Jibber Jabber

Talking about and examining my more critical stances as someone who tends to largely look at things positively :)! Enby, She/They

[empurpost]

Howdy! I’m C (but can be referred to as whatever!), and this is my critical take blog! I virtually just look at the media I enjoy and things adjacent through a more critical lens (as I do not tend to do so, let alone express said viewpoints, but I very much so want to more actively critique and engage with aspects of both culture and media). I am a non-binary lesbian, and go by she/they pronouns.

(Those who consider themselves or identify with being: racist, homophobic, transphobic, sexist, ableist, TERFs, darkshippers, pro-radqueer, MAPs, zoophiles, or pro-generative A.I/A.I ‘art’, kindly DNI.)

[empurpost]

TADC’s finale? Uh, sole spoiler I’m speaking on, (spoilers ahead for TADC’s 9th episode!)

I find it rather disappointing that the nuances that come with Gangle and the act of mourning Jax, someone who has undeniably left her with trauma and had treated her with very frequent cruelty, were handwaved by Zooble’s “We’re all human” line.

Yes, we, in regards to the cast, are all human, but wouldn’t it be difficult for some of us to view one another as people? Wouldn’t it be difficult for Gangle, who has been subject to dehumanising treatment at Jax’s hands, to mourn him as one would any other person? Address his nuances and think of his abstraction like one would anyone else’s? Wouldn’t it? And yet we get no further conversation on this beyond, “we’re all human”?

[empurpost]

Naaahh that female character’s kindness and willingness to help has to be insincere. She definitely has ulterior motives, I mean, just look at the consistencies and inconsistencies that are easy to pinpoint the reasonings and background behind in the way she exists. So one-dimensionally manipulative of her.

[empurpost]

The thing about Ragatha’s character and the general gist of her arc(s) is that she is primarily fleshed out through her interactions with others. How she views herself in relation to her maintenance of her bonds with the people in the circus is an integral aspect of her characterisation.

When she confides in Kinger, she speaks about how others feel about her and scrutinises herself for pushing them away. He sums up her feelings as being hard on oneself due to the want to be there for everyone (evidently, in Ragatha’s case, this is aggravated by her trauma, but I digress).

And this is why I wish she spoke to Pomni on-screen! Yes, I know, I’m probably being unnecessarily salty about this, but I’d love for her to get her closure on-screen through her talk, her heart-to-heart, with Pomni, where she doesn’t feel any part of her is ‘seen-through’ as the both of them are simply trying to speak with sincerity. Her heart-to-heart with Kinger was wonderful! I really wish she had herself more of these sorts of interactions, and very much so with this damn confrontation in particular.

Not just that, hell, if we talk bar that, I wish she spoke to Pomni more after this scene. That they had more interactions referencing or being a byproduct of this arc’s closure. I’m still so bummed about this having gotten little to nothing.

[empurpost]

I’ll be honest, I did really like episode 7 as a stand-alone episode, but there is something to be said about its placement. It feels too late down the line. It’s one of if not the most ‘character study from where the cast are at this point of their arc’-centric episode there is, and it’s in the latter half of the series.

It is a great idea, but by fault of its short runtime, TADC has run out of opportunities to put the cast in these kinds of situations. If anything, episode 5 should have stayed the sole episode in this role.

It was nigh halfway through the show and thus did do its job as a character study, it established Jax and Ragatha’s tensions, Pomni’s place on their regard, and gave it time to be fleshed out and explored on-screen. 5 explored where they stand now to prepare the audience for these conflicts and characters developing from here-on out, only for 7 to be another study?

Of course, a more ensemble-angled study of the entire cast is a wonderful episode concept, and the execution of 7 on its own is not bad, but its place in TADC as a whole? Highly unfortunate, in my opinion.

[empurpost]

“But everyone was racist/making racist jokes back then!” Really? We’re using the ‘but racism was normal in White Historical Figure’s time’ argument for something that happened in the last decade?

[empurpost]

It does sadden me how speaking on misogyny and bias against female characters in fandom/media discussion through the lens of a character often reads to those in these spaces as ‘oh, so viewing this character in a negative light is misogynistic’ and results in the prompt labelling of a positive archetype (a ‘girlboss’, more often than not).

Never talked about, never engaged with, but loved. Loved not because people had actively engaged with her story and ended up enjoying her character, not because she is related to, not because she is interesting in characterisation or concept, but because she’s just such a queen! Such a sweetheart! Such a great maternal figure! So kind to Other Character(s)! How could anyone hate her? That’d just be misogynistic, which we are pointedly not.

[empurpost]

Note: ‘sociopathic’, ‘psychopathic’, ‘narcissistic, ‘bipolar’, and similar terms, are words that are not descriptors. They correspond to heavily stigmatised conditions that people tend to associate traits that are traditionally negative with, hence the common use of these words as personality descriptors. They are not. Their meanings in the regard are entirely arbitrary due to them not being personality descriptors and rather the names of personality disorders. We probably shouldn’t be using them, especially as people who do not have these conditions

[empurpost]

Despising a piece of media and still remaining supportive of it or at least acknowledging its appreciated aspects is both normalised and appreciated in such spheres (as it’s ought to be), and I just wish enjoying a piece of media was gone about similarly.

Yes, you can scrutinise the art and remain someone who feels positively about it. Yes, you can scrutinise the artist and remain someone who feels positively about the art. Yes, you can denounce your support for a project and remain acknowledging of your passion for it remaining.

You do not have to take bullets for insincere art, or deplorable people who happen to be involved in something you enjoy (or even just actively consume)’s creation.

You want to stay a fan? You are, and always will be, so long as you remain passionate about a piece and feel those feelings correspond to fandom, even if one you actively stand against the team behind or continuation of.

[empurpost]

“She’s such a lesbian (said in the context of a character’s personality)!” And it’s a character that does not portray attraction to women, and often lacks substantial relationships with them, but leans more blunt and ‘mean’ on the surface-level.