as a delightful act of subversion, a way for Bucky to tip the power balance, and it’s absolutely laden with agency.
“Dr. Raynor is legitimized by the narrative as a credible source into his mental state”
Is she? I don’t know why we are to assume that this woman is a credible figure just because she occupies a position of medical/psychological authority. She’s in a (corrupt)government-mandated, evaluative role of Bucky. She’s belligerent and immature in her interactions with a character we know from other films deserves compassion. She calls his legitimate desire for a sense of peace (which we know is genuine because it’s repeatedly stated and suggested throughout his story arc) “utter bullshit.” She has an obvious lack of understanding of how often and to what extent she’s being evaded and deceived by her patient. She is actively facilitating Bucky’s revenge tour, despite it very apparently not helping him. She’s obviously not respected by Bucky, which is clearly observable both in his speech and facial expressions. And her constant pissing matches with him are staggeringly ineffective. (Doc, you’re supposed to ROLL with resistance, not go to war with it.) So I’m not sure that she comes off as credible or even basically skillful.
“Bucky’s therapist victim-blames her patient, participating in the narrative gaslight of the audience. This is one of the most egregious messages the MCU has ever espoused.”
I’d like to give viewers a little credit that they might not necessarily view Raynor’s words and bad behavior as worthy of uncritical, wholesale belief. When looking for possible narrative cues that we’re supposed to view this woman with respect, I find far more cues that we should view her as just the opposite. The therapy is clearly going like shit. The therapist isn’t likable. She works for the actually villainous government. Deception and intimidation abound in session. If we go back to my assumption about believing Bucky’s interpretation of situations, he outright names her “a terrible shrink.” (And rather than reflecting on this statement in any meaningful way, she instead brags about what a great soldier she is, as if this means anything at all.) I don’t know why any of these things would signal to viewers that Raynor is a moral or psychological authority of any sort.
Because of all this, I don’t see Bucky as a victim of his therapist or a corrupt system that is forcing him to be there. I don’t think Bucky is that naive or suggestible. He openly speaks truth to this bullshit therapy and his bullshit therapist. I see this whole therapy process as Bucky self-protectively ripping the system, and I think this is pretty awesome. (I mean, God, even Bucky’s final act toward Raynor is giving her Steve’s book, filled with the names of people she “helped” him ineffectually make “amends” to with a message saying “Thx for your help!” Gurl.)
“Zemo asks Sam to consider how little it took for Bucky to ‘fall back into form,’ implying that Bucky somehow wants to be the Soldier again. Zemo’s comment stings of language used to discredit victims of sexual assault.”
I kinda can’t believe I have to say this, but are we really going to look to Zemo, a known conniver, murderer, and manipulator, as a source of reliable information on Bucky? Zemo’s perspective on anything related to super soldiering is so wildly corrupted by his own zealous agenda that anything he says about Bucky should be highly suspect. And if we want to look for narrative cues to his unreliability, Zemo singing “Baa Baa Black Sheep” is easily the most menacing thing ever to be presented in the MCU (I’m only kind of joking).
So why should this man be perceived as a reliable narrative figure? I honestly can’t find one good reason.
“Excepting one fleeting sequence in Wakanda, at no point in the narrative does any character understand Bucky’s victimhood. Instead, nearly every character serves to establish Bucky as either unstable or rightfully guilty.”
Do other characters - especially unreliable or untrustworthy ones - have to reflect Bucky’s victimhood in order for it to be legitimate? The fact of his victimhood is well established in Bucky’s storyline, and nobody reputable has indicated a disbelief of his victimhood.
Speaking of Wakanda and violative acts, can we talk about how horrible it was when Ayo amputated Bucky’s arm just because he wasn’t doing what she wanted him to do? The message is pretty clear - this arm isn’t yours; it’s Wakanda’s, and it should be used to further Wakandan interests, not your own. If we want to talk about violation of agency, as well as an immense violation of trust from someone who was deeply emotionally involved in Bucky’s recovery, I think Ayo is easily the most egregious offender. The look on his face... Jesus Christ.
(EDIT: Okay after seeing some feedback about this, I will admit that this initial interpretation is slightly dramatic. If I step back from my immediate complete horror reaction, I suppose the most generous way I could read this is as a punishing power move that just felt gross to me. It’s especially gross because Bucky didn’t know that his one form of self protection could be literally ripped away from him by someone he trusts when they’re displeased with him. Then again, he did betray Ayo and Wakanda by letting Zemo out of prison so... I don’t know. Maybe this scene is a Rorschach test! Was I supposed to lol? What does that mean if I didn’t??)
