Senza titolo

Tbf it is weird considering the relationship standards we have nowadays. It is too fairy-tale like. It doesnt sound as something we - normal people living in a normal world - would actually experience. And everything out of the ordinary we kinda do call 'weird'.

For example, in my family I've only witnessed a lot of emotional abuse (cheating, condescending behavior, guilty tripping etc) and even physical ones. Seeing a healthy relationship to our society standards was very strange to me. I cant understand trusting someone or believing in someone the way anyone does after what I witnessed that behavior since I was a child - and yes. I do therapy to deal with it - but if the normal healthy relationship to us is weird to me - the anidala the is portrayed in RoTS movies is... difficult tl understand. I treat it as a fairy tale romance, but I can understand why people would call it weird or freak4freak after marrying barely a month their first kiss, when i saw what a relationship build in years came to.

…Okay, that's a lot to unpack, anon. I'm sorry you've witnessed and experienced abuse in your life, but I don't think my inbox (i.e. someone else's blog) is the right place to talk to someone about it.

But to get to your actual points: yes, Anidala are a fairytale romance. As a matter of fact, they were intentionally written as such. This is a story about a space-demigod: everything is meant to be mythic and larger-than-life. I'm glad you at least seem to be able to understand that.

However, OP of the post you cited (and I peer-reviewed) was specifically calling against judging Anidala by Earth's (modern) relationship standards and is criticizing the fandom tendency to do so. The problem here is that "weird" and "freak" are both words that carry negative connotations but are frequently used by the fandom who ostensibly ship them, which can feel pathologizing, especially when the source material explicitly uplifts Anidala as a ship when those same words could be used to denounce them.

Also, sidenote on realism: Anidala getting married at the end of AOTC is not just a demonstration of their commitment to each other (re: mythic intensity of young love, symbolism of breaking Jedi rules, etc.) but also because Anakin is being drafted into a war and could literally die on the battlefield in a few weeks' time: they might not have a chance to get married at all if they decide to put it off (which we know isn't the case in-universe but they don't know that). This is a phenomenon that occurs both in fiction and in real life; it might be less common these days but it's still a thing that happens.

(and yes, whilst Anidala may result in tragedy in the Prequels, as OP notes, they are a fairytale because their forbidden love is transcendent and ultimately triumphant. Padme's unconditional love and faith in Anakin's goodness is vindicated in Anakin's return to his True Self in RotJ, aka the 'eucatastrophe' of the Original Trilogy.)

Why do people think cinema is supposed to reflect what is 'normal' in our world? and why it is justified to think anything that doesn't reflect our world is 'weird' in a negative or off-putting sense?

Where's the sense of wonder? the suspension of disbelief that, for much of human history, used to be requisite for any kind of story immersion? Where's the Romanticism? the appreciation for genre? the implicit understanding that myth and fairytale are less about what is 'real', and more about what is true ?

OP's response is spot-on, but anon's ask is making me deeply depressed. Because it shows not only an inability to escape the mundane reality of our world, but also that of our time. The saga was originally created in 1970s/80s, and then the 1990s/2000s. So the story, characters, themes, relationships, and so on ought to be understood within the context of the era in which they were written. But even more pertinently.... this particular story should be understood within its setting.... aka, 'a long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away'.

...that is, in other words, 'Once upon a time'. A time that belongs to the distant, mythic past. To a fairytale.

Characters must make choices.

Characters should often make bad choices before they make good choices.

Character choices should drive the vast majority of the plot. Characters reacting to having random stuff thrown at them is far less interesting than characters reacting to the stuff they've thrown after it's ricocheted around and comes bouncing back toward them.

If a character refuses to make a choice, there better be consequences for that too, and you better have a damn clear way of showing those consequences to the reader and the character.

Focusing on Sunrise On The Reaping, here are my tumblr Hunger Games posts, focusing on Lenore Dove, Haymitch, Haydove, and a side of critiquing Effie Trinket (and Hayffie).

Chapter 1: in defence of lenore dove

Chapter 2: in defence of haydove

Chapter 3: I love lenore dove (& haydove)

Chapter 4: in defence of the sotr epilogue

Chapter 5: ma and sid's deaths mattered to haymitch

the literal book: 'Plutarch tells me with confidence. "... Anyway, I pitched Effie last-minute and they jumped on the idea'. this sounds like cronyism, not being forced to do something.

and what would effie be being punished for? re-reading the 'effie dresses them' scene, drusilla is telling people that effie dressed them as a COMPLIMENT and so that her estranged husband MAGNO does not unduly get credit for her good job. which effie doesn't want because magno (who is much socially higher than her as a hunger games stylist) would make a fuss and reflect badly on her. effie is well-versed in capitol politics! snow is not mad at her for dressing haymitch, he's probably more like yes someone who will execute my vision!

and she does treat haymitch with some respect and dignity in SOTR! and then praises the hunger games unprompted in the next sentence. she is really an encapsulation of 'etiquette is important! anyway yay human rights violations <3'

effie represents the average capitol citizen who goes on to use the hunger games to advance her own social standing but is a better person than drusilla or snow (not particularly hard), yet even after decades of direct contact with reaped children, she cannot understand that the hunger games are wrong. she just accepts it as normal.

she was not kind.

Percy COMFORTING THALIA because she's so devastated about Annabeth going missing. Just your local feral unhinged loverboy everyone

asking after Clarisse's well-being to a grumpy Ares camper

parenting Nico

having the nerve to feel SELFISH for forgetting about Grover's life's ambition even when Grover like two sentences before this forgot that Annabeth's life is in active danger.

reblog if you believe anon is wrong and writers are writers, no matter what they write about. no matter how they portray these taboo topics.

reblog if you believe art can be about topics that are controversial, taboo or outright disturbing, and artists who create controversial, taboo or outright disturbing art are as valid as artists who create art of conservative values.