#rdr meta

[schiavonaintherye]

FULL credits to my dear @mileygoneblogger for this idea, and outside of universe I know this is literally just an offhand joke from a time before rdr2 was even a concept, BUT

You ever think about how, after reuniting with John for just one night, one of the first things Jack asks John is if he’s been cheating on Abigail?

As soon as John tells him about the MacFarlanes, one of Jack’s earliest assumptions is that John’s been messing around.

(creds to GTASeriesVideos, truly the GOAT of this fandom)

Sure, this could just be Jack being a teenager making a dirty joke, but idk? He and John are NOT that close at this point.

But, the Marstons’ marriage is largely healthy by this point and we all know Jack has no memory of his childhood. He has no reason to suspect John of anything.

Unless Jack knows about how John spurned him when he was little. And therefore knows about the year John where took off and likely drank and whored his way around. There’s a line where he says “You never wanted me!”— I don’t know how to trigger it but… yeah. Jack knows.

How would he know? He has no memory of shit from when he was four, and even then, at four, he would have NOT understood what that implied.

I think he must’ve heard it somewhere. Did John confess it when they were sorting things out? Was it thrown back at John in an argument (perhaps during the pre-epilogue years)? Did he overhear his parents talking about it? Uncle clearly talks to Jack about wildly inappropriate things– did he bring it up once? Did Abigail ever confide in him about it? They’ve been alone together enough times.

Or was it just an assumption he surmised from John’s behaviour?

Either way, Jack suspects that John’s been fooling around. And I’m ABSOLUTELY reaching here, but considering how quiet he is around Bonnie, which is probably just him being introverted but I mean you COULD read it as Jack having reservations about her. Jack's a huge mama's boy... is he wondering if John cheated on Abigail?

Either way Jack absolutely knows about John’s year of fucking around, and may suspect that his dad’s still fucking around.

This isn’t an anti John post. I love John and I love Johnigail. I also love how human he is and I love the more flawed side of his dynamics with his family.

[fleurdelucienne]

I honestly think the single best improvement from Red Dead Redemption to Red Dead Redemption 2 is not graphics, gameplay, story, or quest design, but rather the dignity and respect with which they treat women in the game.

I realize this is a big statement to make, so stay with me here (RDR1 spoilers ahoy): the women in Red Dead Redemption are repeatedly used as props in major story developments to show "bad guy is bad." Bill's gang kidnapping Bonnie, Abraham Reyes' casual indifference to Luisa, the repeated refrain from the former gang members about how Abigail was a prostitute and they "all had her," etc. Now, this is better than mistreatment of these women from a protagonist, but because of the way the game approaches the "old west" style masculine stoicism assigned to John (and don't get me wrong, I love John Marston), the in-world reaction to some of these events feel underwhelming and serves to rob these characters of their humanity. Whether it's making the women into punchlines (like Reyes constantly referring to Luisa as Laura), repeated casual violence, or even turning the best-developed and written woman in the game (Bonnie) into an "aw shucks John is married ☹️" by the end of the story, the world feels nearly devoid of nuanced and sympathetic characterizations of women. It creates an inherent imbalance in the game and flattens the characterizations of the men, as well.

RDR2 couldn't be more different. Whether it's members of the gang (Ms. Grimshaw, Tilly, Karen, Mary-Beth, Sadie and Molly), antagonists (Catherine Braithwaite), or any of the other women Arthur interacts with otherwise (Mary Linton, Penelope Braithwaite, Charlotte Balfour), we are given a wide range of women with rich, diverse, and well-developed backstories. Additionally, while Arthur Morgan still has plenty of that old west masculine stoicism himself, he is also more nuanced and better-developed as a protagonist. He is repeatedly shown to be canonically unabashedly protective of the women he cares for, and much more respectful and evolved than other members of the gang in his view of women. All of this lends an ENORMOUS amount of humanity and empathy to the world of RDR2, which makes the game ultimately more impactful, better balanced and filled with incredible depth.

[dearpyramus]

on john marston and his fate

he died in the most humiliating way possible. he died thinking abigail would survive a long time. he died thinking jack was gonna abandon the outlaw lifestyle he spent his last dying moments protecting his family from.

most importantly, he died betrayed once again.

in this photo it appears that abigail’s skirt is in his pool of blood. at one point she probably had to wash it off herself. the blood of her husband. she also probably had to wash it off her hands.

[amrass]

RDR2 headcanon: Micah Bell kills his brother Amos in 1907

I think the family who Micah and his gang invade the home of and murder is Amos and his family. 

The crime is mentioned twice: in a 1907 newspaper, and by Cleet before John or Sadie kills him. The family includes a husband, a wife and daughters, like Amos' does, revealed through Micah's speeches, a knife game, and the letter from Amos in Shady Belle. (Shady Bells, both of them lol, being shrouded in mystery. I'll try to unveil them a little).