(EDIT 2: I had a good conversation about this with @themandelorians, for those looking for a thoughtful rebuttal to the above)
In summary, I don’t think that either Dr. Raynor or Baron Zemo can or should be depended upon as trustworthy figures through which we can gauge Marvel’s opinions about Bucky’s healing process, victimhood, or culpability. These characters have been amply shown in an uncharitable light, even to untrained eyes, and so I find it highly suspect that we are supposed to believe they represent some noble creative truth around which we should orient Bucky’s recovery and assessment of blame.
As Sam tells Bucky, “you’ve gotta stop looking to other people to tell you who you are.” In this case, I think we also have to stop looking to other people to tell us who Bucky is.
The next part will address this whole subject of “amends,” which will be appropriately centered on Bucky’s interpretation of his culpability and responsibility for his actions.
Part 2: Moral Injury and Amends as Moral Repair
I’ll start with a quote that Rusak offers from TFATWS director, Kari Skogland:
“Kari Skogland, director of TFATWS, said ‘Bucky will always have to be responsible for his past … His redemption is that he could take responsibility for his actions and allow himself the guilt. He allowed himself to own that and say, “I did that,” and admit that he cannot always hide behind his lack of control.’”
Before I dive into this, let me offer some context here.
Examinations of responsibility and blame are a core part of trauma treatment for many folks. Cognitive Processing Therapy, one of the top evidence-based treatments for PTSD, works in depth with blame vs. responsibility and has offered a number of very helpful definitions:
The unforeseen: You had no way to predict a traumatic event would happen. No control. No responsibility. The adaptive emotional response: Grief and/or sadness
Responsibility: You played some role in the event(s) (i.e., you can’t say that you weren’t somehow involved). However, there was no intention to do harm. The adaptive emotional response: Regret
Fault/blame: You acted in ways that were intended to cause harm. The adaptive emotional response: Guilt
It could be argued that Bucky’s trauma doesn’t fit well into just one category or emotional experience. Due to his brainwashing and associated acts of violence, his role embodies elements of both “the unforeseen” and “responsibility.” He had no idea this could ever happen to him. This was beyond his control. And also, he played some role in the events in that he was directly involved as the weapon, even though there was no intent to harm.
Related to this:
… “TFATWS makes Bucky complicit in his time as the Soldier. Bucky always uses “I” statements when it comes to his past (e.g. “The power I gave her”), a retroactive injection of agency completely at odds with Bucky’s position as a powerless prisoner at the time. The story itself seems to back this up; Bucky even says, “Hydra used to be my people.”
Rather than being read as an admission of self-blame, I think it’s also reasonable to see these as acknowledgments of the facts of his participation in Hydra activities. These are not inherent references to guilt and culpability.
What does Bucky himself have to say about his culpability? Let’s recall the following exchange from Civil War:
Steve: “What you did all those years, it wasn’t you. You didn’t have a choice.”
Bucky: “I know. But I did it.”
I know it’s not my fault, but I still was a participant, even if I wasn’t a willing one. I was the instrument, even if I am not to blame. This is an acknowledgment that he was somehow involved and has to live with the consequences of his involvement, even if he couldn’t help this involvement.
I’d like to propose that Bucky’s assessment of his responsibility and a desire to make reparative actions very strongly suggests that we’re dealing with moral injury here, in addition to other trauma sequelae. Moral injury has been defined in the psychological literature by moral injury expert Brett Litz and colleagues as:
"Perpetrating, failing to prevent, bearing witness to, or learning about acts that transgress deeply held moral beliefs and expectations.” (emphasis mine; Litz et al., 2009)
Bucky was forced to participate in and, in the most extreme fashion, bear witness to actions that deeply transgressed his moral beliefs. Adaptive Disclosure, which (to my knowledge) is the only manualized treatment specifically for moral injury, was designed to address moral injury in service members and veterans due to the frequent occurrence of these injuries. This treatment involves both exposure components and moral repair components. Moral repair is an important behavioral feature of treatment that is patient-centered and can involve anything from meaningful conversations with a benevolent moral authority to acts of moral repair. And yes, it could include gestures of amends to harmed parties.
