completely oblivious

tired and slowly deteriorating

[sophedicts]

There’s something so profound about the line “The reality of you has become more tantalizing than any fantasy ever could be” that will always, always make me emotional when the quote is essentially Benedict telling Sophie that to know you is to love you more, and more, and more…

It resonates even deeper when you reflect back on Benedict’s character arc in s3 and how he initially believed he wanted something more serious with Lady Tilley—that is, until the novelty of the arrangement wore off, the mystery/intrigue behind meeting a new, interesting person was gone, and he realized how much else there was out there that he wanted to discover on his own. Simply put, knowing her more didn’t make Benedict want her more; quite the contrary, we saw this inverse relationship occur where she became more attached over time as she got to know him, while he became even more independent and averse to commitment. When the glimmer and allure of fantasy dissipated (when she suddenly became “attainable” after confessing her feelings for him and asking him to commit to her), it left Benedict with this restless need to keep exploring and blindly seeking out the next thrill, opening up a world of possibility and a thirst for something outside of her. Her eventual vulnerability and candidness with him pushed him to distance himself rather than grow closer to her, which is in stark contrast to him feeling so drawn to Sophie the more he learned about her in s4, even as she instinctively pushed him away out of self-preservation (“What has happened ever since I met you has made me realize how good it feels to be free” vs "The thought of spending a single day without you torments my soul.”) While meeting Tilley only reminded Benedict how much he valued personal freedom/independence, being with Sophie shined a light on his own loneliness/disconnect from others, feeling tortured and in agony at the mere prospect of being separated from her.

There’s such a drastic shift in perspective in s4 when he self-deprecatingly refers to himself as a “free spirit,” underscoring how Benedict no longer wants to be as “free” as he once believed he wanted to be. Instead, he wants to be with Sophie and only Sophie—the person who, quite fittingly, makes him feel the most empowered he’s ever been, no longer forced to navigate this world on his own anymore. Commitment to her, he discovers, provides him with the greatest sense of belonging and liberation rather than serving as a cage to tie him down.

This sentiment is reflected in his adamant denial that Sophie is like “that kite in [his] study,” someone he is passionate and intrigued about one day but will forget about the next. She is not a passing fancy, not a fleeting distraction, not something he wants to “fix” momentarily and then discard/tuck away/forget about once it has lost its initial appeal.

The more he knows Sophie, the more he dreams about her, and the more he falls in love with her…the reality of her only feeds into his fantasies instead of dispelling the illusions altogether: “I cannot think of a maid every waking hour, longing for a life with her, and yet you have taken possession of me. Shot me back to life. Turned me from someone who could not sit still for a moment to one who wishes to be in one single place: beside you, for as long as I might live.” We concluded s3 with Benedict expressing to Eloise that “the next thing [he] might learn may change [him] entirely”…and then in s4 we are shown just how much meeting Sophie has changed him entirely, shaking him to his core and uprooting his entire belief system/way of life.

We see how the narrative progresses from the Lady in Silver being “the most intriguing person” Benedict has ever met in 4x01, to him turning away from this idealized, enchanting fantasy woman and choosing the reality of Sophie with all her flaws, scars, and vulnerabilities in 4x04—vulnerabilities that make him desire her even more instead of giving him ample reason to flee from her. Her vulnerability allows him the strength and courage to open up and expose his own scars, revealing to her just how deeply isolated he feels in spite of the carefree facade he puts on. (“And now I have found someone I love more than I could even have thought possible. Someone captivating and maddening and real.”) Whereas in s3 he felt compelled to hide his identity as an artist in front of others, Sophie is the one person who instantly recognizes the essence of who Benedict is at a core, fundamental level without him needing to say a word, giving him the inspiration/conviction he needs to reignite his passions and, in turn, feel the most like himself he’s felt for so long.

