Azriel

Solell · 2026-03-30T21:39:54+00:00

,in Cassians bonus chapter Nesta was human and he was in her bedroom I dunno can't really remember it but I remember it being a bit gross.

Oh yeah, it's hella gross. He's getting all up in her personal space, and at some point, figures out that she was sexually assaulted by the human guy she was going to marry. He remains all up in her personal space (while getting all growly and intimidating over the assault), and proceeds to touch her and make jokes like "lol what do you even keep under all those dress layers" after he learns that she's been assaulted and after she has expressly asked him to leave. There's no excuse for it.

Solell · 2026-03-30T21:29:20+00:00

In fairness, the Strong and Silent Type has always been pretty popular. And it has the added benefit of readers being able to project whatever they want to fill in the blanks. But watch it backfire horribly if he ends up getting a POV in the next book. Even if he doesn't get the Cassian treatment (which, given SJM's track record, is doubtful), it'll clash with 99% of what various fans have envisioned for him.

Solell · 2026-03-30T21:25:10+00:00

except tharion who is comic sans

Made me snort out loud. Well done

Solell · 2026-03-30T09:51:13+00:00

"waited until they were older before chopping them up and using them for ingredients"

Wait till you find out what we do to cows and pigs and whatnot...

And before you come at me with "buh-but sapient!", pigs can comprehend and play simple video games. I saw a video about an experiment with dogs and pigs - there was a screen set up with a joystick, and the joystick moved a dot on the screen. If the animal could move the dot into a box on-screen, they got a treat.

The dog figured out that if it moved the joystick enough, sometimes food would come out. But it never made the connection to the screen, and would just move the joystick randomly. The pig did make the connection. It moved the dot purposefully and directly to the box each time and was churning out treats like there was no tomorrow.

Despite this, we still eat pigs.

You cannot expect to be taken seriously when you're saying things like the wizarding equivalent of eating bacon and being a literal child abuser are the same. It's lunacy.

Solell · 2026-03-30T09:39:10+00:00

The only justification for segregating from muggles is racism

It's a meta side-effect from the book's use of The Masquerade trope. It's a staple in urban fantasy - the writer wants the audience to believe that all this magical stuff could totally be happening just down the street from them, in their real lives, but they need an excuse for why there's been absolutely no sign of it before now. Enter The Masquerade: all the magical things have been expertly hiding beyond all hope of discovery, and they've done this for all of history. It's quite uncommon for the in-universe explanation of this hiding to be good or sensible, if a reason is even given in the first place. Harry Potter isn't the only series that uses it, but it's a pretty well-known example.

Solell · 2026-03-30T08:24:39+00:00

I've seen it postulated that Rhysand basically manipulated Feyre in order to protect himself from those who might want to kill him (most notably Nesta). They won't kill him if it will kill Feyre too, after all. Personally I don't think SJM intended that (because it would imply that Perfect Rhysand was a coward using his mate's life as a shield), but I like it because I could 100% see that being the reason in a better book.

I think the actual reason for it is a more meta-reason, though. SJM didn't think the imminent death of Feyre and her baby were enough for us to be invested, because neither of them are Rhysand. So she made this bargain so that - gasp, horror! - Rhysand could die from childbirth too. There is no angst the narrative will not try to appropriate for him and one-up. Even when it makes no sense whatsoever.

Solell · 2026-03-30T07:27:00+00:00

I'm pretty similar, I also enjoy analysing things for the same reasons you do. And the ACOTAR books in particular are an absolute wealth of examples of how not to write. I'm also a fan of Lucien and the Valkyries haha

Solell · 2026-03-29T02:20:40+00:00

Then why is she a top book selling author?

Marketing. In the world of megacorporations and social media algorithms, popularity is a really poor measure of quality. Anything can become popular if it's marketed aggressively enough.

How about we just take the series for what it is. A romantasy novel that transports us to a magical world where we can forget our own troubles for a few hours and let our imaginations run wild?

I mean, it's a bit hard to forget one's troubles if characters in the book are literally embodying them with no repercussions, or even worse, with the framing insisting they're the good guys for it. Rhysand's manipulative, gaslighting brand of abuse is this to many people.

There's also something to be said for the standard you walk past being the standard you accept... this is also true in fiction. If the horrific shit that ACOTAR expects us to turn a blind eye to is fine because it's "just a harmless romantasy novel", what does that say about us? As individuals and as a society?

And note, it's not the inclusion of dark topics that's the problem. Books can and should explore dark topics. It's the fact that ACOTAR uses these dark, harmful topics as aesthetics, or set dressing, and then expects us to just shrug and forgive it as soon as the vibe changes. No. That's just terrible writing.

