#morethanprinceofcats

[bebemoon]

@morethanprinceofcats’ daydream-verse ~ romance in the emerald countryside .

[maddie-grove]

If you have the time and inclination, I wanted to ask what you think a writer can do to make a shitty male lead likeable in spite of himself, or what's worked for you at least. I've been poking through your romance novel tag and you certainly don't seem to write them off out of hand.

I’ve never really thought about what makes me like heroes who are objectively terrible (or, at the very least, unsavory)! I ended up making a list of my favorite nasty heroes (there are twelve). These are the mitigating factors that I’ve gleaned from that list:

Self-awareness: a hero who takes ownership of his evil actions (rather than, say, blaming the heroine for forcing his hand or provoking him) and acknowledges that others have a right to be pissed off at him is much easier to enjoy.

Perceptiveness: if the hero can see the heroine clearly and think beyond the most conventional ideas of his society (especially if that received wisdom is bigoted and/or cruel), he’s a lot more fun to read, even if he’s still kidnapping and blackmailing heiresses.

Admiration of the heroine: I’m just charmed by a hero who’s like “yeah the world is a cesspool and I fully plan to wallow in it, but that has nothing to do with Elizabeth! She’s a brilliant angel! Might still force her to marry me as part of an elaborate revenge plot, though. Nothing personal.”

Vulnerability: this can mean a lot of things, including psychological vulnerability (trauma/mental illness/marginalization doesn’t excuse everything, but I am going to be a little more sympathetic), social vulnerability (he’s not immune to the consequences of other characters not liking him, and he has to make compromises or sneak around sometimes instead of using raw power), and narrative vulnerability (he’s not always presented as being in the right). A Teflon hero is boring and hard to like, especially if he’s also a heel.

Reformation: a hero who genuinely reforms over the course of the story (not just at the last minute) in a way that feels realistic and earned can be very appealing. I find it’s most effective when the heroine is a significant reason for the change, but not the only one.

Context: If the hero is surrounded by bloodthirsty Renaissance feud-perpetuators or corrupt Victorian sickos like himself, he’s going to come off a lot better than if he’s the most enthusiastic sexist in the Wars of the Roses or the most callous Puritan in 1630s Massachusetts.

Pizzazz: Some of these guys are just fun, because they have a good sense of humor/drama.

There are also heroes who do questionable things under complex circumstances, and heroes who are generally good but did something truly fucked-up in the past; I often like them, but put them in a different category. Also, I referred to heroines because, while there are problematic heroes in m/m and m/nb romances, I haven’t seen any real standouts yet. 

[forthegothicheroine]

Mina/Dracula

I’m actually going to put both sets of questions here, because my feelings are so complicated!

Shipping:

What made you ship it? While I don’t believe the book is ‘about’ sex (I think it’s ‘about’ many things), it does brim with dark sexuality, and Dracula is especially a predatory incubus figure.  I enjoy villain/heroine dynamics where the heroine continues to fight back, and Mina absolutely does that!  It’s also interesting that she says she feels pity for him, and that he wants to keep her as a wife rather than just killing her.

What are your favorite things about the ship? There’s the potential for so many different ways to handle this, from captivity to power plays to twisted grasps at redemption.  And there’s some good fic for it, too!

Is there an unpopular opinion you have on your ship? Not sweet and loving and reincarnated!  Not sweet and loving and reincarnated!

Not shipping:

Why don’t you ship it? Because there is absolutely no reason for Mina to forgive him for what he did to Jonathan and Lucy and adaptations either ignore this or say it’s okay because Jonathan was abusive or a nonentity and Lucy was a slut.  He attacks her and she doesn’t want it!  The book is very unambiguous about that!

What would have made you like it? As a nice ship?  Probably if Dracula had been sadder and more tired, like a combination of Herzog’s Nosferatu and Maxim from Rebecca.  That way Mina’s feelings could be more mixed, and I could believe that she loved Jonathan and also cared for the tragic monster who haunted her life.

Despite not shipping it, do you have anything positive to say about it? Death and the Maiden is a great artistic motif and there’s some great art out there of them.

[goblins-riddles-or-frocks]

thoughts on the best villain archetypes, since you don't like my whiny crybabies lmao

Referencing this ask To be clear! I love crybaby villains, I just prefer them when they’re not going through moral dilemmas. Like again to bring up Phantom of the Opera: I love Erik regardless of his last minute come to jesus moment, not because of it. A big reason I do love the larger story is because his come to jesus moment is not through “the love of a good woman” as opposed to just a moment of self realization. But again, I’d still love him as a character even if he were rotten till the last moment.  I did give you a short list off the top of my head when you brought it up the other day. But let’s go in depth: Evil Queen:  Generally, I fucking love bitches in power. They’re often times very vain and very in control of their shit, to the point where that is their weakness. This usually ends in them spiraling and losing that carefully constructed demeanor. I define the queen aspect loosely, but they must be in charge of whatever is the story scope’s main institution. The appeal is equal parts aesthetic, power fantasy, and watching that inevitable Machiavellian spiral at the end. Examples: Cersei, Azula, Lady Macbeth, and more obscure but my favorite is Arianrhod in Snow Queen Cycle.