The moral repair component isn’t explicitly found in other evidence-based trauma treatments and is pretty unique to treating moral injury. The reason that this component was added is because over and over again it was discovered that the “it’s not your fault” approach doesn’t tend to land well with moral injury, necessitating some additional patient-selected actions to heal. It addresses the frequent need for people to do something tangible to ease a profound sense of moral discomfort, whether they perpetrated the immoral actions or not.
“Bucky’s narrative project takes form as a list of people to whom he must make amends. This builds his journey, by definition, around the assignment of blame. In truth, Bucky should be allowed to conclude that he didn’t harm anyone. … Raynor should be duty-bound to tell Bucky that he is not guilty, regardless of what Bucky fears. Instead, Bucky’s aforementioned ‘amends’ list seems to come from therapy; the rules that Bucky follows to ‘make amends’ are Raynor’s as well.”
First of all, we have no evidence that the amends idea was imposed by Raynor or anyone else. Using the moral injury and moral repair framework above, we could conceptualize Bucky’s drive to make amends as moral repair work for having to bear witness to and unwillingly participate in these murders. Of course, we see that Bucky is not actually making amends for most of the show. And we see that his therapist is too incompetent to a) have realized that revenge wouldn’t be helpful from the outset, and b) notice in practice that acts of revenge are not effective in healing his suffering.
The value of meaningful reparative action is supported both by Sam (a character we can certainly rely on more than Zemo and Raynor), and, most importantly, by the results of Bucky’s conversation with Yori Nakajima. I argue that the idea of amends/moral repair is not in itself flawed, nor is it indicative of perceived blame. But for most of the show, this process is not being executed by Bucky in a way that’s helpful to him. I’d say it’s an indicator of growth and healing that he can have an intimate conversation with Sam - an actual competent therapist - about moral repair. And you know what? Sam immediately gets Bucky’s moral injury. He doesn’t say “oh Bucky, but it’s not your fault!” or try to convince him that repair work is inappropriate. I’m willing to bet that this is because Sam personally experienced moral injury and/or has worked extensively on healing moral injury with patients at the VA. He goddamn gets it instantly.
And, here’s the thing - Bucky knows this re-orientation toward real reparative action is correct for him. He already had a sense of it, given that he’s portrayed from episode one as being highly invested in real reparative actions with Nakajima. And actual moral repair work rings true for Bucky in his recovery, as we can see in episodes five and six. He’s very obviously positively affected by this work, once he really starts doing it. Why are we so excited to shit on something that’s so powerful and helpful for him?
As for Raynor being duty-bound to “tell Bucky that he’s not guilty,” I have so much to say about this. First of all, it’s not helpful or effective to just “tell” a traumatized person that they’re not to blame. If that was the case, a lot of trauma therapists wouldn’t have jobs. Despite what we saw in Good Will Hunting, repeating “it’s not your fault” doesn’t magically make someone believe it. In fact, telling patients that they’re not to blame can be harmful and profoundly invalidating. The deep examination of responsibility and blame is a long and grueling one. The person has to come to their own understanding of it through months or possibly years of work, and it’s the kind of work that they have to be ready to do with someone they trust. Why would he do this work with Raynor? And why would she try to do this work with him? We don’t even have a sense of how many sessions he is mandated to see her. I don’t think even a remotely ethical therapist would try to engage in intense trauma work with a dubiously engaged party in a time crunch, especially when the patient is clearly there under duress.
As for Bucky being “allowed” (??!) to conclude that he didn’t harm anyone, it’s clear from one of his very few lines in Civil War that he has already concluded (all by himself!) his actions were not his own. But he has to live with them. He reaffirms this in episode six of TFATWS. I’ll say it again for everyone in the back: Bucky repeatedly and explicitly denies his own culpability.
“Instead, he’s a man whose autonomy was stolen, who was rendered helpless at the hands of his captors.”
This lends even more support to why Bucky would want to claim some form of responsibility for his actions. Why would he want to spend time wallowing in the devastating knowledge of his helplessness when he could empower himself through reparative actions to provide him with emotional relief? Remember, he already knows this is not his fault. He knows he was helpless to do anything to stop it.
