#for something else

[vintagegamebro]

slightly tweaked this dave picture i abandoned (last years)

[riyasart]

added extra frames to the deltarune fountain sprite

[aphelionbruise]

while going through my notebooks from high school today, I found this poem. It must have been written around september or october 2019, and I’m not sure what event it’s referring to.

[aspiringpolymath]

[itstonyowo]

the unfinished doodl of him the colored one was for fun

[submarinedog]

Ok, I think this is the best way I can see to explain why I think that “everybody dies”, while a bittersweet ending, isn’t a Good Ending. 

Spoilers for My Sister’s Keeper, book and movie, if that matters to you. 

The plot of the book and the film “My Sister’s Keeper” is about a girl who was conceived by her mother specifically to save the life of her sister who developed cancer as a toddler. When the book starts, the sister has developed renal failure and needs a kidney: donating a kidney is a very serious matter with serious consequences and the mother is, naturally, pressuring the girl to donate it because she’s the only one who can and it’s her duty. There’s no guarantee that the kidney donation will actually help: it’s very likely that the sister would die anyway. There have been multiple other times in her life where she’s basically felt like she had no choice in submitting to various painful and invasive medical procedures in order to donate things like bone marrow. She, with her sister’s blessing (that’s a twist) is suing for medical emancipation from her manipulative and narcissistic mother. 

She wins.

At the end, Anna, the girl, seems to have independently made the choice to donate the kidney anyway, but then the choice is taken out of her hands entirely because as soon as the case is over she gets hit by a car and is rendered brain dead. The person who got guardianship over her really has no choice but to pull the plug and have her organs harvested for her sister Kate’s sake, and whoever else in the hospital needs them I suppose. 

The sister lives. The pyromaniac brother who had a suplot becomes a functioning member of society, the father is sad, the mother continues to be an awful person. (She’s the origin of the line “what do you call a parent who’s lost a child?”.)

(The movie ends differently, but I’m not talking about the movie.) 

I feel like if the ending of ff7 involves all the protagonists and the entire human race dying, that that’s the equivalent of having a drunk driver turn the “I have the right to bodily autonomy” plot into a shoot the shaggy dog story.

One of the questions the game asks is, is it right to kill hundreds of innocent bystanders in your crusade to destroy an unquestionably evil institution?

Holy is the drunk driver and the human race is Anna Fitzgerald’s bodily autonomy.

I maintain my interpretation that the ending is perfectly compatible with humanity surviving and just leaving Midgar. 

But beyond that: when your protagonists include extremists like that, who start out the plot with little thought for the individual lives of innocent bystanders because the environment matters more, having an ending where everyone dies “but that’s ok because the environment is saved”, after the protagonists have come to the conclusion that what they did at the start wasn’t ok.... is not exactly ideal, for reasons other than it just being somewhat of a bummer. 

[seenashwrite]

#for science #’cause jeez #what’d y’all do?! #the hell is #going on in #that backseat? #I mean #other than ya ruint underwears #you heard me #yeah #I said it #next time #gird your loins