In the letter, Amos rejects Micah and tells him to stay far away or he'll kill him. "I have daughters, as you know". Micah must know his brother's address as this letter is a reply, but how does Micah know about his nieces? Did he visit? Did he stake out Amos' ranch, before he was spotted? (That must've been an intense moment). The letter can be found randomly as if thrown away, so it must've upset him, who is usually secretive. He is also swears he remember threats.

Is 1800s Micah capable of killing his own brother? Idk. But in the 1900s, I think he's unhinged enough to do it, especially if his O'Driscoll-like gang members join in. Amos is a failed Bell and a loose end, and he witnessed a weakness on Micah's part, in the letter.

For Micah hope is weakness, a belief that was softened and then solidified when he was in the Van der Linde Gang. I think he joined unconsciously wanting a family, consciously wanting money (the Blackwater score, Dutch's bounty, the gang funds…). Maybe Dutch let him join as as a pet project, testing his mentoring skills on a man rougher than a street kid (and if Micah can soften or settle down, so can Dutch?). Between chapter 1-4 of RDR Micah gets a sliver of hope and reaches out to Amos. But the reconciliation with the old family, the new family, and the money all go to hell. He likely ratted after Guarma, but I'm unsure if he were going to give the Pinkertons, Dutch. As a young man, Micah chose his father over Amos, like he chooses Dutch over Arthur or any other gang / family members. When Dutch rejects him, he screams in frustration. The money is seemingly not enough. I think he changes after this, going from bad to worse. And at his worst, he's probably capable of spilling his own blood. Maybe he feels like he's killing Amos on his father's behalf, like he killed "traitors" on Dutch's. (Daddy issues deluxe edition).

Micah and Amos can be read as a dark mirror to Arthur and John. Both Amos and John abandon their lawless lifestyle – and their brothers – to become lawful sheep ranchers. But where John lives on thanks to Arthur's involvement, it makes narratively sense to me that Micah's involvement does the opposite, ending his remaining family. In canon, John is also killed in the end, after a few years of lawful living. Amos might've been equally unable to escape. Especially with a brother like Micah.

Sorry if I got any details wrong. Special thanks to @zanazirafanfic and @the--end-is--nigh , who chatted about this with me months ago, offering their insights. I've been seeing a lot of cool Micah Bell and RDR theories lately, so I'd thought I'd share one of mine.

[wxywardsun]

What if your red dead online character witnessed or heard about the blackwater massacre either through word of mouth or maybe even a newspaper article or (probably the scariest option) hearing everything go down depending on where they are. It’s not entirely impossible since red dead online takes place a year before the main story of rdr2. I don’t know,just something to think about

[vittoriaisfuckingpathetic]

RHODES POST-GAZETTE

MARCH 15, 1989 In a long-abandoned manor located deep within the swamps of Bayou Nwa, one amateur historian made a remarkable discovery. Underneath the floorboards, a satchel with a faded HM monogrammed into the leather was discovered. While a few items of interest were found, the photographs are perhaps the most important discovery. These images are believed to be photographs of the infamous Van der Linde gang shortly before their dissolution.

“If these pictures are indeed of the Van der Linde gang, they paint a picture of the gang’s day-to-day life,” historian Josephine Chǎtaney noted, “Oftentimes, we get so caught up in the infamy of the group that we forget that they, too, were in fact real people.”

The gang’s exploits were recorded in the firsthand account of John (Jack) Marston’s 1927 novel American Venom and later popularized by the 1959 film Red Dead Redemption starring John Wayne.

”I really think these pictures are of Dutch’s boys. I mean, these guys are legends. Honestly, I can’t believe I got lucky enough to find these.” the amateur historian — a man by the name of Ricky De Santa — went on to say.

The photos are currently under the care of the Blackwater Historical Society, undergoing restoration to be displayed in the Blackwater Museum.

John (Jack) Marston declined to comment on the photographs.

[greensaplinggrace]

Arthur’s interactions with smart or well educated people are seriously my favorite. Like the way he treats the dinosaur bone woman and the mad scientist and Albert Mason? And Lenny too, with his “book reading”. How Arthur always listens so closely to Charles’s words on hunting and fighting and doing the right thing? And Rains Fall *especially* he seems to respect the hell out of. I love it so much you have no idea. He’s always so deferential and just a touch confused, and whenever they ask him to do the heavy lifting or go get something he just quietly agrees even as they keep rambling on about their expertise.

[kbstories]

Do you sometimes think about how Charles is so unerringly loyal to Arthur that he doesn’t even get upset when Arthur can’t help him with things (e.g. refuses a mission) because he’s the only one who actually makes an effort to understand what Arthur is going through and sees that Arthur’s inherent morality is what is keeping the gang afloat, not Dutch’s questionable leadership, and how it all culminates in a single request (”Ride with me?”) and its inevitable answer (”Always”), even though they both know there’s no getting out of this one and that they have to try anyways or else they won’t be any better than those they’re running from and yeah.