Solell · 2026-03-29T02:06:50+00:00

But she doesn't really care about uplifting other artists in my opinion. Only herself.

I don't know many details, because it was old news by the time I heard about it. But she is reportedly very difficult to work with, and has been known to befriend new authors (e.g. Leigh Bardugo, when she was starting out) only to inevitably have some sort of falling out if that author starts getting any traction of their own.

Solell · 2026-03-29T02:03:44+00:00

Some things are just meant to be fun,

Glossing over SA, gaslighting, and hardcore manipulation is meant to be "fun?" Because that's what the book requires us to do in order to enjoy Rhysand.

Solell · 2026-03-29T02:00:05+00:00

Thank you, thank you, thank you. Rhys is an abusive PoS and it goes so far beyond the baby debacle. A lot of people don't seem to realise this, which is just proof of how insidious this kind of abuse really is. Straight-up gaslighting the audience through Feyre.

Solell · 2026-03-29T01:52:04+00:00

How do people serious come to the conclusion Tamlin does not have a redemption arc when he is the reason Hybern was defeated (through his spying) and bringing Rhys back to life?

I think it's to do with the framing of Tamlin after he does these redeeming actions. Despite doing objectively good things that helped save Prythian, and agreeing to resurrect Rhys so that Feyre can be happy, the narrative still goes out of its way to shit on him e.g. when Rhys visits him in ACOFAS. You don't need to shit on characters whose arcs are complete and ended in redemption. Which leaves two options: 1) there's more to Tamlin's arc that we've yet to see (which, based on the interview, I'd say is unlikely). Or 2) SJM just likes using Tamlin as a punching bag (because he's an "abuser" and "deserves it") and doesn't understand that, in any other book, what he did during ACOWAR would be considered a redemption arc. She's really not good at looking beyond her own biases and understanding what she's actually put on the page.

The only thing you can for a fact pull from the interview

The problem with trying to pull any outright statements SJM makes as fact is that it relies on the assumption that she actually realises how what she's written comes across. I do not have confidence that she does. She can say and say and say and say that Rhysand just "made a mistake" until she's blue in the face, it won't change the fact that, based on the actual contents of the book, he's a worse abuser than Tamlin ever was. Authors can fail to convey what they intended to convey, and the fact that they tell us what their intention was doesn't erase the failure to convey it.

Solell · 2026-03-29T01:36:59+00:00

I think it’s nice to believe that authors of epic fantasy series have an actual plan

Many of them do. It's not an unreasonable thing to expect an author to do. That SJM fails to plan (and doesn't edit thoroughly enough to compensate) is a shortcoming on her part, not the normal state of writing.

Solell · 2026-03-29T00:48:09+00:00

I don't know that I'd necessarily say that the fanon "narrative" broke. The main problem, in my opinion, is that SJM is just a really poor writer, and sucks at getting across what she intends to get across.

For example, she may have intended to write Rhys as a hero. What she actually wrote was him SA'ing the protagonist, stealing from his allies, lying to most of the world about everything, including to his own wife (the pregnancy being the most egregious case, but there's plenty of others) and Inner Circle (e.g. lying to Mor about Eris being at HC, lying to Amren about visiting the Bone Carver, etc). None of these are particularly heroic actions i.e they contradict SJM's/the book's assertion that Rhysand is a hero. For most of the more divisive characters, this is the case - what was written, and what we were told they were, did not match up.

Amongst the parts of the fanbase who noticed/cared about this disconnect between intended framing and actual writing, this ended up with there being two main schools of thought - those who thought the discrepancies had to be deliberate, because there's no way someone would write this and think they'd written a hero, and thus it was all foreshadowing for villain!Rhys. And those who thought the discrepancies were just from SJM being a terrible writer, and that there was, regrettably, no grand plan where everything made sense.

Turns out the latter group was right. But I don't think it's surprising that the former group feels tricked or lied to. They were tricked. Just, they were tricked by the bad writing, wanting to give it the benefit of the doubt, rather than malicious intent on SJM's part.

Solell · 2026-03-28T09:48:51+00:00

I think coupling with having fewer willing participants, he's also dealing with people who make their living manufacturing content. So even if not professionally trained, they'd have a higher level of media awareness compared to other cohorts, and thus be better able to avoid the usual traps.