The Mentor: This type of villain tends to be overbearing, well spoken, volatile, and genuinely believing they’re in the right. The power imbalance is integral, and the initially positive relationship that later turns suffocating. (The latter aspect being why I prefer Louis and Lestat’s relationship in the film to the novel, there’s a longer span of time before Louis hates him.) And it usually— and ideally— ends in the protégée rising above their reach and eventually killing them. The appeal here lies in revenge fantasy, wanting nuanced portrayals of dysfunctional dynamics, and lmao my personal relationship experiences. Examples: Erik/Phantom of the Opera, Lestat, What The Darkling Could’ve Been.

Righteous Villains: This character type is often (and ideally) religiously motivated, but being consumed by any sort of ideological perspective is good enough. These are the evil priests, the political fanatics, the horribly devoted knights and warlords. They also need a position of institutional power at all, though they do not need to be at the top of the food chain, even within the scope of the story. I prefer these characters with a lot of tragedy or at least through a vaguely sympathetic angle, but pure evil is honestly fine too. It’s all extensions of the same trope imo. The appeal is more in seeing how dogmatic ideals can twist and ruin a person. And how institutions like the church can be wielded for selfish gain. Examples: Claude Frollo, Javert, Konstantin from the Winternight Trilogy.

I think saying which are the best archetypes is definitely subjective. But these are my favorites anyway. Other traits that I generally enjoy are: competence, style, humor, genuine ruthlessness, and a fundamental weakness or frailty. Villains are often powerful, and they can run the risk of being too perfect in their evilness. They need to ever make mistakes, be caught off guard, or have their choices blow up in their face. If they’re too in control of everything then it starts to become one note. My favorite part of villain arcs tends to be when they begin to unravel, and when they lose themselves over the course of the story. Pettiness can also be a fantastic trait. Like if they shoot themselves in the foot because they had to get back at someone. Or just the constant desire to fuck with the protagonists or have the last laugh, to the detriment of strategy.

Conversely, characters that have no emotional bonds, or regrets, or their own version of morals are also fundamentally uninteresting to me. If they’re just there to kill people, grimace, and ruin everyone’s day for #reasons, without any other defining characteristics... that’s boring. (Yes I like Dracula despite this, but I maintain that Dracula is, by far, the weakest part of Dracula) They need to be fleshed out characters that are actually believable as people. Send me “thoughts on___” to here my opinions on random things!

[sea-of-solace]

if you could travel anywhere in the world where would you go?

I’ve already been there, but I really really love England, so probably there :D

[marzipanandminutiae]

I live in total redneck country and that kind of leftist class-based mockery cuts deep. The people who are most affected by conservative policies are the ones with the fewest means to escape them. In spite of a large number of Trump supporters here there were also so many people, after his election, who came to my mom at work (she's popular in town) to hug her and just cry. Like, old people, people who've lived here always & have the local accent. It's cruel to blame the rural poor for Trump.

You’re absolutely right.

I grew up near Nashville, in a fairly affluent suburb town, as a white cisgender girl (albeit gay and neuroatypical) from a well-off family. So I was one of the lucky ones. That area is fairly progressive, for the south. I and people I knew still faced, depending on our individual situations, racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia- all the various forms of bigotry humanity has to offer.

And not all of them left.

Some lacked the resources to leave, of course. And some just genuinely had things to love in the places they’d called home from early childhood. Family, friends, favorite hangout spots, familiar landscapes, religious communities, etc. Because no geographic location is a total monolith of sociopolitical opinion. Plus, people are complicated. A place where you’ve experienced discrimination can also be a place that’s made you really, really happy in other ways. You shouldn’t have to leave your home to be treated like a human being.

Great political strides have come from those places, too. My paternal grandmother, a staunch union supporter and a feminist, was born in New Orleans to a blue-collar family that almost literally lived in the bayou. (She was also a devoutly Catholic mother of seven- again, expectations are made to be subverted.) Southerners have done and continue to do great things for this country, even the ones who never live anywhere other than the south.

One can’t just write off vast swaths of the country like whoever posted that tweet did. It’s short-sighted and, as you say, heavily rooted in classism.

[gothiccharmschool]

If you know any off the top of your head, what are some good sites for beautiful gothic jewelry? The only one I know about is Bloodmilk, which is a little too pricey for me. I used to have a lot of bookmarks but I think they must have been on my old computer. I'm especially looking for Victorian mourning-style jewelry, but witchy/magical/otherwise Romantic stuff is also good.

I know I should remember if you’re outside of the US, but I don’t. If you are, I apologize that almost all of these are going to come with hellacious shipping costs.

Callisto Jewelry. Witchy-type jewelry made from large crystals. I have a bunch of her work, and I love it.

Martha Rotten. She makes a variety of items in different styles, so there’s gothy, witchy, some trad-goth things, and so on.

Mata Hari Jewelry. Romantic, quasi-Victorian styled pieces.

The Parlor Apothecary. I only just learned about their mourning-inspired pieces, and I kind of want them all.

[actualmichelle]

I haven't read Les Mis but Megan has and loves it and i think it's misleading how people are putting this. The priest doesn't show up again but who he is as a person completely changes the life of the actual main character. It's obviously acceptable to not like it - and the people saying all this DO like it, presumably that's why they have read it enough to make the fond jokes that they do - but acting like it's just completely scatterbrained of him is kind of irritating.

Aha I see -- it’s not a divergence for the sake of it, but more like including the prequel in the actual story? That is good to know!! :)    I get more curious whenever I hear anything about Les Mis, and at this point I’m going to end up reading it eventually. It also seems like it’s such a singular piece of writing, so I’m surprised they didn’t have us read it during any of my english classes...