Chuck and Blair essays.

Chuck telling Blair how great a mother she will be and that she never gives up on the people she loves only reminds me fondly of 3x12 at the hospital. Blair telling Chuck that she sees a great man in him and that he carries people, he carries her. I love when Blair and Chuck say things like these to each other. They’re building each other up. They’re acknowledging good and laudatory things in each other. Unlike what people think CB is all darkness, all grave all the time. No there’s a lot of lightness too. there’s more than a chase of a dark and secret thrill that brings CB together, they also look for light and virtuous things like Blair being a competent mother and Chuck being a noble person and the best thing about it all is that Blair recognizes that in Chuck before he can see it in himself and it’s her approbation that leads him to believe so for himself and vice-versa for Blair. I think it means the world to her that Chuck said she’d be an amazing mother. He knows her very well, all the parts of her, light and dark and in between. It’s true when they say they know each other better than they know their own selves

Really?

I mean it’s not the first time i’m seeing this argument but it’s getting like really old, in my opinion and i just couldn’t help but say something here. Certain of you act like Dan and Blair are the only people to have ever had intellectual conversations. As if before Dan and Blair such a thing as ‘intellectual conversation’ did not exist. As if  Chuck and Blair never had any of it on their own. If i recall, there’s nothing about Dan and Blair’s intellectual supremacy that Dan and Vanessa did not have and possibly on an even deeper level. The only thing they lacked really was the hardcore banter and the juxtaposition of social classes (which he already had with Serena). And i think that’s mainly the reason why some people may found Dan and Blair more enjoyable given that there was of course a supply friction in their dynamic caused by these two elements. However both those elements were part of Serena and Vanessa combined, so there was really no novelty to Dan and Blair except maybe for the banter. And that aspect was purely character driven and it was something that was maintained in their friendship. When their friendship turned romantic, they kind of lost the only novelty they had. So Dan and Blair never even worked and it was back to being a hybrid of Danessa and Derena which was made worse by Blair being psychologically and emotionally incapacitated.

Getting on with the topic at hand, I find it quite funny how certain people make it sound as if Dan and Blair had this unprecedented intellectual connection and thrt they always had the most amazing communication know to mankind and that they understand each other thoroughly with words or without. May i remind that in the finale they broke up because Blair blindsided Dan completely. Well when the words “I thought she changed” were pronounced, it kind of confirmed that their communication was not so tidy and Dan didn’t know Blair as well as he thought he did. So acting like they always had the most fulfilling conversations and intellectual connection that the world had never seen before and that it fully warrants them and suffices them to ‘belong with each other’ or some bull like that is just furthermore insulting your own intelligence. Do you know how many people at NYU have that same intellectual connection with each other? and the fact that Blair couldn’t form that particular connection initially was the reason why she never felt like she belonged at the school. Because in truth, if i know Blair as well as i think i do, Blair is not really an intellectual snob. Blair is a classicist if you can make the distinction. She is very well-read and cultured indeed but she’s not the nerdy, esoteric type. She’s not Nelly Yuki, Dan is. She wants to go to Yale, not Harvard. She likes Jane Austen and Marie Antoinette, Audrey Hepburn movies and impressionist paintings, and she loves fashion, not five hours long German political thrillers with no subtitles and advocacy for community gardens. That’s a Dan and Vanessa thing. She even exemplified it by saying she didn’t want to be like the High Brow Brilliant people at all (where Dan was) because they’re boring doctors curing diseases. She’s a society girl, she wants to be like Gwyneth and Mayor Bloomberg and the Beckhams, High Brow Despicable.

So you guys make it seem like Dan and Blair are on the same wavelength in their intellectual snobbery when Dan is so far more gone than Blair. I mean Blair had aspirations to be princess not to win a Nobel prize in science or humanitarianism or anything. when she was a NYU she was trying to get into La Table Elitaire, not the Tisch writing program. Her favorite author is George Sand not Immanuel Kant. They don’t even seem to agree on the same art exhibits most of the time. I’m sure Blair has the capability to understand abstract things as deeply as Dan does. Blair is a very smart girl, but those are not even her aspirations. Those are not her sensibilities. The salon that she threw was the closest thing she ever did emulating anything like Dan.

But even if they were a hundred percent intellectually compatible and loved absolutely the same things, Does that even make them a perfect match? if people were to base their romantic choices off only the intellectual connection they have with others notwithstanding all the other aspect of romantic compatibility, then i should go ahead and marry all my professors because the factor of ‘mutual love and desire’ would not matter. not at all. Maybe i can make an argument for Dan and Vanessa belonging together as well and your argument would only support it if you’re claiming that because two people love the same books and movies and can have arguments about then, it means they are perfect for each other. okay then.

But my point is about Chuck and how his lack of intellectual elitism is supposed to be some kind of insult against his character. I laugh wholeheartedly if that is your aim because it couldn’t be more ignorant. First off, romantic compatibility isn’t based off intellectual connection alone or even as significantly as the many other aspects. There are many ways to be compatible and one of them is physical attraction, which Chuck and Blair both have towards each other. And then you have the only thing that truly matters, the mutual love and desire of each for the other, which Dan and Blair do not have. So they are already largely incompatible in those terms.

Not only do Chuck and Blair have mutual love and desire for each other, they also have their fair share of intellectual compatibility, which i’m sure you are unwilling to admit. However Chuck and Blair have always been a match in snark and wit, which is why their banter is so exceptional. Dan is not the only one who can use big words. And Chuck and Blair, they are both really good strategists as well. They may not have long superficial talks about literature and cinema but they do have their own meeting of the minds, it just so happens to never be strictly intellectual which is why they are compelled to be more than friends. Their connection is deeper than intellect. They are deeply attracted to each other. They bonded over a mutual love of scheming and burlesque which lends them a touch more of sensuality because of the fetishistic appeal of those vices over their already improper banter. So Chuck and Blair  have always been more than big dictionary words and an encyclopedia of names to go off of. They have a literal sensual/physical connection which evolved from yes, an intellectual connection.

contrary to what you may believe, intellectual connections are not about academics. They’re simply about a meeting of the minds which can happen on several different levels and Chuck and Blair made that connection in the kinkiest of places.

But even as far as the academics are concerned, theories or practice. Dan may have read more books than Chuck or watched many more movies, knows more trivia about ‘intellectual stuff’ and he may be a snob about it. But Chuck is not an airhead, i’m sorry to burst your bubbles. Dan is actually the superficial one because Chuck has actual real life experience. Chuck has the actual practical experience. He is world traveled. I’m not even sure Rome wasn’t Dan’s first trip out of the country tbh. Chuck is cultured not because he learned about the things he knows in books but because he’s actually been there, done that. He can make cultural references too, just like Dan can. Chuck is 100 percent more lived than Dan. Dan was a sheltered little boy until Serena walked into his life. His intellectual preemption about things is uncalled for. Chuck has a reputation all over the world based off his standard for fashion, finery..etc. Yes i’m sure  he also knows a few things about Matisse and Gauguin. Maybe he read the Fountainhead too at one point, it’s not like he’s incapable of understanding words in a sequence. And before you forget, he did actually get Blair into Columbia. He wrote those essays believe it or not and those are not the easier things to write. And did i mention he conducts business for a multi-billion dollar company and so far he’s outsmarted many people who have tried taking it away. So i’m sure he learned something there in math class after all.

Very tl;dr haha XD   Michelle’s chair gifs/graphics always makes me flail, but I’ve been fangirling extra over her latest “us” cb parallel. http://signaturescarf.tumblr.com/post/30986483910/us-requested-parallels-by-donnashana It’s so gorgeous, because it’s like…looking at CB from far away, and yet seeing all the intricate moments that always bound Chuck and Blair together. I feel sort of overwhelmed - it’s like when you listen to a piece of music that is so beautiful, you can’t fathom it - that’s what CB is like, for me.

