High key inspired by this post, it made me intrigued in how zuko & katara not only figuratively parallel each other, but also literally.
During the key interactions parts of the progression of their relationship, zuko is usually on the left while katara is usually on the right.
Examples of this:
Even in official art of the show, they are positioned this way:
If you ask me, I donât think itâs a coincidence that katara (the moon, night, feminine) & zuko (the sun, day, masculine) are paired in this particular manner.
It is extremely representative of the yin & yang emblem, where yang is typically on the left nd yin is typically on the right.
As we all know, the moon and ocean spirits la & tui are fundamentally based on yin & yang. Guess how la & tui are positioned?
La means âpullâ in Mandarinďżź. Guess what katara does?
Tui means âpushâ in Mandarin. Guess what zuko does?
I know Iâm most likely reading too deep into this, but I just couldnât stop my mind from wondering after reading that wonderfully written post.
When he realized that Katara didn't have any sort of image of her mother (as the Water Tribe isn't really known for its paintings), Zuko hired the most talented portrait painter in the Fire Nation and then consulted with Hakoda and Gran-Gran for as many details as possible in order to commission a life-size painting of Kya to give to Katara.
The painting was so beautiful and so true to life that Katara almost thought her mother was about to step out of the canvas. It became one of her most cherished possessions.
Many decades later, after Katara passed away, the painting was considered a masterpiece and placed in the Southern Water Tribe cultural heritage center and museum. It is the most beloved work in the gallery and remains a symbol for many Water Tribe and Fire Nation people of love, courage, and kindness.
Probably the funniest part of seeing anti-Zutara comments on Zutara posts on Pinterest is the confirmation that they are seeking out the content. I've gone years without seeing my NoTPs on Pinterest because the site won't show me stuff I'm not looking for. Sure I had to block the 7 or 8 Kataang posts I saw, but I've been on that site for years, and they rarely show me any non-Zutara posts. It's kind of like TikTok that way. When I see people complaining about how they "always see that Zutara crapđ đ đ ", I have to chuckle. Why are they so obsessed?
The Reckoning of Roku name dropped Sozin's parents. Big L for the Fire Lords reproduce asexually enjoys. đ
(if you dont remember you had a post about that Fire Lords reproduce like GRRM's dragons and I vibed with that)
Lol, I was joking about the dragons thing because I hate the idea of Zuko reproducing with Mai, especially since canon implies that they didn't stay together and Zuko might as well have made Izumi all by himself for how little canon cares about Mai.
I'm more interested to know whether Sozin's mother was an official firelady or a concubine.
BTW, that post-series book dropping the term firelady to imply that Fire Nation culture is backwards for not having it as an official term is obviously meant to throw shade at the zutara fandom for inventing the term and pointing out how little the creators cared about depicting women existing in the world they built. Trying to explain it as in-world sexism to avoid the writers taking responsibility for their own sexism is rich.
I find it hilarious that the book taks a jab at the Fire Nation for being sexist it arguably the most out all of the nations. This doesn't mean there's 0 sexism, but considering that the show treated Fire Nation princes and princesses as equal heirs.
If the book is referring to how the Fire Lord's wives faded into the background and their roles were likely subordinate, my question is how is that any better than having zero information or references on Air Nomad nuns' rituals, practices, beliefs, lifestyles and reproduction?
We at least see Fire Nation women trained and educated just as well as their male counterparts. For female Air Nomad figures, all we see are the Air Acolytes, who devoutly follow Aang like a cult, and Pema, whose sole role is to essentially repopulate the Airbender population with a guy 16 years her senior.
If this is how Air Nomad women are depicted, I think the Fire Nation gets a pass for not having a official term for a female Fire Lord.
Me, culturally Protestant, walking into a Catholic church filled balls to the walls with paintings sculptures candles and god knows what else: whyâs there so much stuff
Me, vampire, walking into any denominational holy place: AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
I think almost all of the anti Mai discourse from namely Zutara shippers boils down to this.
