fwish

"How Does The Narrative Justify Jax's Behavior?"

I'm going to break this argument down into three layers, with each layer being less direct than the last. We will be going over Scenes from the show itself, then Framing, and lastly the show's Conclusion. At the same time we will be referencing Gooseworx's own statements, and I will also be doing a comparison to Bojack Horseman, because I feel that show provides the best example of what I'm talking about. It is important to consider ALL of these elements combined when analyzing this argument, as while some points may seem weaker or insignificant on their own, it is THE SUM OF ALL PARTS that matters most. We have to take a step back and look at the full picture here.

So without further ado...

SCENES: IT WAS JUST A JOKE...UNTIL IT WASN'T

Probably the easiest batch of evidence we have are many direct scenes within the show itself.

When we talk about the narrative, we have to think of it as a tool, an entity even. The narrative is the tool of the narrator, and it is the strongest tool a writer has to convey complex patterns of thought that there just aren't words for. The narrative is also an entity, that says who and what goes.

In every episode, there are multiple moments where Jax antagonizes members of the circus, namely Gangle and Zooble. With Gangle, there is of course the gag of breaking the comedy mask repeatedly, but also physically shoving and pushing her, and constantly seeking her attention and involvement. Zooble and Ragatha are often collateral, usually being hurt or inconvenienced by Jax's antics as biproduct.

Now, when I initially watched this show, I hardly took these actions seriously, and chalked it up to nothing more as "cartoon shenanigans". While the setting and reactions of the characters fueled this belief, the narrative itself treated these scenes as just that and nothing more. In every single one of these instances, we move on from the pain that Jax causes almost instantly, with hardly any character acknowledging his behaviors unless they're directly affected. It's light banter, and at best, the narrative DISMISSES his actions. Whatever Jax does has no real consequences that carry on to the next episode, or they can be instantly fixed.

Jax's actions have no bearing on the plot.

Jax can do no harm.

Until...he actually kinda does.

As the show progresses, we get to see more and more glimpses of the psyche of the other characters. Namely Gangle.

In Episode 6, Gangle has a conversation with Zooble where she expresses fear at angering Jax for not picking them as her partner to play. Earlier, when the game had been announced, Jax had grabbed Gangle first and tried to walk off with her before she pulled away. She tells Zooble that Jax will "probably make it hurt" and expresses feelings of dehumanization brought about by his repeated and consistent abuse.

Remember these concepts: REPETITION and CONSISTENCY.

Another moment in this episode to speak about is Ragatha's confrontation with Jax. As Jax and Pomni get separated, Ragatha tells Jax she knows what they're up to hanging out with Pomni, and alludes to Ribbit. As a result, Jax shoots her to near oblivion. There is an irony in this scene where, earlier, Jax had been encouraging Pomni to let loose and not to think about the real world logistics of shooting a gun. However, the way that Jax shot Ragatha was VERY real; from the way her body jerked around from the impact, and the way her stuffing flew all over the place like a certain crimson bodily fluid.

Gooseworx had mentioned in a post before that she initially planned for Ragatha to have plush organs. Given the amount of times that Ragatha is stabbed, tortured, and generally tossed around, this scene could have been far more grisly.

And yet...

Jax's actions have no bearing on the plot.

Jax can do no harm.

Do we ever discuss how Ragatha felt being assaulted by Jax multiple times? Do any characters directly call out Jax for his abuse of Gangle bringing her to the point of being placed out of her humanity? Do the other characters find out the truth of Ribbit?

No. It is completely dismissed. Despite the stakes changing drastically, the show treats these moments as the exact same when it comes to plot weight. We get a brief establishing glimpse, and then we move on. Whatever consequences that may occur are quickly forgotten about, or resolved fairly quickly (often off screen).

At best, the narrative DISMISSES Jax's behavior. But as we start to delve deeper into the layers of the writing, this dismissal becomes something much more sinister.

It becomes an EXCUSE.

FRAMING: WHO IS TELLING THE STORY?

As someone with autism, one of the problems I often run into is that when I am told or feel prompted to explain my behavior, people assume I am giving an excuse. And I think to myself, well that's not fair at all! I'm merely explaining why I did what I did, or what happened. It is very frustrating, but these moments have given me a lot of insight as to what often causes this miscommunication.

