I'm sorry, but what do you mean AFTG opens with Andrew slamming his racquet into Neil to stop him from running away and ends with Andrew slamming his racquet into Riko to save Neil now that Neil has finally stopped running?
What do you MEAN the first thing that Andrew says to Neil is "better luck next time" - and in the end the better luck is that Andrew was fast enough and desperate enough to reach him in time??
sam, smoking a cigarette: so anyway you're acting really weird man. like kinda suspicious. and frankly with how vulnerable some of my loved ones are i'm really struggling to trust you. it's nothing personal, i've just gotta be careful, ya know?
andrew, physically vibrating, internally: dont ask him to put that out on you don't ask him to put that out on you don't ask him to put that out on you don't ask him to put that out on you don
i think if u do srsly want insecurity to be a conflict within andreil's relationship it makes way more sense for andrew to be the one feeling insecure rather than neil but this gets ignored bcus he's more in control of their sexual encounters during the series and it makes me. so sad.
One of the things that I love so much about Summer Sons is the Appalachian/Rural South’s reclamation of queerness and queer community.
I’m so used to the story running the other way: queer kid leaves bigoted southern rural hometown to find themselves in the Big Gay Accepting City. But Summer Sons says: No! Fuck That! Queer folk belong everywhere. Queer folk build beautiful accepting communities everywhere. And you should not, as a queer person, feel like you have to fucking apologise for wanting to belong back home.
[Rest under cut b/c Summer Sons spoilers]
I LOVE how first Eddie and then Andrew need to go back home to Tennessee before they can discover and accept their queerness. It’s not enough that they are inseparable and that they love each other. Eddie can’t begin to accept himself – to any degree – until he understands himself, which he can only do by going back home, to where the land calls for him. For Eddie, Home means a questionable legacy from his wealthy land-owning family and a rich tradition of folklore that he is personally part of. For Andrew, Home means being surrounded by bittersweet personal hauntings but also by real living people who are like him and who share his culture. And both of them need these aspects of Home to understand who they are as people.
I think a lot of queer narratives tend to (for obvious reasons) paint queerness as essentially incompatible with rural cultures – but Eddie, Andrew, Sam and Riley are all both queer and fundamentally rurally Southern. When Eddie and Andrew go home, they find themselves back in a culture that makes sense to them because it runs (literally) in their blood. They find a small community where being queer isn’t this other, distinct identity but has been made to naturally fit and blend into the local lifestyle that they love (which ok, for these guys, consists mostly in racing very fast cars and taking many drugs, with some ghost tales thrown in. Good for them, you only live your 20s once).
This is not to say that the book ignores queer oppression – Riley’s parents disown him for being trans, Sam throws these ragers that he invites homophobes to, Andrew immediately gets into a fight over a homophobic slur, there is a sense that both Riley and Sam are forced to look beyond their immediate community for romantic partners. But still, despite the oppression that these characters face, the narrative has them all unquestionably BELONG - and part of the process of belonging is them figuring out how to make their own community at home, without hating where they are from OR hating themselves.
Anyway, imo this is very cool! Why should we accept the narrative that folk from rural areas with lower college attendance rates are somehow incapable of creating loving and inclusive communities – as if these aren’t the very people with firsthand experience of (other types of) systematic oppression and prejudice? Why should queer folk feel like they have to choose between their hometown identity and their queer identity? what if queer liberation were ground in local community and family support?
one thing about neil is that he's extremely calculated and genuinely does not give a fuck about 90% of people. and the 10% of people he Does care about he's still willing to manipulate and use for what he views as the best outcome (re: breaking a bone to heal it properly) and i think there's an instinct to downplay this so that neil can be the softer/less intense/emotional one to andrew's uncaring/intense/harsh demeanor bcus there's an obsession in our culture with opposites attract (re: heteronormativity) but it does their dynamic a huge disservice to ignore the Basis of andreil. which is the understanding they have of each other + their reasons + their reactions and how extremely similar they are.
Hiii long time no see!
I just finished a big school project so yay I'll have half a day before getting drowned in work again haha..
Anyway here's a Nicky Hemmick apreciation post :)
I love this guy so much, I remember liking him from the veeery beginning but as we get to know more about him he becomes even more likeable holdable.