You can try and deliberately misconstrue the writing to say Zuko forgot Mai, was never happy around her, never loved her, etc etc
But not once can you say Zuko ever looked at Katara, Jin, or any other female character you ship him with the same way he looks at Mai in these four panels.
What I love about the art of animation is it conveys so much when words canât.
The eyes, Chico. They never lie.
This single scene conveys so much love, adoration, and the happiness of finally reuniting with your soulmate. And no amount of dissertations on how a fanon ship wouldâve made a childrenâs tv show more enjoyable to you will never change that.
The curse of canon weighs on Maiko and Kataang shippers, but we wouldnât have it any other way.
This! Zuko never looked at Katara like that, he never was interested in her. He never looked at Jin like that, or at any other girl. only at Mai.
I like to think that haters ( zutara shippers mostly) can write huge metas with bad analysis and thousands of fics, but the truth is the truth: Zuko never loved Katara, never wanted her. the only woman in his life is always Mai.
I think some people forget that some literature and some media is meant to be deeply uncomfortable and unsettling. It's meant to make you have a very visceral reaction to it. If you genuinely can't handle these stories then you are under no obligation to consume them but acting as if they have no purpose or as if people don't have a right to tell these stories, stories that often relate to the darkest or most disturbing parts of life, then you should do some introspection.
Iâve read some things that deal in sad/dark/actually depressing and disturbing subject matter. Iâve loved them and the points they make without endorsing the events portrayed.
Itâs always disappointing to get online and see that the conversation is âX thing shouldnât existâ on the grounds that it made somebody feel badly. It was meant to make you feel that way and itâs normal that it did - itâs okay that you stop reading it or donât finish it but I am BEGGING you to consider why it made you uncomfortable and why the author felt the need (if the answer isnât immediately obvious, as it can be). There isnât shame in something putting you off so badly that you shelve it.
The sterilization of reality is a detriment to all who exist within it. To censor stories with painful themes is to erase the reality that such stories are based in some horrific truth and works to erase the reality that many people have endured.
This trend or whatever we want to call it has gotten so bad that I listened to an entire lecture from somebody about how awful a book was and how it shouldnât exist at all, how the author was a terrible person for concocting it and how it hurt people. When I asked what the book was, this person not only could barely recall the name but HAD NEVER READ IT. I bought the book. I read the book. It accomplished its task beautifully and I found it to be a cathartic experience. I also understood how it could make people so uncomfortable and would never judge anybody for setting it down.
Itâs okay not to like something and distance yourself from it. Remember that those rules apply only to you, though, because they speak only to your own psyche.
Periodic reminder that one of the many roles of fiction is microdosing on big scary feelings so you build resilience, empathy, understanding, and defense against the real thing.
The Choice of Compassion: A Scene Analysis of Aang vs Zuko
should aang have killed ozai?
the age old question. the discourse secondary only to the infamous kat.aang vs zutara ship war. the argument that's been raging for sixteen long, long years and inspired dozens upon dozens of thinkpieces on either side.
so naturally, i'm here to add one more that no one asked for.
now, this debate keeps getting mischaracterized as The Side That Respects Pacifism vs The Side That Wants A Preteen To Commit Brutal Murder when, for the most part, i don't think anyone is really staking their life on the homicide hill. the real issue most people take with aang's arc in the finale isn't him sparing ozai, but rather the deus ex-machina mechanism through which he's able to do so. i agree with that, but i would also take it further to argue that the real problem is that aang's ending is not thematically and narratively consistent with the rest of his arc as set up in the show.
to illustrate this, let's take a look at another scene that plays with similar themes: zuko choosing to save zhao in the siege of the north.
the basics of both scenes are the same: both boys choose, against all logic and common sense, to spare someone who would never show them the same mercy. when it comes down to compassion versus violence, they choose compassion, even at risk to themselves.