Also, why is it such a feat of imagination to believe that Bucky could have concluded his lack of culpability in the past few years? Why are we so quick to dismiss Bucky’s own words and hard-earned self-knowledge in favor of Bucky Barnes Protection Squad damaged woobie narratives? Why are we so quick to assume that his decision to try to confront his past trauma through acts of moral repair is misguided and damaging? Why are we looking for reasons why Bucky’s recovery path is illegitimate, just to support ideas of him as a damaged victim whose damage and victimization we really, really need to see on screen to prove that it’s true?
You might say here, Dread! How can we trust that Bucky even wants to engage in amends/moral repair?! This could have been imposed by someone else as punishment! If this was some imposed punishment, why is he so attached to the idea of reparative action? Why did he put his hands around Zemo’s throat and threaten to kill him for even looking at his list? Why would he circle Nakajima’s name - and why would his conversation with him emotionally bookend the series - if it’s all just a bunch of mandatory garbage for him to get a green light from Raynor? Even after he leaves Raynor’s “care,” we see his commitment to doing some kind of morally reparative actions. We see how important this drive is for Bucky’s recovery arc throughout the show, which will be the subject of the final section of this essay.
We don’t need to be trauma experts to pick up what Marvel is putting down: Bucky’s feelings of responsibility and his attempts to heal them by engaging in reparative work are both important for him. Or, alternatively, I suppose we could choose to believe unreliable characters who think that Bucky liked being the Winter Soldier, or who think he’s bad and needs to make amends for his badness. One of these relies on Bucky’s own interpretations of his life and his demonstrated valued activities. The other relies on believing other people’s skewed opinions about Bucky. As a fan of Bucky and a cheerleader for him on his arc toward becoming an autonomous human, I know which one I’m inclined to believe more.
Part 3: Agency, Growth, and Healing
This final section is dedicated to exploring and supporting an arc of recovery that is, of extreme importance, driven by Bucky.
I’ll start with Rusak’s take on this:
“Fans hoped that The Falcon and the Winter Soldier would allow Bucky to work through his victimhood; a meaningful project both in-universe and out. But this does not transpire onscreen.”
To this, I’ll add this question: Why do we need to see Bucky actively and deeply engaging with his victimhood? I’ll be a broken record here: he has already come to the conclusion that he did not willingly commit these acts as the Winter Soldier. Did he fall to his knees on camera and weep about how horrible his victimhood was? No. But why do we need to see him in this state to believe that he was able to emotionally approach his victimhood at some point since his escape from Hydra?
Over the course of at least four years, Bucky has been shown on camera moving through trauma work: reconciling his memories; reflecting on his time with Hydra and the subject of his blame; engaging in neurobiological healing acts with Shuri; engaging in emotional healing acts with Ayo; spending meaningful time with a community. Why can’t we just believe him when he says (multiple times) that he knows he’s not to blame? What’s keeping us from looking at the events of TFATWS as a continuation of years of previous trauma recovery work?
Here is some of what Rusak wrote about Bucky’s recovery arc in TFATWS:
“Rather than telling a story of survival and recovery, TFATWS retcons Bucky’s history in order to more comfortably deal with it.”
“By refusing to acknowledge Bucky’s pain or to focus on his healing, the show reinforces cruel and false real-world narratives about the roles victims play in their suffering, and about what blame should fall onto those who have been hurt.”
I’ve talked amply in previous sections about why Bucky’s story is not reliably presented as victim-blaming. But what I do see is a clear arc toward healing, scaffolded by his many acts of self-determination. In addition to his “amends” work (initial acts of revenge reconceptualized as moral repair work), we see Bucky’s clear, active, and consensual choices to do good in the world and find a sense of purpose. Bucky in TFATWS is not a passive participant being dragged along by anyone. In fact, Bucky is frequently seen as a driver or co-driver of world-saving actions of great personal meaning. Bucky willingly embarks on the mission to stop the spread of super soldiers. In fact, he does this despite being told by Sam to fuck off. Nobody does this to him. Nobody is using him. He’s volunteering himself for it wholeheartedly.
“The show casually re-traumatizes Bucky and uses the sequence as proof of his culpability. In Madripoor, Bucky is forced to violently perform as the Winter Soldier while his body is, in essence, trafficked by Zemo. But the show doesn’t indicate that it understands how harrowing it is for a victim of repeated assaults to relive their trauma.”