What is the difference between Explanations vs Excuses? The answer is Framing!

Let's say you're told to watch an expensive vase for a friend. While watching the vase, you go and close an open window, and upon walking back you bump into the vase and it shatters. When your friend asks you what happens you have two general options...

"I bumped into the vase by accident."

"The window was open! I had to close it and then I shattered the vase by accident!"

Now, one of these is an explanation and the other is an excuse. It's important to note that excuses CAN INCLUDE explanations.

If you said that the first is an explanation, and the second is an excuse, then you would be correct. Why? The first statement is an explanation of what happened, it is a direct and logical argument. The vase shattered because you bumped into it by accident, simple. While tone and sentiment can be important to help sway the hypothetical feelings of your friend, you explained exactly what happened.

On the other hand, the second statement is an excuse because it is providing irrelevant information. One has to consider that it was possible for you to close the window and NOT shatter the vase. Because there is no correlation between these two events, you are making an excuse. Now if instead it was...

"The window was open! A bird flew through and I tried to shoo it out, but I knocked the vase over by accident!"

That's yet again another explanation. The presence of the bird is in direct correlation to the vase shattering, because you were in a panic. Now sometimes, people may argue that that is still an excuse and those people are assholes. While Explanation vs Excuse can largely be up to interpretation of the person you're talking to, the distinction to be made between the two is CORRELATION. This is a principle of Framing.

So, returning back to TADC, let's talk about the Framing. The scene I will be citing strongly, is the conversation between Ribbit and Jax.

For starters, a very obvious detail that must be pointed out is that this scene is from Jax's perspective. We will never know the true extent of how Ribbit felt before or leading up to this, again, the narrative deems it irrelevant. What we DO see is Jax explaining to Ribbit how they believe they killed their mom. Despite Ribbit showing Jax nothing but understanding and kindness, Jax begins to retract after this moment of vulnerability and drives Ribbit to suicide. This is something that can not be debated, as the exact wording "drives Ribbit to suicide" is something that Gooseworx confirmed recently in some hypothetical canon art she posted of Jax.

But how is this moment framed? Why is it excused?

Well that's simple. There is no correlation between any of the information that Jax has mentioned and his behavior towards Ribbit. When Jax first arrived in the circus, there were only 4 other members: Ragatha, Ribbit, Kaufmo, and Kinger. We see many scenes of them treating Jax with appreciation and comfort, inviting Jax on adventures and taking them around the circus to fun hangout spots. Jax had no reason to treat Ribbit with animosity, an animosity that extended to directing Kaufmo and Ragatha's behavior towards Ribbit as well.

This particular treatment is something that Jax has not experienced...really at all. And it is not treatment that can be inferred or even speculated either. You could if you really wanted to, but there is something even deeper at work here.

Now we can finally discuss how the show JUSTIFIES Jax's actions.

THE CONCLUSION: INTROSPECTION...? HARDLY

For this part of the argument, I am going to now introduce the Bojack Horseman reference I spoke of earlier.

Bojack Horseman is a character and show that has been floating around the TADC critical spaces for a bit now, especially now that the show has concluded. Bojack Horseman is a six season sitcom about a washed up sitcom celebrity star navigating the latter portion of his life. Bojack Horseman is self-destructive, egotistical, aggressive, and abusive. He is an absolute scumbag from as early as the first episode where he is actively sleeping with his agent: Princess Caroline.

Around the time that Bojack was still being actively produced, a lot of fans of the show had expressed their love and admiration for Bojack as a character. There was a certain portion of the fanbase that praised Bojack for being a brilliantly misunderstood character, a tragic anti-hero within his own life. Those people...completely missed the point of the show. So much so that the writers DIRECTLY called these people out in Season 5 EP 10, using Diane as their mouthpiece.

"That's not the point of Philbert. To watch it and 'feel okay'."