Through her, he learns that there is immense fulfillment to be found in seeking out hidden depths vs choosing not to see or be seen beyond an attractive veneer. He discovers the beauty in the vulnerability, rawness, and messiness that comes with embracing one’s flawed, authentic, unguarded self—to be wholly seen and loved all the more for it. This is such a distinct departure for someone who was once constantly enamored with fantasy and sanitized, surface-level perceptions of people, often swept up in pretty, lofty dreams not grounded in harsher realities.

His compulsive need to run away from the unvarnished truth of a person (not wanting to delve deeper and commit to knowing someone in their entirety + to being known in return) completely shifts in s4, when the narrative revolves around Benedict chasing that truth and FIGHTING for it rather than passively allowing others’ actions to dictate his own response. So unlike the free-spirited reveler of past seasons, he repeatedly begs Sophie to let him stay and be there for her (“No! I’m not going anywhere. Not this time. I’m here for you.”), desperately wanting to be granted the privilege of knowing her and being trusted with that truth, trusted to cherish ALL aspects of her, especially the parts that she tries to hide from him. No longer is he the type of man to flee from commitment and responsibility to another person because he doesn’t trust them enough to want to reciprocate that vulnerability/trust that he is capable of remaining steadfast and devoted to a single person.

The more he discovers about Sophie, the more captivated he is, and the more he feels encouraged to expose his own insecurities for the sake of growing closer to her. The novelty never wears off for him—if anything, she becomes more intriguing, more exciting, more desirable, more lovable over time […something about Luke Thompson reading that John Keats quote “I love you ever and ever, without reserve…You are always new.”]

Benedict fervently conveying to Sophie “Of course he [loved you]. How could anyone not?” after she reads her father’s will shows that he genuinely finds it mind-boggling how anyone could know Sophie and not love her. Through his actions and words, he expresses his unwavering admiration and devotion to her again and again: Knowing you is loving you, and loving you is both a freedom and a privilege, a thrill and a refuge, a choice and an inevitability.

[fairycosmos]

kills myself on my lunch break then clocks back in

[puppiegracie]

[anjaniplestari]

[nocturnalsoph]

Media Today released an objective defense debunking Perfect Crown's "historical distortion" backlash. They essentially confirmed my own take: the symbolism in this show is completely systematic, not accidental. But my "neo-feudal modernity" interpretation actually answers the reporter's biggest burning question: Why did this alternate version of Korea never declare itself an empire? That's exactly what my theory accounts for, and given the court behavior and narrative texture of the series, it's highly defensible.

In the real world, long-surviving monarchies constantly preserve obsolete rituals long after their original geopolitical purpose vanishes. Look at the UK preserving medieval parliamentary traditions, Japan's imperial court clinging to Heian-era ceremonial structures, or Thailand maintaining layered sacral court traditions within modern constitutional politics. So before someone tries to argue otherwise, my take isn't "anti-historical." It’s just rooted in a different kind of historical logic, one driven by institutional inertia, ceremonial conservatism, and continuity over rupture. That is exactly how an alternate universe can operate. It proves the creators were strictly focused on internal timeline worldbuilding, not some ulterior agenda.

“The Grand Lady of the 21st Century — Is It Really So Much ‘Historical Distortion’ That It Should Be Scrapped?”

Reporter Geum Jun-gyeong

You can criticize the issue of setting it as a royal court rather than an imperial court… But is defining it as “historical distortion” and demanding the program’s abolition excessive?

The backlash against The Grand Lady of the 21st Century is fierce. This drama, set in a constitutional monarchy kingdom, has drawn criticism for allegedly degrading Joseon into a vassal state (제후국, jehuguk) of China. Even though the production team and lead actors issued apologies, criticism has continued pouring in, including demands to recover government subsidies invested into the drama and petitions calling for the program’s cancellation.

