strahd blogging

We only see her in very few scenes (all from Strahd's POV) and she's always very gentle and soft spoken.

Which makes completely sense since she was a lowborn orphan trying to make a good impression on her future brother in law, who is not only the ruler of the valley but also a feared war criminal. Of course she would try to be as nice as possible in front of him.

"all my life this place has loomed over the village. when dorian was here, we all lived with the dread of him as the elders live with the pain of their bones. when your armies came, we were in fear of what might happen to us, even as we rejoiced in our freedom. but the years of your rule have been peaceful. you've taken away our fears, and we are grateful."

while strahd very much disregards this sentiment, it still gives us an idea of who tatyana is, how she thinks and what she knows: she has clearly taken the time to observe the changing dynamic of her village, reflecting upon the impacts different rulers (dorian vs strahd) can and do have on the community, and understands how different styles of governance can and do affect the lives of the villagers in various ways (dread vs peace). this suggests she has some level of political maturity to her, as well as insightfulness and introspection to her character. you really can tell a lot from her, imo, just from that conversation alone.

she also carries a lot of emotional depth and understanding when it comes to her fellow villagers. she does not just perceive their fears and and emotions, she has lived them herself; she is, afterall, an orphan who grew up during the conflict! it is not 'their' dread - she very deliberately uses 'we' and 'us'. it is why i love to think of tatyana as strahd's true narrative foil because it is clear she truly embodies a deep connection to the barovian people. she is so clearly attuned to them emotionally and physically like her own pulse.

ok don't know which post this is about since i haven't posted anything in a bit, so i'll just say that speaking up about whitewashing ireena and the biphobia/erasure towards strahd isn't wrong.

i'm not sorry that it has apparently made you or others uncomfortable. speaking up about these things is important even if others may disagree.

i'm not telling people "what to do" with their dnd. of course everyone has the right to their own personal autonomy, it's just important to recognise and understand that the individual choices you make can still perpetuate harmful societal norms and attitudes. yes, even in your private fake dnd game. addressing issues like racism and other forms of discrimination requires introspection and personal accountability because meaningful change begins within oneself and extends to interactions in public spheres.

i would consider and think very deeply about how your private actions align with your stated public values. maybe consider why there might be a disconnect. why do you (general 'you') claim to support LGBT rights, yet continue to perpetuate biphobia/erasure? maybe reflect on the underlying beliefs or biases that may be influencing your behaviour, and challenge yourself to align your actions more closely with the inclusive values you claim to publicly profess.

the same goes for whitewashing and racism. reflect on why there may be discrepancies between your public stance against racism and your private actions perpetuating whitewashing or racial stereotypes.

also the thing with dnd (and by extension, fiction itself) not being "that serious" (which i assume you mean 'not real' or 'not influencing real life') is like. a common misconception. i know it's a form of entertainment for most people, but like every other form of fictional entertainment, it often reflects and reinforces our societal attitudes, values, and norms. fiction can and does shape our perceptions, attitudes, and behaviours, influencing how we perceive ourselves, others, and the world around us.

what this means is if you're perpetuating harmful stereotypes or discriminatory portrayals in your fictional story or games, they can contribute to the normalisation of harmful attitudes and behaviours in real life. this is why it's always important to critically examine and challenge harmful media (dnd) representation and also critically examine yourself and where your own biases may come from.

way to say you don't give a shit about people. this is a large reason why i've distanced myself from my cos blog aside from university responsibilities because my god, a lot of people do not give a shit about the safety of minorities. biphobia and whitewashing may seem like small things to some people, apparently, but biphobic tropes and the whitewashing of characters is extremely harmful to the bisexual community and to poc players of ttrpgs. it is ERASURE and it is both real and serious.

especially considering the history of racist fantasy tropes, it is salient that we remain mindful of any outdated ideas in our games.

it takes maybe 5 min to peruse r/dndhorrorstories or r/rpghorrorstories to see stories from thousands of people about games that harmed them emotionally. i know two people personally who were traumatized by dnd groups who used the mechanics of the game to sexually assault their respective characters. just bc these events occurred in the realm of fiction, does not mean either of these people walked away unscathed. the ability to say that fiction cannot or does not remotely affect you comes from a place of privilege, because you yourself have never felt hurt by harmful representation or erasure that overlaps with one or more of your identities. it is not about censorship or shitting on peoples' fun, it's about respect.