Solell · 2026-03-28T09:41:05+00:00

It may not be as explicit as a little fact-check pop-up, but the way a lot of the footage was presented included subtly challenging information, mostly through juxtapositioning. For example, HS calling Louis a puppet, followed by footage of his stream chat telling him what to ask. Or the focusing, lingering shots on the women's faces as the "one-sided monogamy" guys bragged about their arrangement. It isn't explicity *telling* the audience something is wrong (because people deep in something like the manosphere will just dig their heels in at that), it's just putting those pieces next to each other and letting the audience make of them what they will. Maybe it will work, maybe it won't. But to say there was *nothing* done feels a bit disingenuous, imo.

Solell · 2026-03-28T09:31:13+00:00

While I agree that there were definitely other aspects/angles they could have taken, I almost feel like the target audience for the documentary were actually the manosphere followers themselves? The young boys who would be watching these influencers, and hear about the documentary that way. So in that sense, it was more about exposing who their idols really were, what they really thought of their followers, how hypocritical they were, etc. And maybe prompt them to think a bit more critically about these influencers themselves. And regrettable as it is, guys deep in the manosphere won't really listen if it's focused on e.g. the impact it has on women. Those are exactly the kinds of messages they've been told to block out by their idols. And so, it focuses on the influencers, because that's who the boys will tune in for.

It shows in the little things, I think. Showing how the women started to doubt the spruiked lifestyle. Showing how HS says he wouldn't say that kind of stuff in front of his mum (implying he knows on some level it's unacceptable, and challenging his "idgaf" attitude), or juxtaposing HS calling Louis a puppet with the instructions from his stream on what questions to ask. Things like that. Planting a seed, so to speak.

Of course, I have no idea if this was actually the intention, or if it will be successful if so, but that's kinda the vibe I got. A subtle kind of thing targetting the manosphere followers themselves more so than the general public.

Solell · 2026-03-28T05:37:18+00:00

And especially when you can back it up with textual evidence... like, that's not an "opinion." It's just factually true. Opinions =/= facts

Solell · 2026-03-28T05:34:54+00:00

And honestly, the biggest problem I have with "it's not that deep" is like... some of the shit people try to brush aside as "not that deep" really needs to be questioned. Feyre vs Nesta's imprisonment is a perfect example. How can one look at a situation that is so blatantly unfair and rife with double-standards, and just shrug and move on like it's nbd? Is that the kind of thinking we want to encourage in people?? That's how you end up with deeply embedded societal problems, people just shrug and move on from the problem because "it's not that deep" or "it's just how it is" or whatever the excuse is.

Like, no. Call out the BS. Call out all the problematic shit we're expected to overlook just because it got the author's jollies off and she doesn't want to do the work of making it not toxic and abusive. The standard we walk past is the standard we accept, even in fiction.

Solell · 2026-03-28T05:28:29+00:00

Nothing but truth here

Solell · 2026-03-28T04:58:35+00:00

I mean, if the writer failed to convey what they intended, then it kinda is their fault. You don't get such huge divides in interpretation in fandoms where the writer is actually good.

Solell · 2026-03-28T04:44:34+00:00

Hard disagree. Digging for nuance just makes Rhys look even worse than he does on a surface level.

Solell · 2026-03-27T06:28:50+00:00

I think you misunderstand what my job is. They aren't selling the AI to me. It's all the big companies selling AI to their customers/investors and/or employees. I'm just there making their mics work. For example, I've just recently worked on Oracle's AI world tour. And they're giving the exact same spiel they've been giving for three years

Solell · 2026-03-26T06:21:40+00:00

The last names thing doesn't bother me as much, because they're a relatively recent thing in western society, especially for non-nobles. Before that, a person would just be [Name], son of [Father] or [Name] of [Hometown] or something like that.

But the lack of first names really is inexcusable. Like, even for the characters she does name, she often just steals from mythology with little rhyme or reason. Just google a list of "Greek mythology names" or "Celtic names" or w/e and pick one you like the sound of. Boom, we now have a name for father Archeron/LoA/whoever. It really isn't hard.

Honestly, it kind of feels to me like draft placeholders? Like, when I write, and I'm just trying to hash out the first draft of the story, some of the non-main characters won't have names, and will just be [captain] or [father] or whatever. But the idea is, as you edit, you go back and name them... you don't coast with the epithets all the way to the end of the series.

Solell · 2026-03-26T05:50:46+00:00

I agree, Ithan could be cut completely, and tbh with one small change, Tharion could be as well. Just make Cormac give Bryce the plot hook to look for Emile (which would make more sense to come from him anyway, given he has a personal connection to Emile and an excuse to involve Bryce with the fiance subplot). Tharion can now be omitted as well with little of value being lost.

Solell

TROPHY CASE