“His body was used without his consent, and again by Zemo in the scene. But the show ignores this discussion in favor of emphasizing Bucky’s villainy.”
Is this disturbing to watch? Of course. Do I wish we could have seen the emotional aftermath? Yes. But I’ll remind everyone that Bucky is a savvy, cautious, and intelligent human. He consented to playing the part of the Winter Soldier to achieve the goal of getting access to Selby in Madripoor. He was not forced. He was not visibly coerced. He also clearly doesn’t trust or like Zemo and knows very personally how manipulative he is.
I have a hard time believing that he couldn’t foresee that he may be asked to commit acts of instrumental or performative violence. People with trauma, especially people who have served in war or other violent contexts, are excellent at mentally playing out potential threats to personal and emotional safety. (I call it “running scenarios,” and it’s so, so common with veterans.) Bucky had a long-ass, multiple-leg plane ride from Europe to Indonesia to think of how this might very well go down, and he still chose to participate. He was clearly recruited to be the “muscle,” and he still agreed.
And also, c’mon, context seriously matters here. He’s not being forced to harm innocents; he was asked to pretend to be the Winter Soldier for an evening and to rough up a bunch of known lowlifes and criminals as a demonstration of force. Is this painful for him? It very well may be. Is it self-sacrificing? Undoubtedly. But he’s doing it of his own volition in the service of a greater cause.
As for Zemo “trafficking” him, all parties - including Bucky - knew this was a feint. We know Zemo is full of shit because he’s seen actively lying to Selby about the “deal” she’s “getting.” Was Zemo being creepy AF? God, yes. Did he go overboard with the acting job? Most assuredly. And Bucky very well may have been affected by this later. But going back to the concept of assumed fragility, I’m not going to automatically conclude that this deeply re-traumatized him. These things transpired within the framework of agency and informed consent, which is very different from being actually trafficked.
Bucky is no pawn of Zemo. He’s got the guy’s number and knows what he’s about. (If we want an example of Bucky’s capability and resourcefulness, this is someone who orchestrated and facilitated Zemo’s escape from a maximum security prison.) He admits later to Ayo that he’s been using Zemo as a means to achieve a valued objective.
Also, guys, by freeing Zemo, Bucky betrays the character who facilitates one of the most meaningful and emotive scenes ever presented in the MCU - Bucky coming to the full realization that his mind is free. Ayo is clearly of immense emotional importance to Bucky, and he has shown a willingness to betray her trust in order to serve a purpose he deems to be more important than hers. This is all to say that Bucky is hardly a lamb being led to slaughter in this show. He’s consistently shown to be a competent and shrewd participant in the plot who is willing to make personal and interpersonal sacrifices to achieve valued goals.
On this note, let’s talk about Bucky’s deliberate, volitional use of violence and intimidation. I actually loved seeing Bucky use his capabilities and known stimulus value to influence events. This includes, but is not limited to:
- Very sincerely threatening Nagel with a bullet to the temple
- Allll the staring
- Putting hands on Zemo and threatening to kill him over his amends list
- Launching Zemo’s cup against a wall and threatening him with “leverage” (megalol, Buck)
- Using his Winter Soldier skills, including mindboggling acts of knife work, to kick the asses of other super soldiers
- My favorite: fake executing Zemo while making him think he’s “turned.” A+ trolling. He shows Zemo and the audience that he’s not a machine. He is not the Winter Soldier. He is not what anyone else thinks he has to be. He is Bucky Barnes, and he has reclaimed the power to live his life on his own goddamn terms. This scene goes wildly against the idea that Marvel wants us to think Bucky is some unhinged villain. Once again, if we look to Bucky and his words and actions, not the words and actions of criminals and incompetents, we find little evidence of the Bucky-as-villain narrative being perpetuated.
Speaking of, are Bucky’s chosen acts of violence and intimidation above also supposed to lend to a “villain” narrative? God, I hope not. Why can’t Bucky just be someone who knows how to use his force, who knows his power and can wield it to impact situations? Does he have to throw out everything he learned as the Winter Soldier when he can repurpose it for good? (Jesus, clearly he doesn’t want to throw all that out; we see him practicing his knife skills on Sam’s boat just for the joy of it.) And why couldn’t Bucky sometimes be violent or angry? Doesn’t he have a right to this character complexity without it being labeled as Marvel OOC villainy? I, for one, love a complex Bucky who can both do good AND ALSO act in ways that aren’t great. This is amazingly human!! Don’t we want Bucky to be a full human?