From the time when they were babies, having a secret relationship - the buildup to 1.10 - limosex, the Erikson Beamon necklace - to the excruciating pain and pleasure of season 2, where they referred to themselves as “us” before they were even a couple. As Anne (blairhappiness) said, Blair always knew that Chuck loved her (2.13 - calling C a ‘narcissist’ implied that he was holding back his feelings). Chuck always knew that Blair loved him (2.08 - the reason why we can’t say it isn’t because it’s not true). It was the fear of how their relationship would change after those three words, eight letters were said. 

What I love about CB is that they went through these hurdles together, for the most part - and even when they weren’t together they still were, if that makes sense. They still were an “us”. Even after Blair had hurt Chuck in 3.06, even after the writers started unravelling CB for the sake of drama. Even after Safran burned CB into ash - 4.02 brought something so heart-wrenchingly beautiful to Chuck and Blair. 

And in season 4, CB were still an “us”, even after Blair ran Eva out of town, even after Chuck brought Jenny Humphrey back, even after massive amounts of hatesex —- they became friends again. “For us a million, the world zero”. Even when they decided they couldn’t be a couple/friends. Even after Chuck reached the worst of his self-destructiveness. 

I watched 4.22 yesterday and it was so beautiful - the bar mitzvah, Blair clapping and dancing - the girl who said that her hair didn’t sparkle when it caught the light - but she was so beautiful in her dress, and she exuded happiness, from her heart. And HER FACE being lifted up on the chair. I think one of the many things that is so beautiful about CB is how Chuck sees her, like no one else does. To quote Sophia, “he’s in awe of her.” From 1.07 when she danced at Victrola - he saw something in her - a side of Blair - that no one else saw. Blair was so used to being passed over for Serena, so used to Nate taking her for granted (although he loved her very much) - and here she had completely transfixed the ultimate bad boy, the “devil” of the UES. The virgin queen, the girl who was in line to wear the Vanderbilt ring, the girl who hurting and broken inside, despite her ‘frigid facade’ (D) she showed to the world. This girl - captivated - Chuck Bass. “I can’t sleep, I feel so ashamed” - she had him around her little finger. Blair had a certain amount of power - that went largely underestimated by everyone, who assumed that her power lay in her ability to rule as Queen - but really, she had so much more power than that. The power of her beauty, sexual power (she had captivated Nate and Chuck Bass, of all people, with little experience) and of course her “mind-game mastery”….but Chuck never underestimated her power. 

Season 5 was mostly painful - in a very bad way - but looking at the ‘us’ quotes, what I found most interesting was that Chuck Bass was saying most of them - he was fighting for CB as hard as Blair fought for them in season 2. 

5.10 -pre crash - had some of the most beautiful scenes in the entire season. 

Blair was so scared and tired, and her voice was small. Her hair was parted to the side, and looked a little matted. But Chuck heard her, the same way he heard her in 1.07, when no one was listening. Even though her voice was so small. And when Chuck kissed her, something awakened in her - his cheeks flushed red - and I’m certain it was just like true love’s kiss mentioned in 3.04. Just like the night at Victrola, when Blair shed her dress, breaking free of society’s rigid expectations. And I think from that night, they became an “us”. Not just because they were together with sex, but because they gave in to the pull — the pull that took Blair away from Nate, from the future Eleanor had set for her —- and for Chuck, he gave in to loving Blair - not only with fire, but with compassion — as he had never done before. You can see Blair though Chuck’s eyes - someone mentioned that Chuck saw Blair as a precious treasure, the way he held her, her entire tiny body fitting around his hands. In 1.08, he put the necklace on her, and kissed her shoulder, so gently, with remorse for Nate - and I believe that he truly felt her pain. The way he touched her in 5.10 was the same - Blair was his treasure - no matter how she dressed, acted, or treated him, or which phase in her life she was going through. Blair is and has always been, the only girl Chuck ever loved. 5.10 was such a huge development for Chuck. He had always sacrificed his own happiness, (Blair has proven to be his only happiness), because he was afraid that he couldn’t make her happy. “You should be with me” shook my entire world. Because I think, in loving Blair so much, and her baby, he felt love for himself too, for maybe the first time ever - because he loved himself enough to know that he could love Blair as she deserved, and raise her baby. I think that was why that scene caused an earthquake in my heart. Because Chuck Bass, whose father had treated him with resentment, who had grown up thinking that he killed his mother for most of his life, who slept with Jenny because he hated himself so vehemently, who gave the love of his life to another man — this Chuck Bass —- loved himself.

I just don’t believe that 5x22 and 2x13 are comparable in any veritable sense and there simply is no evidence of Blair ever loving Dan at that point to parallel the two storylines; whereas at 2x13, there was explicit evidence of Chuck and Blair both having these mutual feelings towards each other sans direct reference or verbal exposition. So in that case it didn’t really matter that Chuck didn’t say it back, everything else in the production of the scene notwithstanding the dialogue was saying it back. The only real impediment for Chuck and Blair was the timing, not the emotions or lack thereof, not the reciprocation of said emotions the way it is for Dan and Blair. During that ILY scene it remains indeterminate that Blair felt those emotions for Dan and after that there was never any other expositions of those feelings. I can state that Blair doesn’t love Dan and you cannot prove to me that she does. If you want to claim that Blair loves Dan, the burden of proof is on you and you  don’t have any proof so it’s ludicrous that you can make any claim. I was just stating the facts.

Okay. making two more points clear. 

1.) Blair telling Chuck she was no longer in love with him was reversed in the finale when she admitted to trying to kill her feelings for him, which subsequently means …point 2.) Blair saying that Chuck doesn’t have her heart anymore and that it belonged to someone else doesn’t mean that her heart was Dan’s. If you want to be honest with yourself, do you not find it absurd that Blair could admit that her heart belongs to Dan even before their relationship was official and yet still couldn’t tell him she loved him after having experienced several weeks of that ~bliss~ with him? isn’t it perplexing and a bit senseless? You know just as well as i do that Blair was either referreing to herself when she said her heart belonged to someone else or she hadn’t even meant it, in light of finale in which she admitted to still being in love with Chuck but had tried to run from it.

And go ahead, bring up the hotel incident. Frankly, it’s the only thing you have and you use it day in and day out. Whether or not you’re willing to admit, it must be tiring for you to be using the same pathetic excuse everytime. That’s the only thing you can hold against Chuck, though Blair herself no longer holds it against him and in spite of everything she still chooses to forgive him and love him. However, you won’t give her that right. You won’t respect her, not at all to respect who she chooses to love. You don’t respect what she wants for herself, it’s all about what you want for her because she’s just a misguided girl and you know better than her. And then in perfect hypocritical fashion you all accuse Chuck of being the one who’s controlling, misogynistic even.

Speaking of misogyny, have you taken a look at your homeboy Dan? I’m just wondering… because if his relationship with Serena is anything to go by — His relationship with Vanessa. his relationship with women in general? Rachel Carr?  finding them alluring as damsels is quite honestly patronizing. Is that why he’s so ~perfect~? I find it quite funny that you guys won’t cease and desist this old argument, and mind you it’s only the same argument that’s been recycled year after year because you guys simply have no argument. But you’ll go on and on about certain of Chuck’s indiscretions while as much as you claim to love Dan, i don’t really think any of you see him for what he really is. Because if you did, i don’t understand how you can proceed about crucifying Chuck the way you do yet never even acknowledge the things that Dan has done. How are you being fair to Dan’s character if you’re not charging him with the full accountability of his actions? That is basically the definition of hypocrisy.