The fact he gave up a good life in Germany with his boyfriend for years to raise the MINYARDS - honest respect.
come on then, whose gonna write the Leviticus Andreil AU where Andrew's all "I want nothing" and then tadaaaaaa! that demon don't look like nothing to me, pal
hi, tbh i see people use the excuse of oh she did what she had to do to keep him alive they were being chased & hunted by the butcher and she had to be rough to make sure neil understood something along the lines of that or she was just a mother doing what she had to do to keep her son alive & how her abuse saved his life
think i repeated myself a little there but yeah shit like that
something i want to bring up after scrolling through the mary hatford tag
a consensus is that in an alive!mary au andrew would kill her and i was wondering if you would weigh in on that? I'd be really interested to hear your thoughts on it
ty for your answer to my previous ask! it was very validating that you found the justification horrifying
Hi there,
My answer is under the Read More! Just as a warning, we are discussing child abuse, abusive relationships, etc., so if that is uncomfortable for anyone, do not feel obligated to read.
Also, I’m so sorry for my late response, haha. I know this was a conversation started over a month ago.
What is interesting about that argument - that Mary’s abuse saved Neil’s life - is that actually the opposite is true in AFTG. Mary’s methods get her killed & Neil saves his own life by casting aside her rules and finally doing what HE wants to do and what brings HIM joy even though he knows she would have beaten him for it.
Neil plays Exy, he goes to college, he makes friends & he falls in love & creates his own family. Everything Mary forbid Neil from doing & abused him for entertaining. Not only does this save Neil’s life, it also makes Neil feel as if life is worth living. He plays a sport he loves with a team (the Foxes) he views as family, alongside the man he loves (Andrew).
Neil, prior to signing with the Foxes, is actually rather similar to Andrew in the sense of… he’s not really living. He’s just waiting to die (in the sense of getting caught by his father/his father’s people & then getting horrifically murdered). He doesn’t see himself as having a future, nor does he think there is much worth living for in the future if his life is just constantly running, running, running. He continues to live because that is what Mary ingrained in him & while he’s not actively suicidal, I do think it is interesting how early on Neil was willing to accept his death & push the burden of living onto Kevin.
I think part of the tragedy is that in TFC it was so easy for Neil to decide ‘okay mom, Kevin will be the one to live for us now’ b/c he genuinely was not enjoying being alive versus in TKM when Neil WAS enjoying being alive and WANTED to live and stay with the Foxes & Andrew, but he sacrificed himself, anyway. Because the thought of running - of once again being nothing & not enjoying life - wasn’t worth it compared to having the last few months of his life being playing Exy with the Foxes & kissing Andrew, and he wanted them safe & he wanted to stay, but he couldn’t have both so he had to allow himself to be taken.
Moreover, it’s this feeling of being nothing but wanting to be more that Andrew connects with when Neil spills his half-truths to him at Wymack’s apartment after the first Columbia trip.
Mary had to die & her control over Neil had to be broken so he could actually begin having a good life. In order for TFC to happen, Mary has to be dead. That itself is also part of the tragedy. She wanted to save Neil, yes, but Mary never had a clear end goal other than to keep running until what… Nathan mysteriously dropped dead? What about his associates - Lola and the rest? What about the Moriyamas? Was she hoping if Nathan died they would forget about her? Okay… then how would Neil at 25, 30, 35 be able to rejoin society?
Therefore, in order for Neil to be saved (and safe) Mary AS WELL as Nathan both have to be dead. [I think, as well, that in CONTRAST to Nathan, Mary seems like a good mother b/c she loved her son & didn’t want to sell him to an abusive sports cult. However, I think this sometimes stretches too far - such as suggesting that Mary tried to protect Neil from Nathan’s physical abuse prior to running. Y’all… MARY was also physically abusive & likely was BEFORE they went on the run. If there was one thing Mary & Nathan had in common other than being literal Mafia Criminals, is that neither of them saw a problem using “physical force” to “discipline” their son.
Additionally, I think there is a tendency to be… a bit more dismissive of a woman being abusive versus a man, and some VERY excellent points were brought up last time about how mothers can be more easily humanized b/c they ARE putting the work in to caring for the children & often they are also being abused themselves by their husbands - however, I do think that being better IN comparison is still not being “good.” Mary was absolutely complicit in Neil’s abuse throughout his childhood - in the same way that Maria Hemmick, although her husband was obviously controlling & racist & sexist towards her, was also complicit in the abuse of Nicky Hemmick for being gay - Nicky tells us himself that she locked herself in the washroom for days crying after he came out & then agreed to send him to be tortured at conversion therapy & proceeded to disown him when he returned from Germany dating Erik].
