Not Thou Shalt Not. Say I WILL not.(He/Him) @siraquila - Tumblr Blog

Okay I need to go into the implications and imagery here. Cause this is prettty nuts backstory and information to be given here. To start off with the easy stuff the christ iconography is literally being eaten away by what looks like wyrm taint. The fact Stig is using some true sight magic means we can take this as being fairly literal at least so far as the corruption of the church goes.

Based on what we know about Stig from the bumper he's the eldest of the trio, but we don't know how old. If the one talking here is genuinely the Big J, JESUS CHRIST that implies Stig was there to meet him?? Is the wolf spirit in the back meant to be a metaphor for how he feels at the moment or is it apart of a flashback? there are plenty of stories of wolves being repelled by Christianity and churches so it could just be a reference to that as well. As I see it there are a few possibilities for this scene's meaning;

Stig is genuinely ~2000 years old and was there to meet Christ in person before becoming a proper Garou. I find this one unlikely because that would make him obscenely old.

This is the first time Stig has encountered true faith in person and only knows of Christ through legend and perhaps in relation to Gaia so what he's seeing here is a metaphor for how the wyrm has corrupted religion and god and such. The wolf spirit being shown is just a metaphor for his emotions.

'Genetic' memory of an ancestor maybe??

siraquila

It is merely about the corruption of the local chapter of the Society of Saint Leopold. This is not the representation of Christianity or Jesus in general. That is the representation of the True Faith of the three crusaders, and, well Goomba III specifically.

Also, it is not going to be literal. Anything of the umbra and based on spirit talents is going to be filtered through at least one layer of metaphor.

Also, why would you conclude Stig would have met Christ from this scene? I honestly do not even understand this conclusion, and I want to know what I missed. To me, he simply reacted to seeing something that is widely considered to be a symbol of hope in stories, and of someone the Silent Striders have many legends about, considering the historical Jesus was a massive force of good even in WoD to the point where banes could not even come within a mile of him, and the Silent Striders hunted many powerful banes suddenly displaced by Jesus passing. But even without that context, he clearly knows about the modern world; he is wearing the cross as an eyepatch in the form of the Swedish flag.

Imagine for a moment you entered a Buddhist temple and saw the statues of Buddha on a pyramid of skulls, blood dripping over it. Wouldn't your reaction be somewhat similar? Should you be a Buddhist, sorry for assuming you aren't, and imagine it with any other religion you know but do not believe in being perverted.

#stig skorsten #hunter: the parenting #htp

silentwalrus1

Yknow. If you’re writing fiction. A question that’s really useful to ask yourself is, why is my story following the characters that it’s following? Why are the readers spending the most time with THESE characters? What are their experiences and choices contributing to the story i want to tell?

Bc boy howdy is this a recurring problem i see in a bunch of books. A couple months ago I read A Memory Called Empire and, spoilers, the climax happens and it has absolutely fuckall to do with the main character. She’s the character we’ve spent the whole book with. Almost 100% of this book is her pov, her experiences, her choices. And then we hit the climax, and it’s all about two characters we’ve met a handful of times and have next to no insight into, and it’s about their relationship with each other. Why did we spend all this time with Mahit Maincharacter when nothing she did mattered to the stakes the author set up for the story?

That’s not the only problem with this book - how the damn hell did this thing win the Hugo, I’m serious - but it’s the narrative equivalent of telling your readers oops haha did I say the party was in THIS room? It’s actually in a different building. You weren’t invited. All the really interesting things, all the stuff that mattered? That’s not for you.

So, yknow, whatever happens with your characters, it’s worth asking hey. Why is my main character my main character? How relevant are they to the story I want to tell?

siraquila

Did we read the same book? Because Mahit's actions did matter quite a bit, and more are set up for the future. The information she delivers is quite important for the plot to happen, a not insignificant part of the actual climax, not the cleanup after, is how she disrupts three existing relationships and how she both builds on the relationships of her predecessor but also breaks with them. Something that has been a theme for most of the book already.