Dan has done things, ok, things which you would be aware off if you weren’t too far deep in brown-nosing. Dan sent that video on Blair’s wedding day and help built the gilded bars of her cage, an indiscretion he would have never admitted to and would have entered a relationship with her while keeping this lie from her. He caused her such grief by doing that, yet he looked her in the eye and accused Chuck and passed it onto Serena. He was supposed to be dependable, wasn’t he? Dan slept with Serena in the finale. He betrayed the girl he claimed to love. What he did is not any better because  of the fact that she went back to Chuck. He still cheated on her when they were in a fully committed relationship. According to you guys, he was supposed to make her happy right? What about him cheating on her would make her happy, like you claim? What if she came home to him that night. Where’s the pure and simple love in that? Just because she was spotted at the Empire, he gave up his entire faith in her. He couldn’t even trust her to make ‘better decisions’. He couldn’t even give her the benefit of the doubt. He automatically assumed the worst of her.  He judged her for not having changed according to his ideal of her. what’s so pure and simple about that? What’s so great about that? tell me.

Not that Chuck hadn’t done close to a similar thing with Jenny, but he and Blair weren’t in a relationship and she had outright told him that she wasn’t going to show up. What’s Dan’s excuse? He tripped and fell inside Serena’s vagina? The hypocrisy of Dair shippers which also completely weakens their arguments in favor of their ship is that, none of us Chair shippers argue under the pretense that Chuck and Blair are pure and simple and have a perfect relationship. Most of us will admit that the course of their relationship has been tragic — so much has happened. But the beauty of it is that throughout all those obstacles, their love for each other has weathered and has even grown stronger with every roadblock they conquered. Watching that Chuck and Blair scene in 5x03, hearing her say that there’s a part of her that wanted it to be his. I believe in that love. It’s far greater than the love they had even in 2x13. What happened in 4x02 forever dramatically heightened that love. It hasn’t been the same since and will never be the same again. It’s just a much tougher love. It’s not dainty and immaculate. It has scars but it has wisdom and tenacity like no other. Neither Chuck and Blair are perfect and unlike DBers we don’t put either of them on pedestals and absolve them of their flaws and accountability. We don’t delude ourselves. We accept them for who they truly are and we love them for who they truly are. Chuck can be an ass, we’ll admit it but we’ll endear it likewise. Blair is a bitch, not a saintly virgin and we love her for it. We accept their darkness as part of who they are and we also accept their lightness — the way they take care of their best friends and each other, their open hearts and humanity, their childish fondness. And we wouldn’t want them to be anything other than who they are.

You can write poems about pure and simple love that was never there. First of all you’d have to prove that whatever was going on between DB was actually love. Regardless you can write about their presumably pure and simple relationship and i’ll dispute it as a non-fact but i’ll never argue it in favor of Chuck and Blair. No, Chuck and Blair aren’t pure and simple (DB weren’t neither). Chuck and Blair are a complicated love. Their love itself is simple but it is being input on very complicated people. Their love is simple in the sense that the agreement of their feelings towards each other is even beyond their will to decide it. Love is not something they can dictate, it’s something that happens to them. However the path of that love is enormously complicated. The journey is that of a poignant love. They’re a hard love, sometimes acidic love but there’s never a debate that it is actual love between them, even when it contradicts itself provided that when the word love itself implies softness, how can a love be hard? They have the Ying and Yang of love. It’s complicated but it’s simple at the same time at his core.

I love their journey for what it is. Regrettable, unimaginable things have happened but that’s just what the story is and i can just accept it. I couldn’t love Chuck and Blair as characters and want them to have a pure and simple love. It defeats who they are. It defeats the complexity of their own natures. I think their love being a reflection of their stubborn  fighter personalities is what makes their love authentic. It emulates who they really are. And I don’t feel like Blair ever had to change to be compatible with Chuck and although the disagreement in the different dimensions of complexity they each have inevitably led to conflicts. However, her character still stayed true to who she quintessentially was. If you take all of the layers of Chuck and mesh them with all of the layers of Blair to try and create something, how can that realistically be simple? How can two coarse things render something of the refined variety?

We saw Blair get a pure and simple fairy tale with Louis  which was everything she could ever dream of and more. Louis was charming. Louis was patient. Louis was good to her. Louis loved her. Yet she had a hard time conforming to it because she simply didn’t belong there. The real Blair schemes and plays sex games and dreams herself into old Hollywood movies. 

I don’t think any of you who still want Blair with Dan have any idea who the real Blair is. We have proven that if she actually loved him, he isn’t incapable of making her unhappy because he’s already done thing which would prove to be hurtful, perhaps devastating if she was actually emotionally invested in him. The fact that he intended to forever withhold telling her about the wedding video and continuously demonized Chuck for it. And the fact that he slept with Serena without even the slightest idea of Blair’s intentions to leave him. Yet one other thing i find ridiculously entertaining especially coming from you ~feminists~ is the fact that since the Dair cataclysm that happened in the finale, i’ve seen so many people accuse Blair of being a bad girlfriend, a whore, the worst, piece of shit, stupid moron, yet it’s as if Dan was completely innocent. Um… did you not see that Dan was inside Serena’s vagina and then worst blamed the whole thing on Serena as if she forced herself in him?… He had no accountability for himself. He didn’t even feel bad for doing this to Blair.  of course Chuck is the worst and you would feel self-righteous to bring up points of things he did and apologized for a long time ago. Yet remorseless Dan just from a few months ago shall never be mentioned. I don’t even think it occurred to you what Dan did because your head is so stuck up his anal cavity, you can’t even see it.

Another funny point is beside all of that you guys weirdly still want Dan and Blair back together, even after such betrayal. You see why the term hypocrisy rings so many bells. Because the betrayals Chuck and Blair committed in their relationship can never be moved on from but with Dan it just takes a finger snap. But it’s also very confusing because you ~feminists~ claim Blair has no brain cells for choosing to be with the person she knows she loves. Because she’s not with who you want her to be it makes her stupid right? and worthless? and a whore too? I thought she was the worst. How can you want someone like her with Dan at the convenient possibility of them reuniting? I thought she was brainless and moronic? Oh is it because that being with Dan is the only thing that can validate her intelligence and worth? right, you said, supporters of women’s rights. You’re certainly doing it right. You should call even more women’s issues hotlines and report your arduous arguments on behalf of the female gender. What’s even funnier with this whole feminist thing is your feelings towards Serena. You embarrass yourselves quite  frankly. Do you ever rationalize the things that come out of your mouths?

But alas!….

Blair has outright stated that Chuck makes her happier than she’s ever been, that she’s in love with him. Arguments, like yours, telling her that that’s not how she should feel are deplorable. You love Blair so much. You care for her happiness so much that you better than her  should pick who she should be with? You respect her character so much that you’re implying she’s is incapable of judging her own emotions? So she’s only fiercely strong and independent when she’s with Dan. She cannot be that on her own when she chooses not be with him. Everything that she is is auxiliary and relative to Dan and she cannot be an individualistic character. And you are a Blair fan? or even a Dan fan?

http://dairpressiontherapy.tumblr.com/post/25837947014/your-reaction-makes-it-everything-but-a-failure

“It’s so refreshing to see/read a chair fan who writes eloquently with proper grammar.” 

First and foremost, the only possible reason why you haven’t encountered other intelligent, well-spoken Chair fans is that you’ve actively avoided or ignored them- because based on my own experience, many members of this fandom are incredibly smart, accomplished, and eloquent. The asks I just posted are only two examples.

On to the points! Oh, and if you were hoping I was just going to “agree to disagree”… sorry, that’s not how I roll.

1. “But this doesn’t mean we will agree or worse condone these “interesting” reflection of society through these fictional characters.”

Dair fans often misinterpret enjoyment of a character or storyline as “condoning” it, which seems like an overly judgmental and shortsighted way to view entertainment. Let me be clear- I don’t condone anything about this show. Every single character has done something I would consider to be morally repugnant in real life. If Chuck, or Blair, or Dan, were real, and I met them? I would dislike them intensely.

“Abugu added, “In its corrective function, literature mirrors the ills of the society with a view to making the society realize its mistakes and make amends.””