I also don’t really buy the argument that Mary had to be “rough” [I’m also not sure how I feel about using the word “rough” - I know this isn’t coming from you, either, Anon, you’re like quoting… but it seems a bit watered-down for what we’re trying to say, which is “physically abusive.” I find AFTG Fandom does this quite a bit, which is strange - we are reading a series that contains heavy topics, I believe we should be able to use the words that refer to those topics. I notice this as well when people gloss over what happened to Andrew as “the bad things” or some other silly phrase - it’s called rape. Rape and CSA - childhood sexual assault. There is no reason to shy away from using these words] to protect Neil (especially b/c Mary’s abuse wasn’t even really ABOUT protection it was about control - the stubborn insistence that SHE was in charge & a method of ensuring Neil did not challenge her, which is often WHAT abuse & also rape are about: control).
Mary never told Neil why exactly they were running, she kept him entirely dependent on her (they’re running from the mob and Mary never taught Neil to fight? He needs to learn fist-fighting from Matt and knives from Renee? He does say he can shoot, so that’s something - and I also think some readers thought this was odd considering Neil’s background but tbh it makes perfect sense with Mary - she doesn’t WANT Neil to know how to fight back against her or anyone else, she wants him to NEED her and for him not to run from her as well) & reliant on her to make all their choices (and to feel safe, as well, she literally had them sleeping in the same bed up until she died) - to the point that in AFTG Neil thinks he’s too dumb to function without her.
I think as well… there seems to be this idea in AFTG Fandom that abusive people cannot love the ones they abuse (or be loved in return), which is why there is also this insistence that Riko CANNOT have ever loved Kevin or that Kevin doesn’t love Riko, he’s just afraid of him. And that’s not really true.
It's shown quite well that Neil has his own complicated feelings regarding his mother throughout AFTG - I find it very interesting that some readers gloss over the fact that Neil admits to resenting his mother & he never tries to justify her abuse. The fact that she ran to save him is something that Neil reflects on & he obviously grieves her. In his own way I think Neil loved Mary, and she loved him (although apparently she never told him she loved him). However, I also think it’s possible for Neil to love & hate Mary - as he does in Canon. To grieve her loss & be grateful for everything she did to protect him, while also resenting her for abusing him & lying to him.
Now, as for Andrew killing Mary if she were still alive - that actually comes from Nora herself! Nora once answered a question stating that Andrew ABSOLUTELY would kill Mary - he’s already conditioned to not like abusive mother’s b/c of Tilda, and he would think she was a coward for running from Nathan instead of trying to kill him herself.
I have admittedly seen a few arguments against this b/c some readers believe Andrew would emphasize with Mary for ‘doing what needed to be done’ and that Andrew himself is a violent protector. I disagree for several reasons (and not just on the basis that Nora herself said Andrew would kill Mary, haha).
The first being Andrew IS violent, protective, and controlling. HOWEVER, I think it’s very telling that even when Aaron is breaking their deal, Andrew doesn’t violently lash out at Aaron. He lashes out at Katelyn. Additionally, even when Neil states in Baltimore that Andrew’s emotional control is shattered he still doesn’t physically lash out at Neil. In fact, Neil even tells us that he trusts Andrew’s violence would never hurt him.
Andrew does threaten Nicky with his knives several times, although I think it’s interesting that he never actually cuts Nicky with them. Unfortunately, there is Kevin to take into consideration - Andrew does cut Kevin with one of his knives & also famously strangles him. However, Kevin & Andrew have a rather volatile dynamic that isn’t quite the same as Andrew & Aaron or Andrew & Nicky or Andrew/Neil, moreover the circumstances for the knifing (Kevin grabbing at Andrew, which Nicky & Aaron seem to know better than to do - although Nicky DOES try to hug him in TRK, which is also violently rebuffed) and of course, the strangling, which is its own thing. While Andrew does enforce his own boundaries & rules with violence, who he directs his violence at & and the extent of Andrew’s violence differs from Mary’s violence. Moreover, I think once Andrew enters a sexual relationship with Neil, his willingness to use violence ON Neil significantly decreases b/c that will then become too tangled up with sexual violence.