Finally, Bucky’s Recovery Arc (Yes, I Believe He Has One)
Let’s revisit Bucky at the beginning of this show:
He’s shown to be in the clearly incompetent and aversive care of a mandated therapist whose reports on him to the government. He is understandably not thrilled about this and actively works to subvert the process, bless.
He is deeply involved in “amends,” which are intended to be acts of contrition designed to alleviate his suffering and the suffering of others. However, he’s perverted this into a revenge tour (with his therapist’s help), and this is not having the intended palliative effect.
He’s not entirely alone, as his therapist incorrectly determines. He has been cultivating a friendship with Yori, even if the initial intent may have been just to have a conversation with him about his son. He makes attempts to have new relationships, as evidenced by his SUPER NOT AT ALL QUEER (fuck you, Marvel) admission to online dating and his willingness to go on an actual date(!). But there doesn’t seem to be a lot more going on in the platonic or romantic relationship department.
He has an uneasy relationship with his arm, wearing a glove on it even in his own apartment.
He doesn’t know what he’s supposed to do with his life. Free to do what? He is craving some other way to discover and express his identity, agency, and values in the world.
Throughout the series, we see, at minimum, the following signs of growth and recovery:
He is freed from his therapist and her government-sponsored surveillance (by Walker, of all idiots), and he leaves her with the equivalent of a bag of dog shit on her doorstep.
He has come to realize that actual amends/moral repair work is both valuable and effective in helping to bring closure to himself and others. We see it clearly improving his mood, more than suggesting that these actions are healing.
He has become good friends with Sam, spends time with his family, and lets himself be welcomed into their community. He is seen flirting with at least two women!
He’s running around with no gloves to conceal his arm, a symbolic act of making peace with this vestige of his time with Hydra. It could also be seen as him accepting that he belongs in society just the way he is. He uses this arm for good! He uses it to fix a boat! He uses it to hold kids and show off to Sarah!
Throughout the series, Bucky acts with free agency again and again and again in the service of his values and the safety of the world. He engages in an important, unambiguous act of post-Hydra heroism in the direct (rather than indirect) service of saving civilians. He is more grounded in a sense of self that is a benevolent consolidation of his many parts. We don’t know what he’s going to do next, but goddamn, did he do a lot of meaningful things during this series.
Apropos of fuckall, I’m now going to give myself some small space to do some unmitigated screaming before I wrap up this essay:
/Start screaming
OMG when Bucky teams up with Sam to fight Walker!!! It calls back to at least two previous fights (Tony/Bucky/Steve and Bucky/Steve/German Special Forces) and ZOMG Bucky fucking SWINGING JOHN WALKER’S FULL-ASS SUPER SOLDIER BODY INTO SAM?? Dead.
And here’s a very disorganized and abridged list of things I love about Bucky in TFATWS: Snarky as fuck. Largely measured and intentional. Willing to sacrifice for his higher values and the greater good. Exceedingly brave, taking huge emotional and physical risks to move toward a more fulfilling life. Fucking BADASS. Actually flawed. Great comedic timing. Protective and caring. Working on Sam’s boat! Flirting. Passive aggressive gift to Raynor. Sooo good. Sebastian Stan acted the living fuck out of this.
BTW: Did you see that BUCKY HAS A PIANO????? He doesn’t have a bed, but the guy has a piano. Gah!
(Turn up your brightness all the way and zoom if you can’t see it in the upper left hand corner)
/End screaming
Okay, it’s time to close out this stupid fucking self-indulgent essay now.
I’d like to ask what is more important: Bucky recovering in the exact way we think he should based on our own projections and expectations, or Bucky recovering on his own terms? At the end of the day, like with any person, the alleviation of suffering is the goal in trauma recovery. Why should we care if Bucky holds himself partially responsible, especially if it leads to tangible actions that bring him peace and closure? Why can we not honor that there may be part of him that wants to still claim some responsibility because it’s the best way for him to put the past to rest? Why do we need to be constant voyeurs of Bucky’s misery? Why do we need to see him completely broken down by the agony of the full realization of victimization? Why can we not believe him when he says that he doesn’t blame himself?
I’ll repeat the following quote from Rusak:
“Rather than telling a story of survival and recovery, TFATWS retcons Bucky’s history in order to more comfortably deal with it.”