While interesting, I don’t consider that particular interpretation to be applicable to this show- as GG isn’t written as a “corrective” of society’s ills. Most of the storylines are written with the intent of surprising or titillating the viewer, as opposed to providing a satisfying or morally righteous outcome. So if you want to root for “what society should change for its betterment”, it seems like there are far better venues for doing so than a teen soap opera based almost entirely upon “OMGs.”

2. “I know exactly what the show is about that’s why we Dair fans often use the word HOPE because we know goodness is not what the show is about. Maybe futile, but we hope because if the writers are true to their literary roots they know the main reason why the Humphreys are there as the moral compass of the show. “Literature also projects the virtues or good values in the society for people to emulate.””

This is one of the main points where you and I differ- I don’t think GG is, or *should be*, about presenting values for people to emulate. In fact, I don’t think any television program should be, but especially not one that has defined itself from the very beginning as scandalous and “every parent’s worst nightmare”. Basically, I think you’re barking up the wrong tree here.

And regarding the Humphreys being the “moral compass” of the show? That may have been true once upon a time. But can you honestly say that Dan was the “moral compass” in 4x07? Or in 5x14? Or 5x24? Or Jenny for the entirety of S3? Or Rufus in… well, Rufus is useless. Point being, if this show is making any moral point, it’s that the UES is a corrupting influence on people who enter it. Jenny’s downfall was obvious, and now Dan has pretty much lost any moral righteousness he once had. He refuses to acknowledge it (as do his fans) because he’s enormously hypocritical… but I think it’s undeniable that Dan has changed for the worse since S1. 

3. “If you noticed i never used the word epic for Dan and Blair’s relationship even though Dan has time and again rescued Blair and was her hero in so many occassions, never her heart’s antagonist.”

Our differing opinions on the application of the word “epic” are noted, and really aren’t interesting enough to discuss further. But I did chuckle at the idea of Dan being Blair’s “hero” and rescuing her… although again, I guess that’s pretty much the same way Dan views himself- white knight to weak, helpless women. Saving them from themselves, helping them see the error of their ways and change into “better people.” Putting them up on a pedestal and then turning viciously on them when they fall off.

Personally, I prefer Blair, as a character, to be strong enough that she’s not constantly making idiotic decisions and then needing a man to save her from them. I also prefer her to not feel as though she has to change who she is, and certainly not that she needs the help of a man to do so. So yeah, if I were to emulate any relationship dynamic on this show, it sure as fuck wouldn’t be that one. 

4. “Of course there is no general rule of romance, but there is a very clear, concrete and real definition of love: 1 Corinthians 13.”

Well, if the bible says it, than it must be true! Haha. The bible also has some interesting thoughts on homosexuality, do those fit into your definition of “love” as well?

“isn’t it a little hypocritical of you being that your entire post is about how wrong and misguided the things i feel strongly about are?”

I’m hardly being hypocritical by simply disagreeing with the points you’re making. If I were making sweeping assumptions about you as a person, or telling you that you should be “ashamed” of something you enjoy, *then* I would be a hypocrite. Note that I haven’t done either of those things. 

5. “The point i was trying to make was, even with your future kids’ and grandkids’ free will, would you rather them marry a Chuck Bass over a Dan Humphrey?”

This is a meaningless comparison, IMO, because Dan is a much more realistic character than Chuck. Dan was originally set up as the normal guy thrust into this crazy world, our “window” into the UES, so we viewed all of the other characters from his perspective. There’s nothing particularly unusual or heightened about him, he’s just an average, supposedly nice, kind of boring and douchey guy. You’re likely to meet many guys like Dan throughout the course of your life, I certainly have. You are unlikely, however, to ever meet a guy like Chuck- and that’s because they don’t actually exist. 

6. “I never said Blair doesn’t love Dan nor that she finds him uninteresting. I do believe the opposite actually.” 

No, I was the one who said that.The first point was proven by 5x23 and 5x24- not only did Blair not respond to Dan’s “I love you”, either time, she then explicitly chose another guy over him (a guy she actually does love). I can understand why Dair fans would want to believe she loves Dan, but there’s simply no proof of it- in fact, all evidence points to the contrary. As for her lack of interest in him, that seemed evident throughout their entire relationship. The most interest I ever saw Blair display in Dan’s life was her “oh, I can’t believe they didn’t take you” verbal pat on the head in 5x22… which was followed by, basically, “let’s talk about me some more.” Blair and Dan’s entire relationship revolved around Blair and how much he loved her. And if you actually are a fan of Dan’s, it’s hard for me to understand why you would want that for him. 

7. “Truth be told, it is all for concern and fear for impressionable young viewers why i wrote about Blair’s decision. Not all are mature like you who will see Blair as just a character (as you claim, she only is). 

Are you getting my point? To the many, Blair will not only be character: she is a role model.”

I disagree vehemently with this argument. Blair should not be a role model, for anyone. And if she is? The solution to that is not to change her character to make her less objectionable, or to hold the writers responsible for other people misinterpreting their work. The solution is to teach kids to be more discerning about who they choose to look up to.

Honestly, the whole “won’t somebody please think of the children!” argument is just melodramatic and irrelevant, IMO. Impressionable children shouldn’t be watching GG, at all. And if they do, the blame falls on their parents, not the show itself. After all, there’s plenty of content out there that isn’t appropriate for younger viewers. If an 8-year-old watches a bloody slasher movie and has nightmares as a result, is that the fault of the horror movie industry? Should we eliminate it entirely just to avoid such a possibility?

Or should we maybe expect parents to step up and, I dunno, actually parent their children?

So yeah, I think it’s ridiculous to expect the writers of GG to adjust Blair’s character or her behavior just because some misguided viewers might try to emulate her. That’s not their responsibility. It’s also not yours, and it’s not mine. Personally, I don’t think expecting people to be able to differentiate between fiction and real life is too much to ask. 

In conclusion- the majority of viewers love Chuck and Blair together. They’ve enjoyed watching the twists and turns of their relationship, the drama and heartache, the all-consuming love that’s been a constant theme of this show for almost 5 years. They enjoy it because they understand the story the writers have been telling- the story of two enormously flawed, narcissistic, emotionally damaged people who unexpectedly fell in love, but were unprepared to handle the intensity of their feelings for each other…  and who now, finally, after all the hurt, and lies, and pain, managed to find their way back together. Back to a love that makes both of them happier than anyone else ever could.

So… cheers! And enjoy season 6 :)

This shall be the first installment of many. I am new to the fandom and I have 5 seasons to fangirl over so be prepared for my bombardment of opinion. 

Now that that’s out the way. I must first admit that I have been running a serious Chuck and Blair marathon for about 2 weeks now. From S1 to S5 I cannot help but want to relive every moment of it over and over and over and over and over and over and over again. I don’t know if I need to continue in this excess as Chuck would suggest to get over something or if I should take a page from Blair’s book and try a cleanse. *sigh*

Anyway, my first thought on Chuck and Blair has to be that I love everything about their story be it a moment of joy or a moment of sorrow, be it good or bad. In true fan fashion, I will use a quote made by Blair to Chuck to describe how I feel about them as a couple.

“The worst thing you’ve ever done, the darkest thought you’ve ever had; I will stand by you through anything.”

As a couple, Chuck and Blair have had some truly trying moments. Two such moments, the “trading for a hotel” and the “punching of glass,” seem to be the topic of much discussion. I’ve read many opinions and now I am throwing mine into the mix.

I would rank these two controversial moments amongst my favorite Chuck and Blair moments. Although favorite moments when it comes to couples tend to be those considered hot, sexy and/or sweet (I fangirl over such moments as well), I also gravitate to what I consider to be complex emotionally charged pivotal moments that bring forth both flawed and endearing character traits. For in such moments, layers of facade are pulled back leaving the rawness of vulnerability. It is in such vulnerability that I find the essence of a character, which either makes him/her root-worthy or unroot-worthy. And by root-worthy I mean investing in the character and wanting to see him/her grow not wanting the character to do no wrong or go unscathed.