Throughout the series of Bojack Horseman, we learn...pretty much everything we could need to know about Bojack's upbringing. His rough and abusive home life, his early dependency on alcohol, and even the implied physical and sexual abuse that he went through. From a young age, Bojack learned about interaction and relationships through the television. He lives his life as a sitcom constantly, and became mentally stunted at the age he first debuted on TV.

As we finally get to the first half of the sixth season, it seems as though Bojack has come to a thorough understanding of why he is the way he is. He seems to understand who he is. Both his parents are dead, he has a stable relationship with his half-sister Hollyhock, he's quit his substance abuse, and has devoted himself to helping out the newer generation of the acting community. Most of his formerly abusive and toxic relationships he has ended or improved; namely with characters like Todd, Diane, and even Princess Caroline.

And this seems to be a good thing. It seems that Bojack has finally done the introspective work to unpack and dismantle the layers of his toxicity. The inciting incident for Bojack to finally take rehab seriously was when he strangled his coworker on Philbert: Gina. Everything should be fine because Bojack was abused...and became an abusive person....but now that he's made amends with that abuse and cut off the people/stressors that aggravated him...he's doing fine.

Right?

.

.

.

Enter Biscuits Braxby.

Now the show does make a point to say that one of the main motivating factors for Biscuits' second interview with Bojack was purely for the ratings. But we can't let a sentiment like that distract us from the very revolutionary concept that Bojack Horseman gave us.

Biscuits interviews Bojack twice.

The first interview, is one that I would say is akin to what many people seem to take away from Jax's character. It is the story that the narrative went with, tragic as it is, and that is the fact that Jax could not help being all of the things that were done to him. Jax is...a culmination of all the moments of repression, of never stepping in your identity, of not knowing the right choices to make and even when in possession of that knowledge, still being scared regardless.

In our first Bojack interview, Biscuits does a very good job of making Bojack look like a good person. She asks all the right questions about all the tragedies that have occurred throughout the series; namely Sarah Lynn's death, which in this interview, is framed as something that happened TO BOJACK. Her tragedy is what allegedly made him want to turn his life around, even amidst all the mistakes, it stuck with him. While he admits to the wrong that he's done and the mistakes made, the emphasis is on how he's a better person, on his introspection and growth. While Jax's story is far more tragic, that is what the show decides to go with as well. The framing is eerily similar when you consider Ribbit's suicide.

But then Biscuits interviews Bojack a second time, and that's when shit gets real.

The second interview is a lot more direct. Rather than starting with the vague questioning from earlier, Biscuits gets right to the point and immediately interrogates Bojack on how he brought alcohol to the set of Horsin' Around. She pushes further, carving out the trend of the many female characters Bojack has had inappropriate interactions with throughout the series; from helping a teen mom sneak into a house party to dating a woman who had just woken up from a 30 year coma.

The story of Sarah Lynn is tragic, but it is not just a tragedy, it is a pattern of behavior. A pattern of abusing women and manipulating them through intense power dynamics. A pattern that even Bojack hadn't recognized himself. Why?

Because it's the one pattern he couldn't blame on someone else.

And we realize, in this moment, that Bojack actually HASN'T done the introspective work, that there's still layers deep to his psyche that he hasn't bothered to unpack, and in one afternoon all of his progress is unraveled. Because it was never really progress, he never really dug that deep.

Hurt people can hurt people, yes this is true. But when we talk about deeply systematic issues like misogyny, ableism, and of course racism, it's a little deeper than that. The fact is that there's no one incident that can make you bigoted, that's just not something you can blame on someone else. In order to be a systematic abuser, you have to REPEATEDLY and CONSISTENTLY engage with rhetoric. Likewise, in order to unlearn these behaviors, you must do the same.

When I look at Jax from The Amazing Digital Circus, and I look at the conversations that surround them, I see a lot of people looking to excuse or even explain the bigotry in a multitude of ways, and none of them address the sentiment that you just don't become bigoted because something bad happened to you. You just don't.

As a Black AND Trans individual I refuse to acknowledge that as a valid argument because it reinforces the burden of marginalized people to be kinder or nicer to their oppressors to avoid being oppressed. That if one of us is rude or cruel then it sets ALL of us back. It's ridiculous, it's exhausting, it's incel behavior. What would I want to do with a person like that anyways? What good does it do for me to have someone in my circle that's only an ally if I'm nice to them?