A Drama That Consistently Depicts It as a “Kingdom”

The parts of The Grand Lady of the 21st Century that became controversial are that the officials shout “Cheonse” (천세, cheonse, “ten thousand years” reduced to “one thousand years,” a lower-ranking acclamation traditionally used for kings rather than emperors) instead of “Manse” (만세, manse, “ten thousand years”), and that the ruler wears a guryu myeollyugwan (구류면류관) — a crown with nine hanging bead strands — instead of the emperor’s sibimyeonryugwan (십이면류관), which has twelve strands. Critics argue this treated Korea as being at the level of a Chinese vassal state.

The historical verification itself is not wrong. This drama consistently maintains the setting that even modern-day Korea remains “Joseon” as a kingdom (왕국, wangguk). The setting itself is not an imperial household (황실, hwangsil) but a royal household (왕실, wangsil). The supreme ruler is portrayed not as an emperor (황제, hwangje) but as a king (왕, wang), and the king’s son is called seja (세자, crown prince of a kingdom) rather than taeja (태자, imperial crown prince). Even the gonnyongpo (곤룡포, dragon robe) worn by the king is not the yellow robe reserved for emperors.

If the issue is that Joseon was portrayed as having lower status than China, then titles such as king and crown prince should have been considered problematic from the start. In the process of consistently portraying Joseon as a kingdom rather than an empire, it is difficult to view the use of “Cheonse” and the nine-strand crown — both actually used in historical Joseon — as incorrect.

Was Joseon, where the king wore a nine-strand crown and officials shouted “Cheonse,” merely a petty vassal state? It is true that Joseon was influenced by China, which at the time was East Asia’s strongest power, but Joseon still possessed sufficient autonomy distinct from a tributary or vassal state. Sadae (사대, literally “serving the great”) was at the time one method of diplomacy, and expressions or clothing based on that premise are difficult to regard in themselves as disparagement.

Regrettable That It Was Not Treated as an “Empire”

However, it is true that bringing this “kingdom” setting into the modern era increased the potential for controversy. Moreover, considering that the drama is broadcast through global platforms, criticism that this is regrettable was inevitable. The most puzzling point in this drama is why the country in the drama is a “kingdom” rather than an “empire” (황제국, hwangjeguk).

Alternative-history works popular in web novels and similar media are not genres where any development receives praise merely because imagination exists. What matters is gaeyeonseong (개연성) — plausibility, narrative believability. The premise has to feel convincing to receive positive evaluation.

Historically, Joseon maintained tributary-investiture relations (조공책봉 관계, jogong-chaekbong gwangye) with the Ming and Qing dynasties for a long period. However, after passing through modernity, it discarded the name “Joseon,” which had originally been chosen by the Ming dynasty, adopted the new national title “Daehan” (대한), and proclaimed itself an empire.

This drama is an alternative-history work that applies a fictional scenario beginning after the era of King Jeongjo, so it does not pass through the historical upheavals of Joseon’s decline, such as the Japanese colonial period.

The issue is that the proclamation of empire was also omitted, and it is questionable whether there was any need to exclude that. Even applying the alternative-history setting, as China’s influence weakened during modernity and as the nation entered into treaties and established equal diplomatic relations with other countries, there was more than enough possibility that it would break away from Chinese influence and proclaim itself an empire. This is closer to a problem of “reality” or “plausibility” than historical distortion.

Are Repeated “Historical Distortion” Criticisms Toward Fusion Historical Dramas Appropriate?

The expression repeatedly appearing in the barrage of criticism against the drama is “historical distortion” (역사왜곡, yeoksa-waegok). It is difficult to define this drama’s setting — which preserves Joseon’s characteristics into the modern era — as historical distortion merely because it did not portray Joseon as an empire. Furthermore, demanding that even works with fantasy settings distinguish historical truth from falsehood is excessive. It is sufficient to view it simply as an issue of plausibility.

Previously, controversies surrounding the dramas Joseon Exorcist (조선구마사, Joseon Gumasa) and Mr. Queen (철인왕후, Cheorin Wanghu) were also accompanied by terms like “historical distortion” and “historical disparagement” (역사폄하, yeoksa-pyeomha), but these too have excessive aspects.