I find that in each of these two moments the many facets of their relationship, who they are together, and who they are as individuals were revealed. From the “hotel incident” several things were apparent:

Chuck was willing to barter Blair to get his hotel back.

Blair was willing to barter herself to get Chuck’s hotel back.

Chuck thought he and Blair could move past the incident because they loved each other.

Blair was willing to have sex with Jack because she loved Chuck.

Chuck did not want Blair to have sex with with Jack.

Blair did not want to have sex with Jack.

Chuck did not tell Blair his plan.

Blair did not tell Chuck her plan. 

For me, the striking thing was the parallels between both of their actions. Both were willing to use sex to get what they wanted while keeping it a secret from the other hoping that all would be okay in the end because they loved each other. Both were operating under the assumption that anything no matter how despicable could be excused because of love. In the end, I think they both learned the hard way that although one is willing to do anything (sex with Jack) or forgive anything (sex with Jack) because of love, love should have also stopped one from doing the despicable act (sleeping with Jack) or setting up the despicable act (sleeping with Jack). This lesson was learned the painful way, but it was a lesson that needed to be learned. Hence, this is one of my favorite Chuck/Blair moments because it thought them love is double-edged sword not to be weilded without care.

The other incident I want to discuss is when Chuck lost his temper and punched through the glass window resulting in Blair receiving a cut on her cheek. Heartbreaking is the word that best describes what happened. My heart cracks for him every time I watch that scene. *tears* He was losing the love in (yes in not of; it gives it a different meaning) his life in a way that seemed more permanent than ever before in the midst of his world crumbling around him (i.e. things he was learning about his dad). Therefore, his desperation in that moment was so real and understandable; however, the actions that resulted are not condoned. I appreciate this moment because it showed Chuck at his lowest of lows. Without reaching this low I don’t think Chuck would have matured into the man that realized the worst thing that could have happened happened and although it hurt like hell he was not destroyed.

I think I have rambled enough. But I would like to close with a quote from Chuck about Blair that sums up my love for Chuck/Blair that accepts all of the aspects of their relationship.

“It’s stupid for you to want her to be anything other than she is.”

Ugh! So much fangirling so little time.

Smooches,

So I’ve been trying to gather my thoughts and discover from which angle I’d touch upon this. I finally decided that what is most important to me is to try and put into perspective Chair’s “Goodbye” scene, particularly because I’ve read that some fans feel down because it seemed so final. So this is for that, how it was a “wrong” goodbye and not a final “goodbye” for Chair.

It’s been frustrating for Chair fans to hear that CB weren’t happy, when we all remember that from 2x25, that moment of “I love you too” up until 3x16 when Elizabeth Fischer’s deceit blew it all to hell, CB were happy. However, I have taken this like a bucket of water, clear water, fresh and beautiful and pure. And you throw dirt in it. The water becomes so murky that you can’t see through it anymore, its tainted and you can’t make it what it once was. What you have to do is throw out that water and pour in clean water, and now you know, you can’t throw dirt in there and ruin the water. I believe that was the goal of this episode.

CB were happy, there was real love, but so much pain has caused CB to forget that there was once happiness there. But we don’t forget and we’re not supposed to forget. We’re not supposed to forget because then we get scenes like the Bar Mitzvah dance and us fans can say “That is my CHAIR, the ship I always knew they could be. Crashing parties like bosses and pwning it in the process, and really truly being happy.” Our ship, having a wedding foreshadow in a party that is meant to celebrate maturity. Our girl, pulling on her man because she can’t let him go. She sees something in him that night, in herself and doesn’t want to let it go.

Chuck however, knows she has to. That goodbye scene was probably the most beautifully epic scenes CB have had in a really long time, I’m guessing since the train station scene. I think the part that completely broke me was Chuck telling her that she was the most powerful woman that he knows. He loves her so much that he wants her to accept this fact, and that she can be happy, and he wants her to be happy. It felt final because it was finally another step for CB. They finally matured in a way to really get that they want the best for each other and that they will always love each other, directly contrasting the “I don’t love you anymore” from 4x02. Ed and Leighton did an amazing job, the song in the background was perfect and it created a heart-wrenching, bittersweet scene that was indeed “The Wrong Goodbye”.

What I find amazing is that people believe this could be goodbye for Chair. It cannot be. It closed a chapter of immaturity; it threw out that dirty water, and indicated that a new spring has to be born.

The writers tend to use dramatic irony. They tell us CB haven’t been happy, yet we see them so happy and light in the Bar Mitzvah. They have Blair say that Chuck only loves her dark, and we hear Chuck himself say that he loves her light, that he so wants to celebrate her life he is willing to let her go to be happy with a man that he thinks makes her lighter. They tell us that Chuck pulled Blair into the dark, yet twice this season, it was mentioned that Blair glowed, both times was in direct relation with her love for Chuck. Much of what they say is not meant to be taken at face value.

The biggest thing is, Blair is pregnant and the father is Chuck. I am certain of this. (If I’m wrong you all can lynch me later). I have thoughts on this child that would probably be best saved for another essay, but you don’t have them create life, in the same venue where they first mutually declared their love, if you intend on ending that story. It may take a while yet, in fact, I anticipate that it will be a long while still with more roadblocks thrown in, but CB are going to get a rebuild. I appreciate it being done in this fashion actually instead of an instant reunion.

So, having watching 4.20 finally, I had a lot of feelings about it, to the point where I felt the need to write everything down sporadically on the train, at work, on my lunch break, and at home, throughout the week. Here they are on paper, for those of you who have the stamina to get through it all! My intention here is not to upset or offend. I am merely analysing and expressing my opinion about what unfolded.

There is no one who will tell you that Chuck’s behaviour was justified. I will never tell you that. What I will do is try to get inside Chuck’s head and understand his point of view. My articulation of that point of view is not my point of view. It is his. Grasping at his thought process, trying to interpret it, and putting those words on a page, is my inalienable right. But the action of understanding does not equate to the action of condoning, or excusing. I do not agree with what Chuck did. It seems completely stupid and redundant to have to point out that obvious fact, but apparently it needs to be made explicit. What I will stand by on this fictional character’s behalf is that the force he exhibited was not pre-meditated, nor was it done casually (as though it came naturally), nor was it an attempt to control, manipulate or disempower Blair. Yes, it was an act of unacceptable aggression. But I do not believe that it was abusive. I would not use that word lightly. That is my opinion by the way. I’m more than happy for people to disagree with me, because all of our interpretations are coloured by our own lives and experiences therein. What I would define as abusive, I did not see any evidence of in that scene. You need to specifically compare his actions towards Serena and Jenny in the Pilot, and Jack’s towards Lily in 2.16, to really see what assault, attempted or otherwise, looks like on this show. In each instance, Chuck and Jack are shouted at to stop several times and they do not. It is only an equal act of force that stops them. In Jack’s case particularly, there is a desire to disempower his victim.

Equally, I would never tell anyone that their feelings are wrong. If someone genuinely feels that what they saw was abusive behaviour, and can constructively, and without agenda, explain why, then that is their right and I will defend that right on their behalf as much as I would do so for my own. I am not going to claim that I have ever been the victim of abuse in order to ‘legitimize’ my opinion. But nor am I going to ignore the fact that I have experienced aggressive, verging on violent, behaviour from people I love very much. Experience has taught me to examine people from every angle. It has also taught me to forgive. I try to apply that knowledge to my life every day.

For the record, my reading of the scene was that it was a desperate act on Chuck’s part to stop the inevitable. She had always come back to him before, even after the worst thing he had ever done. So when he saw her at his threshold he believed she had returned to him, because her love and her loyalty had always been stronger than his darkness; stronger even than her own will and reason. He recognised this action, even though her love makes no sense to him and never has, and he could breathe. So hearing her resounding ‘no’, hearing her head finally overrule her heart, was like watching the Titanic veer off course and resist the iceberg. In his drink and drug-addled brain this did not compute. How could she possibly resist her old impulses? His aggression at this moment was an anomaly, not the norm. What I saw in his face was not rage, or vitriol, or hatred, but total confusion.