Furthermore, at least how I see it, Mahit is extremely relevant to the story the author wants to tell, because she is the only character there that can be the main character, because the story is fundamentally about what it is like to be part of a weaker nation in close orbit around a hegemonic empire. Which is fundamentally a core theme of the entire book, that colors basically every scene, and definitly every single character interaction. Hell, even the climax is about this.

And part of being part of a smaller nation that is bound by proximity or more to a hegemonic empire is that you won't be told what's happening, and that your ability to actually influence things is quite limited.

It's the narrative equivalent of saying. "Isn't it fucked up that the main character and the reader aren't told where the party is happening, and need to piece together where the party is happening and what is happening at the party from context clues. Isn't the way a hegemonic empire treats everyone in its orbit deeply fucked up? How does it feel to be the person who has to scrape and bow and fight for every bit of influence and power that others wield with reckless ease?"

#a memory called empire #amce spoilers #spoilers #amce

aikoiya

Hello there, (This is the resend of the Hunter: The Parenting 5.4 Question)

What is your opinion on the Sub-Chapter, where the Family tries to get help from the Second Inquestion, as this episode has bureaucracy talk and shows the coalition bickering and other things.

Thank you!

Sorry about that, but yeah! It was interesting!

First off, let me just say that I'm SO glad that they didn't end up getting in bed with the Wyrmeffers.

Seriously, frick that noise!

And as awful as it is that Occam ended up in the situation that he did, for the moment, it's at least better than dealing with the Wyrmfreaks.

But good gravy! That Blacklaw chick was an absolute battleaxe! Yet somehow, I disliked the woman with the shades SO much more.

Liked the Union dudes, though. Just a bunch of normal guys trying to survive the nonesense that the world throws at them & being unfortunate enough to have to be on a leash held by the Coalition.

But beyond that, the family should've come in with intellectual ammunition. In a world like WoD where information isn't just power, but even a cause for murder, you don't just walk in without a means of gaining the advantage.

Yet, the only one there who did was Door & he let it go far too freely. That sort of info could've been utilized as leverage.

It's part of why I think D really messed up. Had he kept his cool half as well as Door, he could've utilized that well of information that he calls a noggin far better. If nothing else, he could've had the witch in the shades eating outta his hand had he applied the right preassure. *sighs* Truly disappointing.

But then, I can't exactly blame him. His son's life was on the line after all.

Still, I believe it was, in fact, the correct decision to reject the contract offered by Wyrmfood. And I do mean that carte blanche. The audacity!

siraquila

Oh yeah, the family really messed up there.

In very understandable ways, they were in a horrible situation.

But starting negotiations by insulting everyone at the table, and then telling them you are desperate enough to take any deal they might offer... is... uh... a choice.

As certain as I am that negotiations would have been the right choice, I am also fairly certain that the D-Family could have gotten the Union, the Swedes, and probably the Newberg Group to a reasonable deal. Definitly the Union and the Swedes.

Well, barring Pentex under Blair didn't come in there with a full plan to fuck over the D-Family, but I honestly doubt that. Before today, they were too small fries to really register for Pentex.

But uh... Door did not really get an advantage. I feel like he really painted a target on the family's back. Because Pentex and subsidiaries do not want anyone to know they worship the wyrm. That is high-level stuff, and more importantly, it hurts profits and the doomsday deadline. And Door very handily implied he knows they worship the wyrm. There are very likely corporate death squads in the family's future.

One thing you did not mention was how the D-Family also completely disregarded their allies. Occam was clearly on their side, and Blacklaw, despite his issues, had aligned interests. Yet every use of those resources was a courtesy extended towards the family, and not a discussed and bargained-for advantage. If Blacklaw was willing to pay for the Union for nothing in return and Occam was willing to invoke Treaty and Marriage, how much could the family have gotten out of him had they been willing to join forces, and essentially work the room together with their allies?

Though then again, working the room better would have tied them far closer to the Wyrm, especially with the Newburgh Group. And uh... if Markus is in danger as a human hostage with the garou then being a wyrmservant captured by garou is... yeah.

#wod #hunter the parenting #world of darkness