lets imagine. for a moment. that strahd goes through a successful redemption arc (lets go of tatyana, therefore breaking the curse and freeing barovia or something). how do you think he would act?

would his personality change significantly or would he just be the same sans the tatyana obsession? would he remain in barovia, or would he leave? what would his ambitions be?

that in mind, to remain redeemed strahd would have to stay in barovia and do the thing he set out to do years and years ago, the charge given to him by his father, by his kingdom, by his title. his ambitions would transform into responsibilities and he would ensure the valley's protection and prosperity after having neglected those things for so long. this would in turn be a way to let go of tatyana but also honor what she longed for before dying (peace for her people)

i see strahd as calm, pragmatic, and fair post-redemption. perhaps a bit sullen, grieving what he had to give up to be here but choosing it every time because that's what the woman he loves would want. i don't think tatyana as written in i, strahd wants him to choose her, and this is why to redeem himself he would have to actively not choose her but instead choose to live how she would want him to. this also bypasses the idea that some people have of death = redemption because it doesn't. the end is a cop-out. there's no work done, there's no real changes made. to actually sit down and take care of his people is putting in the work, it is achieving actual redemption.

this is a controversial take tho bc i know even people within my own cos party disagree on some of these points, which is smth that makes this module particularly challenging to run. ultimately redemption looks different to different people, the question of what makes a good man can inspire a lot of emotions and such a philosophically and ethically fraught module can potentially be a bit draining, but extremely intriguing and ripe for storytelling.

to me, largely due to my own views and interests in political science, intl. relations and governance, his redemption would be politically inclined. so i like to see his redemption as a transformation from hobbes' tyrant-leviathan to kant's fair statesman once more.

i. the monster's body is a cultural body

ii. the monster always escapes

iii. the monster is the harbinger of category crisis

iv. the monster dwells at the gates of difference

v. the monster polices the borders of the possible

vi. fear of the monster is really a kind of desire

these are all direct quotes from jeffrey jerome cohen's "monster culture (seven theses)" (full pdf linked) i highly encourage you to read it yourself!

that said, while i think cohen's writing is evocative, it can be a little dense, so while i'm here, here's my capsule summary (you can also hear me talk about this in the first episode of my podcast) (listen to @ghostswerepeopletoo)

i. the monster's body is a cultural body - The monster is a work of fiction to be analyzed through tools of literary and sociological theory.

ii. the monster always escapes - As long as the cultural fear from which the monster stems persists, the monster will reappear in retellings, reimaginings, and sequels.

iii. the monster is the harbinger of category crisis - Monsters defy binaries and challenge easy comprehension or categorization.

iv. the monster dwells at the gates of difference - The monster represents the Other.

v. the monster polices the borders of the possible - Tales of the monster exist to discourage unacceptable or taboo behaviors.

vi. fear of the monster is really a kind of desire - Subjects can vicariously participate in the disruption of the social order through the monster.

anyway, the vampire motif is complex and has been constantly in flux and reworked since the nineteenth century. it is specific to the cultural, historical and personal experiences of the authors of vampire fiction where no singular vampire figure exists and there is no set canon. the nineteenth century vampire motif can be for famine, aristocracy / class divide, anxieties surrounding migration and ‘the other’, disease, life and death, oral sadism, fame (byron), the ‘new woman’, eroticism, sexuality, addiction, menstruation, blood as guilt, war, necrophilia etc. and yes, there are precursors for the vampire who can love.

The forward to 2016’s Curse of Strahd (CoS) module now makes me almost irrationally angry. CoS got me into the world of Barovia, but was quickly left behind as I discovered the rich world of AD&D 2e’s Ravenloft setting. Now, looking back over my old 5e source book, I can’t help but sour at how so many characters have been stripped down and minced into Walmart versions of the 2e NPCs I came to know and love.

(In this Essay I will: point out the queer erasure, literary reductionism, and patronizing commentary that lowkey warps 5e CoS for the worse, thanks to Hickman’s forward)

(Thank you @tatyanafederovna for the OG post which reaffirmed that I’m not totally crazy for hating Hickman’s stuff)

Nearly made the mistake of not uploading this sketch

I thought that since I’m finally on tumblr, maybe it would be worth posting a few older things first before the current ones.