I’m going to be very clinical now. This is what I saw when I watched that scene. There is an uncomfortable invasion of personal space, which from Chuck’s point of view, was in response to her having ‘come back to him’ to claim her prize – although God knows his denial and inebriation must have been working overtime to have thought he was any kind of prize that night. It’s the tone of his voice here, rather than the dialogue, which tells me he is fooling himself and doesn’t quite believe it. Their preceding scene together in that episode tells me the same thing: “Tell your Prince where your heart truly lies. Tell me”. This is the epitome of Chuck’s childish self-doubt beneath the bravado. Listen to the vacillation in his voice. He isn’t saying these things because he is marking his territory (although there is a little bit of that going on), he is saying these things because the only thing he is sure of is a) the sex, at least, was the best of their, or anyone else’s, lives, to quote Blair; so he is clinging to that one certainty (see the Marie Antoinette cake reference), and b) because he genuinely no longer has any idea of whether or not Blair herself “understands what [they] have”; whether she remembers their promise to each other in 4.09; how she feels about Dan; who the hell this Louis guy is; where her ‘powerful woman’ arc went (aren’t we all wondering this); what she is thinking, feeling, or planning – in short, whether she loves him at all, or has simply cut him off, cut him adrift, without any notice (hence his You’re mine interjection – which, yes, is possessive, but I think this statement is more about him seeing Blair, selfishly and wrongly, as an extension of himself). He has been so obsessed in his pursuit of salvaging his father’s legacy that he has neglected everything else. He is totally off his game and can only blame himself.    

Blair tells him about Louis, they have the you’re mine/not anymore conversation, he grapples with her and pushes her to the sofa. She tells him to stop. He stops. He does not manhandle her at this point – they stop and look at each other very intently. At this point he realises that she has not returned for him, she is not repeating their old pattern, and this is not a game. From the writers’ perspective, I can see that this moment could be the final stage of the ‘playing with fiction, or pretence, becomes horrific in reality’ theme they have given Chuck and Blair (an extension of the whole ‘games gone wrong’ metaphor they have stuck them with for the entirety of their relationship – made horribly concrete by the premiere and finale of season 3). As usual, the writers are too heavy-handed and go too far, but I can see what they are going for. He is going through the motions of their past interactions – he fucks up (or pretends to), she is enraged (or pretends to be), she says she has hit her limit, and yet she always comes back to him even when he doesn’t deserve it (after she tells him to play with himself; tells him it’s not enough, that he will never hear those words from her; says she’s exhausted, and that he is as dead to her as his father is to him; after the worst thing he ever did; after she tells him she doesn’t love him anymore; after she drives Eva away and tells him she hates him). It was never over when she said it was over.

So when she tells him now, definitively, that it’s over, she does not just mean their relationship; she means the entire way in which their relationship has been conducted. She is effectively going against every idea he has ever had about the two of them – that they are inevitable, that no matter what he does she will always come back to him (“love makes everything simple”), that if two people are meant to be they will find their way back – and breaking their pattern. He is like a child at this point – he literally has no comprehension of what she is saying. She may as well be telling him that gravity does not exist. The whole idea that they could ever be truly finished is not something that ever occurred to him. Repetition compulsion is Chuck’s modus operandi; he repeats his received notions of behaviour over and over again because it hasn’t killed him yet, and after all, what doesn’t kill you only makes you stranger. At this point they really look at each other. In his utter sense of desolation and confusion and alienation, he cries out an almost inhuman call and punches the glass way over her head – he does not aim for her and she does not duck away from the trajectory of his fist except to flinch at the smashing glass over her head. He does not lay a hand on her at that moment. He is not smashing that glass in an attempt to intimidate her. There is no calculation, there is no thought process. This, again, does not excuse the action. But I think it is important to note that not even at his lowest point does anything inside him, deep at the most trenchant root of his subconscious, call to him at this moment to hurt her, to punish her, or to demean her. To me this proves that the impulse just is not there. At this point he does not stop her from extricating herself and leaving.

Chuck was out of his mind in 4.20, to the point of vacancy. There was nothing left in him but fear and confusion. There was nothing of the cold-blooded, calculating Bart Bass he has been impersonating. Part of him died the day his father was buried. He grew old, and withered, and more tired than he had even been in his life. He went away, and tried to die for real. He was called back and tried again. But like the throbbing corpse in The Tell Tale Heart, he could still hear the heart of the boy he buried inside the monster he wears like a shroud. The beating of the heart he thought he had cut out grows louder still. It can no longer be ignored. The seemingly endless secrets and lies curled about the corpse of Bart Bass are a symptom of Chuck’s emperor’s new clothes being increasingly ill-fitting. The more he tries to be his father and wear his mask, the greater the secrets grow, the worse the lies become. The sins of the father lie heavily on Chuck. But Lily is right. He is Bart’s legacy. If he carries his sin, it will only persist. The only way to repent - to atone - is to change; to act counter-intuitively. Not to follow the path his father walked. He can’t die for his father’s sins any more than he can die for his own. That is not redemption. That is self-flagellation. Being punished endlessly, or hating yourself, will change nothing.

Now it is as though Chuck has been awoken from a dream – a Sleeping Beastly if you will – to find the world he knew completely changed. His father is a fraud, a liar, and possibly a murderer. His best friend is a stranger who no longer recognises him. His stepmother is imprisoned in a brownstone tower. His love is wearing another man’s ring. He has truly become what he pretended to be – a Henry Prince, unencumbered by history and bereft of himself. Just as Blair believes herself to be in a fairytale of Perrault-proportions, Chuck has awoken into a nightmare of truly Grimm sensibilities. It is a nightmare he has always imagined for himself, and nothing is more terrifying than the product of one’s own imagination. The fiction in both their lives has become fact – the act of having nothing has become a reality for Chuck (which takes me back to his dream in 3.18 – when Blair was taken from him on his own orders; or in fact “the boss’s orders” – showing that he subconsciously saw himself as two people, thus separating himself from what he was doing), just as the dream of having everything has become a waking truth for Blair. Blair’s nightmares have always been about powerlessness, and the unwelcome sense of an intrusive reality that interrupts her perfect replications of fantasy (a perfect metaphor for her life if ever I saw one). What she craves is safety, and feeling in control of her environment. That is what she means by power, whether she is aware of it or not. She will feel like a powerful woman when she feels both truly loved and truly in her element. Not when she is playing a part, or spinning stories about her conceptions of what power should be. (On that note, I have never heard about any member of any Royal family managing to negotiate peace in the Sudan or anywhere else. That is another piece of fiction Blair has decided to tell herself). Only sheer will power can change the narratives of a lifetime. Only through going against their own grain can they change their own stories. Only they have the power to awaken themselves.

For me, the mark of a truly great love story is that it ultimately reveals you to yourself. That is what endures beyond the lifetime of the actual relationship. Blair and Chuck are still navigating that fact, still desperately running around trying to ignore, deny, repress, fight, or blacken the name of their history together to the extent that they are running further and further away from themselves. Chuck, for his part, has been so lost in his monomaniacal obsession with emulating and assimilating his father, at the expense of everything else in his life, that every human impulse that did not pertain to this has been driven out. It is only now that the person who represents his weakness, his vulnerability, his need, indeed, his humanity, is forcibly removing herself from his life that you can see the encroaching light of desperation.

And just to be clear- this is not a Dair rant. I’m not bashing or criticizing Dair.