How’s this for a story of survival and recovery, all of which is clearly in the narrative:
Bucky Barnes starts the show with significant healing under his belt after working hard at it for several years, but he’s still looking for purpose, meaning, and a sense of putting the past to rest. He acts in service of the greater good, to significant, obvious emotional benefit. He learns to build deeper, more satisfying relationships with people through acts of interpersonal courage. He lives his life with volition and purpose. He can be trusted and believed by others and by himself. He steps out from the shadow and perceived expectations of Steve and everyone else to become his own man. He forges his own path to further recovery by recognizing and honoring his own cognitive, emotional, and moral needs.
I mean, holy shit, how is this not a trauma survival and recovery story?
I loved Bucky’s words to Yori, which signaled how he can subjectively feel both partially responsible for and not guilty of things he did as the Winter Soldier:
Your son was murdered by the Winter Soldier. That was me. I didn’t have a choice.
What a beautiful, self-selected appraisal of himself. What a meaningful act of moral repair to help him heal his moral injury. Who are we to say that he did this all wrong? If Bucky was my patient, I’d be so fucking proud of him. I would have been thrilled with his choice to absolve himself of blame while holding onto some sense of responsibility, if that’s what is helpful for him. I have worked with people with PTSD and moral injury for whom this was their process and their outcome. It was amazing and so wonderfully empowering for them, just as it seems to be for Bucky.
I’m here to celebrate Bucky and the choices he had to crawl through hell to have again. I’m not here to fish for reasons why his chosen path of recovery is flawed because it doesn’t fit my own personal beliefs about what it should look like. I’m here for all the ways this man has struggled and grown over the course of six movies and a limited series spanning 80+ years. I’m here to watch this man smile and start to have a real fucking life again. And in TFATWS, that’s exactly what I got.
Citation: Litz, B. T., Stein, N., Delaney, E., Lebowitz, L., Nash, W. P., Silva, C., & Maguen, S (2009). Moral injury and moral repair in war veterans: A preliminary model and intervention strategy. Clinical Psychology Review, 29(8), 695–706.
So sorry for the delay with this. Also, for those of you interested, I was asked by a couple folks to offer my thoughts on Bucky’s character in FATWS. I just finished the series this past week, so I plan to write a lengthy commentary (you know how I roll). I also have another ask about a comparison between Baghdad Waltz and A Little Life, which I’ll be preparing in the next few weeks, too.
Thanks so much for your support and awesomeness!
Chapter: 22 - CLICK HERE TO READ
Rating: Explicit
Relationships: Steve Rogers/Bucky Barnes, Tony Stark/Pepper Potts, Minor Bucky Barnes/random folks.
Summary:
I check the monitor again, just as Steve’s eyes slide open. He looks into the camera. He looks into me. And I— I don’t know how to do this part. I never planned for this. I never dared to wish it into life, because I knew it would only bring me pain. And I was done with longing for the dead people and the dead world behind me.
This is a different kind of pain from the one in my shoulder now, as the skin frays around the place where it meets metal. It’s a pain of my reality crashing into this, into Steve Rogers. Alive. Drifting back into my life as I begin to drift out of it.
Expect posting to slow down a bit from here out as the chapters get longer and more difficult. Thank you for reading <3
Chapter: 21 - CLICK HERE TO READ
Beta’d by: @pitchforkcentral86
Rating: Explicit
Relationships: Steve Rogers/Bucky Barnes, Tony Stark/Pepper Potts, Minor Bucky Barnes/random folks.
Summary:
I check the monitor again, just as Steve’s eyes slide open. He looks into the camera. He looks into me. And I— I don’t know how to do this part. I never planned for this. I never dared to wish it into life, because I knew it would only bring me pain. And I was done with longing for the dead people and the dead world behind me.
This is a different kind of pain from the one in my shoulder now, as the skin frays around the place where it meets metal. It’s a pain of my reality crashing into this, into Steve Rogers. Alive. Drifting back into my life as I begin to drift out of it.
Fun fact: With this chapter, I have officially posted over 1,000,000 words on Ao3. Hooray??
Chapter: 20 - CLICK HERE TO READ
Beta’d by: @pitchforkcentral86
Rating: Explicit
Relationships: Steve Rogers/Bucky Barnes, Tony Stark/Pepper Potts, Minor Bucky Barnes/random folks.