Second, Andrew is a hypocrite, haha. It’s one of his pretty big character flaws. Nora once said Andrew doesn’t care about other people’s locked doors (hence going through Neil’s shit in TFC) but if anyone broke into ANDREW’S room then Andrew would be furious. Aaron even calls him out on this b/c Andrew trying to hold Aaron to deal regarding Katelyn while Andrew was blatantly breaking their deal with Neil… yeah not exactly fair. Not to mention Andrew telling Neil ‘no one likes a martyr’ when Andrew’s whole thing is BEING a martyr. Andrew isn’t going to give a shit that he’s ALSO violent & controlling b/c he DOES NOT view his own violence being the same as another person’s violence - also Mary being A Mother is definitely going to work against her b/c Andrew’s canonically a bit of a misogynist with complicated feelings regarding mothers. He’s not going to view them as being the same. Andrew’s violence in his mind is justifiable & works & he’s protecting Neil PROPERLY, whereas Mary’s violence is abusive & stupid & she’s FAILING to protect Neil properly & hurting him, so therefore she just needs to be eliminated.
[I also don’t think Neil would be offended by Andrew telling him that he would have killed Mary. (1) she’s already dead so it doesn’t exactly matter. (2) Neil himself isn’t blindly loyal to Mary so he’d understand his reasoning. And (3) Neil understands WHY Andrew killed Tilda & basically told Aaron to get over it, so I think he would fully understand & appreciate what Andrew IS trying to communicate to him. Also, I think it’d be very funny if Neil DID tell Aaron that Andrew once said he would have killed his mother if she was still alive & Neil found it very romantic b/c Aaron’s reaction to THAT would be gold].
i think there's an interesting trend regarding how often andrew is portrayed as refusing to do anything for neil without his consent even outside of sexual contexts. like removing neil from a situation he's struggling with or when neil is in a vulnerable state of mind re: injury/sickness/intoxication/etc. it's curious to me bcus i think a huge part of andrew's character IS doing things he views as necessary for the protection of his people regardless of what they feel about it. like if neil is injured/unconscious i dont think andrew's going to be debating if it's okay to pick him up without a yes. he's going to be doing whatever he needs to get neil safe/secure/taken care of, and i don't think he would hesitate or regret any of those actions.
and maybe that's just my interpretation of his character but i do think a lot of people often smooth out the complexities of andrew's relationship with boundaries / consent (which are most prominent in tfc but remains consistent throughout the series) bcus of the sexual violence he faces. like obviously andrew is very concerned with consent in sexual situations but he doesn't give a fuck outside of those if ignoring it is necessary. like he's constantly pushing and violating neil's boundaries in tfc not to mention the hold he has on aaron and nicky. and like even during moments of physical intimacy andrew and neil aren't always asking yes or no and that happens WITHIN tkm.
Reminder that before Andrew gives Neil a key and called it home, Nicky already called Neil "family" and told him that the Columbia House is his, too.
This conversation between Nicky and Neil happens at the start of the night out that ends with Andrew giving Neil the key:
And then in the next scene:
Neil has been a Monster for all of 1 evening at this point, Kevin only joined them a few months ago in December. But Nicky effortlessly thinks of the house that he spends all of his money on as belonging to all of them!
Neil doesn't really react to Nicky calling him family other than to push back a little on the very notion of family, and he doesn't even seem to process Nicky saying that he considers the house as belonging to Neil too. But! Not even two hours after this conversation with Nicky, Seth will be dead, Andrew will have told him to stay, and Neil will be clasping Andrew's key in his hand while whispering "Welcome Home, Neil".
I've made the case before that Nicky's friendship with Neil is so crucial because Nicky serves the narrative role of giving Neil the concepts (friend, family, love) that he needs to eventually become a real boy and fall in love with Andrew, which are the things that ultimately save Neil. This is another example of it imo. Nicky patiently introduces the concepts of family and of a shared home to Neil, who either dismisses them or doesn't really think through the implications in the moment. And it is this gentle preparation that then allows Neil to understand and give a full "yes" to Andrew's offer of family and home.
That scene in TKM where the Foxes are all out to dinner and Andrew is glaring at everyone with his hands over his face refusing to engage, and the Upperclassmen are all disapproving and disappointed b/c they thought that they had finally made friends with the Monsters....
Meanwhile Neil (staring at his man adoringly): ahhh my beautiful strong strong Andrew conserving his energy for Kevin. Don't the upperclassmen know that dealing with Kevin is such a colossal nightmare that you need to literally sit motionless for hours beforehand absorbing strength from the atmosphere itself??
neil choosing andrew over exy with no hesitation will always be my favorite thing like exy is everything to neil and what kept him going for so long so the foxes all think that of course neil would choose exy over andrew but when neil is asked about it he is so floored and shocked by it because he can’t imagine any reality where he would choose anything over andrew, even exy.