but where the siege of the north differs from sozin's comet is that zuko choosing to save zhao is thematically consistent with his arc in season 1, and aligns with where it will go in seasons 2 and 3.
zuko's journey throughout the show is one of rediscovery. he has to find his way back to who he used to be, before his family and his nation warped his perception of right and wrong, and forced him into believing he had to become someone he didn't want to be. it's clear as early as the storm episode that zuko is fundamentally kind, and the person he is now is as a result of being indoctrinated in a culture that perverted violence and cruelty into honour and strength.
in trying to save zhao, the personification of the fire nation's worst qualities and most twisted teachings, zuko turns against the values he's been raised with most of his life and instead chooses to remain true to himself and what he believes is right. it's a triumphant moment because it's zuko returning to the heart of who he is, and who he's truly supposed to be.
and even though his decision may be logically unsound (why risk yourself trying to save someone who tried to kill you?) you don't see anyone complaining that zuko shouldn't have tried at all, because his choice here is a direct - even if brief - resolution to the internal conflict the show has previously established for his character. the narrative consistency of the set-up and payoff allows the audience to recognize the thematic cohesion of this moment in zuko's arc - which is what makes it so powerful and satisfying.
so, the question is: does the same apply to aang's choice not to kill ozai?
the argument supporting aang's decision is usually something as follows: "aang sparing ozai is his way of remaining true to his people and making sure they aren't forgotten. it's a powerful symbol of how he's keeping their culture and beliefs alive even though the fire nation tried to wipe them out."
now that's not a bad argument, in theory. the problem, though, is that if this is the resolution of aang's arc, it has to be a direct response to a conflict established in said arc... and remaining true to air nomad values is not a struggle the show ever set up for aang until the finale.
not once in any of the previous seasons does aang seem to be forgetting his people's ideals, or losing his identity through assimilation, or struggling to reconcile his air nomad beliefs with the ideas he's encountering in this new, changed world. there isn't a long-term, sustained arc about him being worried or concerned about air nomad culture dying out completely, or about taking on the burden of keeping it alive. in fact, the only episode that does reckon with this theme in any capacity - the northern air temple - seems to push the opposite message: that aang should move on and adapt to this changing world instead of remaining mired in the past, and protecting the culture of a people long gone.
(note: i don't like how the NAT episode handled this theme, but for the purposes of this post, we will take it as it was written.)
both zuko and aang are characters whose arcs revolve around change, but if zuko's arc is about moving back to who he truly is, then aang's arc is about moving forward. it's about going from the last airbender to the avatar - about drawing wisdom from different places, about immersing himself in the practices, beliefs and cultures of the other nations, and learning to value them as he values his own.
it's the classic want vs need: what aang wants is to be nothing more than a goofy, peaceful airbender but what he needs is to become a fully-realized avatar, the embodiment of four nations in one. and this conflict is established and re-established repeatedly over three seasons, most especially in his struggle to learn earthbending and firebending, both of which called for him to adopt new perspectives and beliefs contrary to his own.
this is why aang refusing to kill ozai feels so narratively unfulfilling, because it's the complete antithesis of what the show established for aang's narrative over three seasons. the plot point of his absolute pacifism not only comes out of left field (where was this problem when he was going to battle ozai during the eclipse?), it's also incongruous with the depiction of other air nomads in the series (both yangchen and gyatso don't seem to practice absolute pacifism) and with where aang's own arc appeared to be leading.
additionally, it also conflicts with the thematic clash that the aang vs ozai fight is supposed to represent: what was meant to be balance and harmony vs dominance and supremacy now turns into... air nomad beliefs vs fire nation beliefs, which runs contrary to the fundamental message of the entire show. not exactly what you want for the final battle between your protagonist and antagonist!