The people I’m criticizing are the bitter, malicious, psychotic members of that fanbase who have the utter gall to pretend they’re campaigning against abuse while they behave in the most bullying, abusive manner imaginable. People who think it’s alright to make personal attacks against Stephanie Savage, saying she’s an embarrassment to women, making comments about her age and relationship status. People who think it’s alright to send anon hate to CBers, saying they deserve to be abused because they have a different shipping preference. People who think any of this is actually a well-reasoned, righteous, justifiable reaction to a television storyline…. because, really?

This reaction isn’t justifiable, and it isn’t genuine. It’s a ridiculously transparent lashing-out against a fictional couple, not out of some altruistic desire to save humanity, but because you hate them and you want a moral justification for your opinion. Just saying you hate them isn’t enough… you need to be *right* in your hatred. You need to feel like you’re more right than all the people who like them. You’re willing to twist any definition, distort any fact, ignore every point that disputes your argument, harass anyone who disagrees with you, just so you can feel like your opinion is the *right* one. You personally attack any dissenters in an attempt to bully them into silence, because it’s entirely unacceptable that anyone views your opinion as anything other than Cold Hard Fact. And you’ll shout over anyone who dares to stand up to you, like it’s a contest to see who can be louder and more hysterical.

And all because a fictional couple you like broke up on a fucking television show. 

Seriously, you guys should be ashamed of yourselves, it’s downright embarrassing. It’s like a toddler throwing a temper tantrum because they didn’t get what they wanted for Christmas. That’s how you’re coming across to everyone else in the fandom, and it’s certainly how you’re coming across to the writers and producers, who couldn’t possibly give less of a shit about your hysterics. They didn’t last year, and they certainly won’t now, when your motivations are even more obviously disingenuous. 

I mean, do you really think your motives are genuine? Have you really managed to convince yourselves of that? If so, your capacity for self-delusion surprises even me. 

But no, you - the one’s who are posting these messages and insulting people because of a TV show - are the disgusting ones. Is it not enough that someone in another fandom took their own life, because of ship-wars? Do you really want to continue with this, when you know of the extreme effect your actions could have?

I am about to reveal something very personal to make my point. My mother forgave my father for something many would deem unforgiveable - something worse than trading your girlfriend for a hotel - and this was real life, not fucking fiction. 

People calling Blair weak for forgiving Chuck, for choosing him, is offensive to me. My mother is not weak, but the people who say a female character is weak for forgiving somebody, are insinuating that she is. If my mother was able to read your disgusting, and ignorant comments, she would inform you of the years she battled with herself, and her emotions, and how much courage and strength it took for her to finally forgive my father for what he did.

Would you call her a “dumb bitch” for taking him back? And what about me and my siblings? Did she send us a terrible, misogynistic message? No, she didn’t. She taught me how important the act of forgiveness is, and how to let go of the past, in order to move forward in the future.

Reading a list of “signs of abuse” on Wikipedia does not make you an expert on the subject. And unless you have experienced it, you should keep your mouth shut. The writers do not owe you an apology for “glamorizing abusive relationships”. They don’t owe you anything. I’m not happy with some of the storylines they’ve written - the IP incident being one of them - but if I couldn’t move past it, I’d stop watching. Simple.

Maybe it’s because I haven’t watched the show in its entirety for eight episodes, and have sufficiently detached myself emotionally. Maybe it’s because I have come to an understanding about leaving my own code of ethics and sense of morality at the door when embarking upon a relationship with any work of fiction. But, having watched THE SCENE, I was not shocked, or appalled. For once, I can actually see what they are doing with Chuck Bass. I completely understand why what happened would be too much for some people to bear. But all I can say is that I honestly (and this is coming from a complete cynic when it comes to these writers) do not believe that they are doing this to “throw Chuck under the bus”, or because they love to torture him (even though Ed is so bloody brilliant that it must make them want to torture him just to watch him be so bloody brilliant), or to diminish his ‘likeability’ (which I would argue has always been negligible) in order to make other pairings more palatable. I absolutely believe they are guilty of having done all these things in the past, and that they are more than capable of doing so in the future. But right now? I get it. I feel like, at this, his darkest moment, I can see him. I can’t quite explain it, but there it is. My only wish is that the writers could match their ambitions with their ability.

Chuck has always been a polarising character. Granted, this polarity has grown more extreme throughout the seasons. He is not, and has never been, hugely likeable or sympathetic. At times I watch him fumble around in the darkness of that fucked up brain of his and grimace, or verge from pity to rage to heartache in the space of an episode. I never condone his actions, because that would be impossible. I analyse and explicate for myself because that is what I do. That is how I engage with the things I am attached to. I may never understand him fully, or completely empathise with him. But I am committed to the attempt.

Okay, so maybe I will indulge myself in a tinsy almost!meta about Blair Waldorf and why watching her became such a painful experience. It will be chaotic and not at all thought through, so be prepared for lots and lots of randomness.

Since the very beginning, Blair Waldorf has been the sum of her own insecurities. The thing about her character, the one that made her so popular and loved, was that - despite her being a New York teenage socialite - people felt like they could relate to her. On a very abstract level, of course, but still. Her parents’ marriage crashed and burned, her mother was never satisfied with her, she was horribly jealous of her best friend, her boyfriend wasn’t in love with her any more, she got mixed up in something pretty scary with one of her male friends and at the same time, she tried to stay at the top of her class. It’s a lot of drama to take at once but most people had at least one of those issues and that was what mattered. On the top of all that, Blair was always deep down very insecure and needed constantly to prove herself to others. She wasn’t like Serena, she didn’t possess a strong feeling of self-worth and confidence that would help her get up every time life knocked her down.

This is why she always depended on other people to tell her who she is. She treated them as some kind of a mirror, looking at herself through their eyes. It is noteworthy that Jenny and Chuck were pretty much the same in that aspect, which is why they were always my favourite characters on the show. (I just thought it was interesting, even if painful, to watch them struggle with that.)

She did it not only with her parents and friends, but also with her boyfriends. Blair always changed a bit, depending with who she was at the moment. With Nate she was the perfect high society girl; with Chuck she was more daring and a little decadent, always scheming and playing games; with Carter she hit rock bottom; with that guy from the end of season three she tried to be just a normal, twenty year old girl; with Louis she transformed into a fairy tale princess; now with Dan she aspires to be a part of New York’s intellectual elite.

At this point, most shippers would already be fighting with which one of those man Blair was her real self. Our choices determine our ship, as you’d probably noticed. But if we take off our shipper goggles for a second, if we take Blair out of a ship, I think we will see that we’ve never met the real her.

If Blair lets her relationships define her (and she does) and she wasn’t not in a relationship for more than a few weeks (she wasn’t), where does that leave us?

Without the real Blair Waldorf, that’s for sure. Maybe that’s it, maybe that’s just the kind of person Blair is - someone who will always be accommodating people in her life and changing to fit their opinions of her. It’s a little exasperating to watch but not impossible as a character trait. What is annoying though, is the fact that while being continuously written as a dependent weakling (because despite all her fierceness, Blair most of the time fails to be strong when she really needs to be), power is her character’s catchphrase, but nothing is ever done about it.

After five years, Blair Waldorf acts with Dan Humphrey exactly the same way she did with Nate Archibald.

The breaking point should be, of course, season 3. Blair’s I don’t like who I’ve become with you was oh so telling. It was a major epiphany on her part, she finally understood that she always moulded herself to others (men she loved, in particular) and that it could be a dangerous thing. It felt like she is finally going to take her life into her own hands and decide who she really wants to be.

Then, of course, season 4 happened and any continuity went to hell.

Do you see my point? The ships, the men Blair dates really don’t matter. We think they matter because Blair thinks they do. That’s the way she operates. So we all waste our time trying to determine who would be better for her, when the thing is, both Chuck and Dan could be just as good. Chuck’s destructiveness and Dan’s tendency to be controlling wouldn’t be so damaging, if Blair wouldn’t let them be. But she does. And if the writers don’t plan to develop her character any further, she still will. So it really won’t matter for her happiness, who she is with, because at the end of the day, she will let some guy stomp on all over her.