BONUS ROUND: THIS IS NOT INCRIMINATION

I wasn't initially going to add this part, but as I was rereading your ask there was something you said that was very concerning to me, and I wanted to address that also.

You said the narrative is incriminating, but this is not true. The narrative at no point acknowledges the full extent of harm that Jax has done, without performing any of the previous three tactics. Additionally, however, there is something else the show does that is horrific, and sadly it is once again about Gangle.

In Episode 9, Pomni enters Jax's mindscape after they abstract. Jax's mindscape is filled with many doors, and behind each of these doors is a fantasy scenario in which Jax is torturing or assaulting a member of the cast; Zooble, Pomni...and Gangle.

Gangle's fantasy is one where Zooble has abstracted. Gangle is wearing her manic mask and bossing everyone around, similar to her behavior in Episode 4, to ensure that Zooble's funeral goes on successfully. Jax approaches wearing the maid dress, claiming to be wearing it in solidarity of Zooble's "freaky gender thing" before approaching Gangle and flirting with her.

When Jax is asked to explain the archetypes of the cast, he describes Gangle as "submissive and agreeable". Throughout the show, Gangle is generally a very meek and timid character, who rarely stands up for herself unless in certain instances (ie. wearing her happy mask or wielding a tommy gun). This is the version of Gangle that Jax is most familiar with. The Happy Mask wasn't introduced until Episode 4, as Zooble had had the mask in their room up until that very moment.

So this fantasy...is a recent development. In fact, you could argue that at least two of them are, as Jax had never seen Gangle's other mask before, and Pomni had just got there.

Something else to note, however, is that in this fantasy, as Jax is coercing Gangle to come to his room, she breaks. When I first saw this scene I was completely disgusted. She breaks and admits that she hates him, to which he responds by giving her the key to his room and walking off.

This is a fantasy. Jax believes Gangle is meant to be submissive and agreeable. And yet, in his own mind, Gangle is fighting back against him, against herself and the part of her that hates him. This internal struggle is something that Jax thought extensively about, and it has horrific implications. Jax always wants to be around Gangle regardless of the adventure, he always wants to have some form of control over he (ie. Candy Carrier Chaos and They All Get Guns) and they want her to fight back, but only a little. The break down is integral.

And Pomni witnessed this. She witnessed this and said absolutely nothing, and did nothing. Just like with Ribbit's suicide, the rest of the cast will never know what Jax truly thought, felt, or did. That was SUPPOSED to be a moment of incrimination, but it wasn't.

It just wasn't.

CONCLUSION: WHAT WE LEARN

The show concludes Jax's arc two ways. We get a conclusion for Jax's digital self, and we also get one for Jax's real world self.

In the digital world, the cast makes a shrine for Jax, modeled after Kinger's theory that the darkness calms down the abstracted victims. Does he make this shrine for his own wife, or even coworkers? No. They go in the glass aquarium like they're fish. Jax does get special treatment even while being abstracted, and as they prepare the shrine and mural, Gangle has yet again another moment where she reflects on Jax.

Earlier in the episode, when Jax had first abstracted, Gangle was the only one to have a unique reaction to the news. She expresses that she can't cry for him, that it's hard to feel bad, and that she doesn't know what to think. This is, of course, a very valid sentiment to have given the abuse he subjected her to. But as she looks at the shrine, a single tear finally sheds. Without saying anything, this moment is meant to speak volumes. It is a moment of reconcilliation and understanding, of forgiveness and willingness to let bygones be bygones.

In actuality, there are quite a lot of moments throughout Episode 8 and 9 where the cast forgives Jax. I mean we can't forget the "iconic":

This being in direct response to Zooble wanting to address Jax's behavior as of late when being told they all need to coexist and comfort each other, after realizing they can probably never leave. It's just not true, not even remotely. No one else in the circus is sexually harassing Gangle, or has pushed not one but TWO members to suicide. No one even comes close, so it can only serve to REDUCE the impact of Jax's actions even further.

This is dismissive. This is excusing. This is justifying.