#saga rambles

[skywalker-saga]

It's so frustrating to come into a fandom late because you've just seen the thing and Have So Many Thoughts about it and would love to talk about it with others, but everyone else moved on ages ago. But I think I'll just go ahead anyway and post some thoughts about Doctor Foster, because maybe there's someone else like me who only recently got into it (because of Bertie lbr).

So, season 3 is coming! Which, first of all, yay!! I'm really excited! Not just because I want to see more Bertie, but also I really love this show and there clearly is potential for a third season. But I'm also a bit nervous because I don't know if my read on the characters is at all the same as the showrunner's.

It's this description that has me nervous: ” - shadows from the past begin to re-emerge threatening both her happiness and her reputation. As Gemma fights to protect those she loves and expose whoever’s intent on hurting her, will she be able to put the past to bed, dispense justice, and claim the future she deserves, before it is too late?”

Because to me that sounds like it's Simon who's again intent on hurting her and threatening her happiness, and, idk, maybe I'm hopelessly naive (or blinded by my love for the actor) but I really thought the show could go someplace else with his character. I mean the Simon at the end of S2 is not the same Simon as in the beginning of S2. He took some accountability (finally) and I saw some hope for an uneasy truce between him and Gemma. I don't even know where I see him going forward exactly, there's many ways their characters could develop after S2, but if it's the same warfare ten years later then yeah, I'm a bit disappointed.

Of course, it could be misdirection and the person wanting to hurt her is somebody else, but then idk who that could be.

Thoughts?

[sagareads]

Related to last reblog: The number of people whose reaction to the awful choice to cast Murderbot as a cis dude was "but I pictured Murderbot as a woman / femme" made me want to puke.

Can people PLEASE let agender/genderless characters be genderless? Without assigning them some mandatory association with masculinity or femininity?

Same thing happened with Frisk, where people looked at a nonbinary character and went "oh, this is a free space for me to assign this character whatever gender I choose :) " but it's much worse with Murderbot bc the character is much more explicitly genderless.

"Gender: not applicable" is its own identity. It's not a blank space for fans to write in the gender of their choice.

[skywalker-saga]

Unpopular opinion maybe (?), but I'm actually not looking forward to seeing Simon miserable in S3. I mean, I totally understood where Gemma was coming from when she wanted him to face consequences for his actions in S2. It was maddening the way he got a new wife, a baby, a fancy new job, expensive house and car after everything he did to Gemma, and all Gemma got was anger, grief and trust issues that might never heal. But he already lost everything in S2. Like, literally everything and everyone. Isn't that enough, for Gemma and the viewers?

(although he might just continue to be a nightmare to everyone in S3, in which case, I might take this back!)

[skywalker-saga]

So, new Doctor Foster S3 pics are out and I love it, but what exactly are they doing in the pics? An article mentioned that they're outside a church, but they're dressed so casually they're not attending a ceremony there. So what is it? A relaxing family camping trip in the countryside? Homeless Simon seeking a roof over his head in a random church?? Gemma checking out a wedding location? But then why is Simon there? What's going on?!?

[skywalker-saga]

So I just finished watching Doctor Foster, and wow it was incredible! I only started watching it because I've fallen into a Bertie Carvel rabbit hole and just wanted to see him, and didn't think the show was going to be my thing, but actually I was wowed by it. The story was gripping and intense, and the actors were absolutely phenomenal. Sometimes it was difficult to watch because there's so much raw emotion and the actors made it all seem so real.

I've seen some criticism about it not being realistic, and yeah I can see where the plot sometimes relies on something unrealistic happening, but I actually don't mind. To me those kind of surface level plot details don't really matter when the actual story is good. And the heart of this story absolutely rings true to life. Some people really do behave like the characters on the show, with similar chaos and destruction as a result. They wage their war and throw their grenades, not caring who else gets hurt in the fire. It was chilling and sad to watch, but it was fantastic television. Definitely recommend this show!

[sagareads]

On a more personal note: today one of my coworkers at my current, non-bookstore job needed to tape a UPS label to a box and I jumped up like "Oh let me do it, I used to do this all the time!" bc I miss doing returns so bad. She could have done it herself, of course, but then I wouldn't have gotten to relive so many moments of dispensing packing tape.

[sagareads]

Also I feel like this should go without saying but don't buy books, read them, and return them to bookstores.

I'm guessing people think "oh, the bookstore will just sell that book to someone else, they don't actually lose any money." Perhaps with the addendum of "they're not technically losing my purchase, since I wouldn't have really bought the book."

There are multiple reasons this doesn't work.

First, bookstores decide how many books to order based on how many have sold recently.

These days, reorders can be submitted and shipped very quickly, while space and funds are at a premium, and the number of available titles is massive. So it's more cost effective to buy just a couple copies of most books and reorder when 1-2 of them sell.

This means that by the time you return your book, the bookstore may have already ordered more copies, expecting that if your copy sold, there must be enough demand for more. (Especially if it's a new release.)

But in smaller stores especially, a lot of books may ultimately only sell a couple copies, because the number of titles publishing every year is so huge. So the bookstore could very easily end up with additional copies of the book you returned that don't sell, because your purchase signaled a demand that doesn't exist. (Since, you know, you weren't *actually* willing to pay for the book.)

And what happens to those copies if they don't sell? The bookstore can usually return books to their publishers and receive credit towards future orders. But it's vital to note that this doesn't make the store any money, just helps cover its losses. And it still costs the store more than if they hadn't bought that book!

That last piece is crucial. Yes, the bookstore typically gets credited 100% of what they paid the publisher for the book they return. But the bookstore usually still pays the cost of shipping on the returns (books are heavy!), and there are significant labor costs involved in selecting, sorting, and packing books for return.

(This was 60-80% of my previous job. It's a damn complicated process that requires a lot of specialized knowledge and experience to do well. It's full of headaches, not to mention inherently Sisyphean. I miss it SO BAD.)

[sagamonstrum]

"You could regret it later though!!!" - arguments easily defeated by something as simple as "you could cut your hair and regret it immediately but nobody asks you to sign several consent forms and get 10 million different opinions; a verbal agreement is enough between hairdresser and client." it works BECAUSE they're both reversible but it'll take time, much like transitioning if someone does end up regretting it. A fucking haircut, its even DIY'able! AND if someone decides to say fuck it, I'm gonna rock a bald look but then regrets it? WIG! c'mon now just let people be in charge of THEIR fucking bodies.

Look it made sense in the shower and I'm sorry if its a bad allegory