Summary:
I check the monitor again, just as Steve’s eyes slide open. He looks into the camera. He looks into me. And I— I don’t know how to do this part. I never planned for this. I never dared to wish it into life, because I knew it would only bring me pain. And I was done with longing for the dead people and the dead world behind me.
This is a different kind of pain from the one in my shoulder now, as the skin frays around the place where it meets metal. It’s a pain of my reality crashing into this, into Steve Rogers. Alive. Drifting back into my life as I begin to drift out of it.
April Fool’s! Here’s a not-tragic one-shot for you.
CLICK HERE TO READ
Rating: Explicit
Relationships: Steve Rogers/Bucky Barnes
Summary:
The shooting stops, and Bucky holsters his pistol like a cowboy, the muscles of his shoulders and arms shifting, loosening. Steve’s heart races.
When Bucky turns back to him, he’s smirking. He jerks his head toward the target, and Steve follows him on unsteady knees.
There’s a fat hole squarely in the middle of the chest, with only two holes just barely outside center mass.
“Holy shit…”
“Still just wanna watch?” Bucky asks.
Steve’s lips purse. There’s a lightness in the other man’s features, the glimmer of unbridled excitement. What’s shocking about it is that Steve feels it, too.
----
Or: When salty gun store owner Bucky Barnes meets quaking gun virgin Steve Rogers.
Stay tuned on April Fool’s Day for my one-shot Buck’s Gun Rack!
Chapter: 19 - CLICK HERE TO READ
Beta’d by: @pitchforkcentral86
Rating: Explicit
Relationships: Steve Rogers/Bucky Barnes, Tony Stark/Pepper Potts, Minor Bucky Barnes/random folks.
Summary:
I check the monitor again, just as Steve’s eyes slide open. He looks into the camera. He looks into me. And I— I don’t know how to do this part. I never planned for this. I never dared to wish it into life, because I knew it would only bring me pain. And I was done with longing for the dead people and the dead world behind me.
This is a different kind of pain from the one in my shoulder now, as the skin frays around the place where it meets metal. It’s a pain of my reality crashing into this, into Steve Rogers. Alive. Drifting back into my life as I begin to drift out of it.
Relationships: Steve Rogers/Bucky Barnes, Tony Stark/Pepper Potts, Minor Bucky Barnes/random folks.
Summary:
I check the monitor again, just as Steve’s eyes slide open. He looks into the camera. He looks into me. And I— I don’t know how to do this part. I never planned for this. I never dared to wish it into life, because I knew it would only bring me pain. And I was done with longing for the dead people and the dead world behind me.
This is a different kind of pain from the one in my shoulder now, as the skin frays around the place where it meets metal. It’s a pain of my reality crashing into this, into Steve Rogers. Alive. Drifting back into my life as I begin to drift out of it.
Relationships: Steve Rogers/Bucky Barnes, Tony Stark/Pepper Potts, Minor Bucky Barnes/random folks.
Summary:
I check the monitor again, just as Steve’s eyes slide open. He looks into the camera. He looks into me. And I— I don’t know how to do this part. I never planned for this. I never dared to wish it into life, because I knew it would only bring me pain. And I was done with longing for the dead people and the dead world behind me.
This is a different kind of pain from the one in my shoulder now, as the skin frays around the place where it meets metal. It’s a pain of my reality crashing into this, into Steve Rogers. Alive. Drifting back into my life as I begin to drift out of it.
Just realizing that I forgot to post chapter 15 last week... sigh. Anyway, here’s more.
Chapter: 16 - CLICK HERE TO READ
Beta’d by: @pitchforkcentral86
Rating: Explicit
Relationships: Steve Rogers/Bucky Barnes, Tony Stark/Pepper Potts, Minor Bucky Barnes/random folks.
Summary:
I check the monitor again, just as Steve’s eyes slide open. He looks into the camera. He looks into me. And I— I don’t know how to do this part. I never planned for this. I never dared to wish it into life, because I knew it would only bring me pain. And I was done with longing for the dead people and the dead world behind me.
This is a different kind of pain from the one in my shoulder now, as the skin frays around the place where it meets metal. It’s a pain of my reality crashing into this, into Steve Rogers. Alive. Drifting back into my life as I begin to drift out of it.