Still, there is one thing that makes me personally lean towards CB.

People who remember the whole show better than I do could probably dig out some great parallels between Blair’s different boyfriends. To my mind come two scenes: the one from 3.04 (Remember I’m Chuck Bass and I love you) and the most recent one, from 5.21 (I have a feeling that the real Blair Waldorf is a lot closer than you think). I’ve seen some people claiming that this is a proof how differently Chuck and Dan treat Blair. That Chuck thought of her as his extension and Dan views her as an independent being. But I think that these are details subject to one’s interpretation; what really matters is that in those scene, both of them told Blair who she is. You are the person I love - this is the measure of your worth. You possess traits I value and because of them are the woman I fell for - this is the measure of your worth. Can you see how similar their rhetoric is? Their way of thinking? But why do they say those things?

Because Blair subconsciously wants them to. Because she needs them to tell her who she is. She expects it and relies on it. They know it, so when they see she is down, they actually try to make her feel better. But how misguided they are!

And then Dan is all: If only you could see what I see! and it’s like he unknowingly hit jackpot because that’s exactly what Blair wants. He tells her who he thinks she is and at that moment, she wants to be that person more than anything. Dan has no idea what he did by listing all those things Blair supposedly is. He hopes that no magazine can dictate Blair how she views herself and I think that clearly shows that he’s not doing that on purpose. But nevertheless, Blair devours his words, feeds on them and I can see in my mind’s eye that she will really try to be that girl Dan told her about. Maybe she really is her, I don’t know - Dan made those observations in one of the short periods when Blair was alone and had no man to define her but it still doesn’t make it any better that she needs him to tell her that. Since she worked at W, she could change, she could feel differently about pretty much everything and this is why trying to fit Dan’s image of her, an image over a year old, that might have not been even accurate or complete in the first place, is just not right.

The next few episodes we’ll probably see Blair trying to be the girl Dan loves and failing. Because she will always fail as long she tries to be a little more this, and a little more that. And just like she said, she is the real problem here.

On an end note, I’ve never been a fan of that first scene I quoted above. Despite my deep love for Chuck and Blair, I think they had better, more meaningful scenes, with less cheesy dialogue. What really ticked me off though, was how dependent on each other they seemed at the beginning of season 3. Those who oppose their relationship tend to cite 3.04 to show that Blair let Chuck dictate who she was. They are, however, forgetting about 3.01 and the infamous: I’m not Chuck Bass without you. I had serious problems with that because I always root for the characters as well as the pairing so I prefer them more independent in general. But what was making it all a little better for me was the fact, that this strange co-dependence went both ways. There was some kind of a sick balance to it.

Blair lacks it with Dan because he doesn’t need her to tell him who he is. Chuck and Blair were very co-dependent and Dan isn’t like that. Somehow he always has the upper hand in his relationships - and you know what? I don’t blame him. It’s not his fault that he’s a strong individual; he doesn’t plan on it, it just happens. But that’s why I believe no girl on the show is his real mate, because there is no girl self-confident enough to be his true match. Well, maybe Vanessa was. But Vanessa’s gone - mostly because her power struggle with Dan wouldn’t end and neither of them was ready to compromise.

I know there has been controversy surrounding the 20th episode of “Gossip Girl’s” fourth season. I know there are people who keep tweeting you and contacting you, telling you to officially apologise for condoning abuse. From what I understand you are considering doing just that.

Many of these people who so passionately speak against abuse are behaving very questionably themselves. Many of them have been harassing those who disagree, threatening them, slandering them. I have been subjected to this, friends of mine have been subjected to this, countless people I don’t know have been subjected to this. All in the name of speaking up against abuse. All in the name of taking a moral high ground.

Perhaps they feel that the ends justify the means and you must fight fire with fire. That harassing those who don’t hate Chuck Bass and who still ship Chair is a price worth paying for taking a stand against abuse.

Personally I think it’s hypocrisy.

Chuck and Blair are fictional characters. The scene in 420 was bad but no flesh and blood human got hurt. Chuck pushed Blair down on a sofa and punched a glass wall, causing a cut on her cheek. Ed Westwick did not hurt Leighton Meester and she did not end up with a cut on her face, nor did any real human being end up with their feelings hurt. Fictional characters were involved. I’m not saying that you can put fictional characters through anything and it is okay and has no consequence. I’m just trying to put things in perspective.

Because the people these anti-abuse enthusiast harass on the Internet are real. I’m real. I’m a flesh and blood person with real feelings. I have been called evil by these people, someone posted a large GIF that just said “FUCK YOU” over and over directed at me, I have been yelled at on twitter by complete strangers for tweeting that I like Chuck and Chair. I have even been threatened. And I am one of the lucky ones. Many others have been subjected to far worse. People are being harassed on tumblr, on twitter, on fanfiction sites. There are a lot of fanfiction writers who have been sought out by strangers who have reviewed their stories just to tell them that they are awful human beings for writing Chair stories and deserve to be sold into sexual slavery. Far worse comments than that have been made to people just because they enjoy Chuck and Chair. People are afraid to post on many message boards because they are being harassed. People are being harassed on facebook. There’s a tumblr called “fuckingchairfans” devoted to hating on those who like Chuck and Blair. Whatever Chuck does to Blair no real living human gets hurt by it. These comments and these threats hurt actual people, many of whom are teenagers. Many of whom feel a tight knot in their stomach when they check their twitter feed or tumblr responses. That is the difference.

I hear these activists saying that there are no excuses for Chuck’s behavior. Then they should be viewed in the same light. There are no excuses for their behavior. If it’s not okay for Chuck to drunkenly punch a wall when he loses the love of his life then it’s not okay to belittle, mock and insult others when they like characters or couples that you don’t or slander the actors portraying the characters in question. Especially not when the former only hurts people who are made up and the latter hurts people who are very much real.

Standing up for what you believe in is admirable. But I know one thing for sure. People who are truly against abuse do not bully others online. People who think: “You’ll never marry anyone else. You’re mine” is a horrible thing to say do not tell others that they deserve to have their head cut off for enjoying a work of fiction. People who are concerned with the emotional well-being of others do not harass strangers on the Internet. People who are concerned with what message is being sent do not campaign for their cause through slander, harassment and bullying. Nowhere in this type of behavior do I see anything that proves they feel abuse is wrong or that their slogans are more than empty words. If anything I think they are vastly damaging all serious campaigns against abuse not to mention disrespecting the people who experience it in real life. Whatever this campaign of theirs is about the word “abuse” is a means to an end and not the issue they are fighting. You do not fight abuse by abusing others.

I am asking you not to give in to bullying. I am asking you not to show them that harassments and threats are rewarded.

You know what your intentions were with the scene in episode 420. Stand by it. Don’t let bullies dictate what you should say or do. If you do then what have you actually gained? You’ve proved that abuse on a TV show is wrong (which we all knew already) but emotionally abusing strangers in real life over a TV show is right.

Remember you have support. For every person out there who’s complaining there are numerous who support you. If you give in to the bullies now you will have taught them that their behavior is the proper way to get your attention and to get their way. If you honestly feel that you should apologise for episode 420 then do so on your own terms. But logic tells me that if you felt that way you would have apologised already. Or not written that scene at all, not directed it that way, not have included it in the episode.

Remember the vast majority of the viewers were not offended by episode 420. Remember real abuse victims have said they were not offended and some have said they are more offended by people equating Chuck’s actions to the pain and humiliation they have suffered. Remember that many of the activists have also been crying “abuse” over Chuck getting Blair a transfer to Columbia in season three. Remember that you know what defines abuse and you know whether or not you’ve written a scene to portray it. Remember that characters on other shows are doing far worse things to each other and nobody is morally outraged.

Stand your ground. Keep in mind what I’m sure you have been keeping in mind all along, that you can never please everybody and you shouldn’t let any fangroup dictate what you should or should not do.