In Mr. Queen, which aired in 2020, controversy arose over the line, “The Annals of the Joseon Dynasty are nothing more than a gossip rag (jirasi, 지라시),” with criticism claiming it “demeaned the value of the Joseon Wangjo Sillok (조선왕조실록, Annals of the Joseon Dynasty), a UNESCO Memory of the World record.”

In Joseon Exorcist, media outlets such as TenAsia directly criticized dialogue insulting General Choe Yeong, using phrases like “insulting Choe Yeong” and “demeaning a historical great figure.”

Regarding the expression about the Joseon Wangjo Sillok, it is necessary to consider that the line came from a character who had time-traveled and then encountered situations different from the actual historical records. Likewise, there was nothing strange about the founding side of Joseon criticizing Choe Yeong, who opposed them, yet this still became a “controversy.”

Of course, this does not mean the dramas that became controversial had no shortcomings at all. Problems repeatedly occur where insufficient historical research results in props or sets evoking other countries. China’s attempts at the “Northeast Project” (동북공정, Dongbuk Gongjeong — a Chinese state-backed historiographical project often criticized in Korea for appropriating or reframing Korean history) must also be considered.

However, it is necessary to carefully examine whether all of this should be placed within the frame of “historical distortion,” leading even actors to apologize and progressing to demands that the dramas themselves be abolished.

Professor Gi Gyeong-ryang of the Department of Korean History at Catholic University stated the following in his 2025 study, “Controversies Over Distortion in Historical Creative Works and the Role of Historiography: Based on the Experience of the Joseon Exorcist Incident.”

“The overused expression ‘historical distortion’ is functioning as a gag (재갈, jaegal — literally a muzzle or bit placed in the mouth) restricting the autonomy and imagination of historical creative works. To overcome these limitations, there is a need to change attitudes that excessively sanctify or solemnly treat history. Most historical creative works essentially belong not to the category of historiography but to the category of art. I too hope to encounter historical creative works that reflect a deep historical consciousness grounded in faithful historical representation. However, even so, it is difficult to justify taking an overly hostile attitude toward creators’ transformations of history.”

“Creators as well must keep in mind that excessively using history merely as material could become a form of ‘exploitation’ of history, and they should maintain an attitude of respect toward the people who actually existed in the past and the world in which they lived.”

Reporter Geum Jun-gyeong

Copyright ⓒ Media Today (미디어오늘, Media Oneul). All rights reserved. Unauthorized reproduction and redistribution prohibited.

[theskyweepsforme]

[possumtion]

My favorite girls ❤️ ❤️ and frank

[koifee]

Tachycardia 🩺❤️

[japril]

[stixy]

Work husband work wife

[chlomisms]

DO NOT ❌❌ SEPARATE

[lyoneve]

It’s a high stress environment! Sometimes you just need your coworker to hold your hands for a bit…

[sugurugetos]

THE PITT — S02E13 7:00PM

[ahsung]

Not young anymore? I’m in my prime, okay? After a little alcohol, your face was burning like a steamed bun. Are you really in your prime? Don’t you think so?

MEET YOURSELF (2023) dir. Ding Zi Guang

[ahsung]

I didn’t think that way. I just feel that love needs mutual understanding. You said I couldn’t go with her, where’s the mutual thing?

MEET YOURSELF (2023) dir. Ding Zi Guang

[lokihiddleston]

BRIDGERTON (2020-)

[mulderscully]

"When he kissed her, he did so with his entire body. His lips, which had begun the intimacy with such gentle reverence, were now fierce and demanding on hers. His hands, so large and strong they seemed to cover half her back, held her to him with a strength that left her breathless. And his body—dear God, it should be illegal the way it was pressed against hers, the heat of it seeping through her clothing, searing her very soul."

[dailybenophie]

BRIDGERTON (2020-)

Season four, episode one & episode four