all of this is not to say that aang should have gone turbo avatar state on ozai and singlehandedly yeeted him into the spirit world. but there were a dozen other ways to handle ozai's end: give him a disney death, let aang learn energybending of his own accord and incapacitate him the way katara took down azula, or - my personal favourite - bring in the spirits in a neat parallel to the book 1 finale, and have ozai's death be a consequence of the imbalance he propagated in the world (i've always felt the avatar being the spirit bridge was a plotline that kinda got shafted in book three, and bringing back someone like koh, for instance, would've slapped).
the point is that for the resolution of aang's arc to be thematically consistent with the established narrative (the validity of this narrative, and whether it should have been different, is another point entirely, but it cannot be denied that this is what the show chose to go with), he needed to place the values and beliefs of the other nations on equal footing with his own, and win because of this willingness to draw from all nations instead of relying solely on his own.
ultimately, remaining true to his compassionate, peaceful nature is not a struggle in aang's narrative the way that it is in zuko's, which is why him choosing to spare ozai doesn't have anywhere near the emotional resonance or satisfaction of zuko reaching out to zhao. meanwhile, the conflict that does characterize aang's arc - being forced to become the avatar - never comes to a meaningful resolution the way that zuko's does. rather, it's thrown out the window in favour of a last minute plot point that robs aang of both agency and development, and destroys the thematic cohesion of his narrative for nothing.
I would like to add that the Lion Turtleâs famous quote doesnât quite apply to Aang either.
âThe true mind can weather all the lies and illusions without being lost. The true heart can touch the poison of hatred without being harmed. Since beginning less time, darkness thrives in the void, but always yields to purifying light.â
It is beautifully written and a very nice message to send to a young audience, but it doesnât align with Aangâs conflict. He is being forced to kill Ozai because, at the time, that is the only way to end Ozaiâs dictatorship. And Aang knows that; he might feel lost, not because he is questioning the truth, but because he has to accept this one truth. Â Â
The second sentence is the one that is the most out of place. Aang doesnât hate Ozai. He doesnât hate the Fire Nation or the Firelords as individuals, not even Sozin. This could be due to his age and innocence; however, the fact remains. Weâve seen Aang experience visceral anger, grief, and distress. He is not immune to the emotional toll the War has taken on everyone else, but he also believes that forgiveness is necessary. The series showed us directly and indirectly that Aang has forgiven most of the people who have wronged him. (which is his personal choice). So, itâs not like Aang is thinking about killing Ozai because he wants revenge for himself or for other selfish reasons. Interestingly, Aang is proving his compassionate nature by considering killing Ozai. They could have explored or, at least hinted this in Sozinâs Comet: Ozai was going to erase an entire country and Aang couldnât let that happen, he couldnât let others suffer what his people suffered. Ozaiâs dictatorship has inflicted so much pain in the world, including everyone Aang calls a friend, and Aang canât let him go unscathed after that. Â
As for the last line, I get why they put it as a black-and-white, good-against-evil scenario, but thatâs not what Aang needed to learn. He needed to learn a different way to be a hero.
He didnât see Ozai as pure darkness either; he wouldnât feel so conflicted if he did.
Lastly, the angle of the Lion Turtleâs words being a riddle to decipher the secret of energybending is understandable, but the visual of the Lion Turtle handing Aang an unknown power that has always been implied to be energybending is an awful message! Aang didnât earn this wisdom by himself; he was repeating what he heard less than a day ago. This introduction/acquisition of energybending cheapens his entire character arcâyes, even the canon one in these four episodesâbecause it takes away all the stakes. Aang now knows he doesnât have to kill Ozai because an ancient, powerful being gave him this godly power and saved him from the hardships he might have to endure if he were to discover and earn such power through his effort.
by getting botox and fillers and cosmetic surgeries you are actively participating in making the world a more hostile place for the women who choose not to do those things. you are actively applying pressure on those women. you are creating a world where women who donât do those things are told they are âaging like milkâ because no one knows what a normal, unaltered female face looks like anymore.
The "making fun of Aang for being bald is racist" thing is so funny as an argument defending KA because it's like. Oh, you mean Aang is bald for a cultural reason? One that means he should technically be celibate?
