#juliabohemian

I don't get why Thor needs a 4th movie. Is it just to prove that he's more interesting than Tony or Steve? Because we don't need another movie to know that he isn't.

Not to compound your heartache, but I’ve been writing about this stuff since 2012 and it’s even worse than that.  

The entire Thor narrative has brought Odin’s family full circle back to where they began in 2011′s first film.  I mean this in terms of filial dynamics and discrete roles within a dysfunctional family structure.  Not only is Loki still always the responsible party for everyone’s missteps and crimes, the “progress” that the family has made is actually a regression that reinforces his scapegoat role.

This is why when others are endlessly celebratory about the moment in Infinity War during which Loki refers to himself as “Odinson,” I cringe.

Because Loki WAS allowed a redemption, in Ragnarok, and then, in Infinity War: but one contingent upon Thor’s, and, by extension, Odin’s, idea of what connotes heroism (and, even though Mjolnir is long gone, “worthiness”).   Loki became a hero when Loki stopped having his own thoughts about what to do after Hela’s invasion, when he stopped having ANY healthy notions of self-preservation, and when he followed THOR’S plan to defeat Hela.  ONLY when Loki emulated Thor did Loki become a hero.  The one thing that has always driven Loki to lack inner peace has been incessant negative comparison to Thor.  So it’s only in an extremely toxic message of SELF-ERASURE that he completes the Thor films’ narrative of “healing” and “redemption.”  Just like when Odin imprisoned both Hela and Loki under Asgard, to ritually erase them both from the fabric of his family tree, only FAR more subtle and insidious, by giving him NO OTHER OPTION FOR LOVE AND ACCEPTANCE BY HIS SOLE LIVING FAMILY MEMBER (Thor) EXCEPT TO “CHOOSE” TO STAND AND FIGHT (AND DIE) AT THOR’S SIDE.  

Loki is only granted redemption when Loki IS NO LONGER LOKI.

 And the freakiest part about this is that the broader Marvel audience has accepted this as “evidence” that Loki “was a hero all along” and it is the ONE THING that has made fans lighten up on hating him.  The story stuffed Loki, who is a marvelous gray-amoral antihero, in a hero box--and not just ANY HERO BOX, but the box labeled “ultimate self-sacrifice in death, even against characterization and logic.”

Think about it.  

--What was Loki in Thor 1?  A passive receptacle for Thor’s warmongering and impulsivity, who must “shut up” and “know his place” at all times, whose plans to divert Thor from a disastrous place on the Throne were thinly veiled by the “heroes” as “treason” and “a whiny jealous younger brother’s petty vendetta.”  

--What was Loki in The Dark World?  A prisoner Odin and Thor genuinely hoped the world would forget, whose inconvenient truths about mirroring his father and brother’s warmongering on a protected (translate: already “owned”--claimed by Thor as “his” because of Jane Foster)  territory of Asgard (Midgard) got him thrown in prison for life. Odin was angrier that Loki brought up these truths of Odin’s hypocrisy than he was that Loki tried to take Midgard as his own.  Because unlike Thor, Odin couldn’t control Loki’s cognitions and beliefs. He never could.   And when was Loki released from prison? Only when he became useful to Thor.  A passive receptacle, being retrained as such, being told his mission basically to escape Thanos’s abuse with Midgard as a consolation prize was basically just a “childish tantrum” for which he should be gaslit and punished. And when was Loki forgiven? When did Thor weep for him, and say he’d take memory of his noble deeds to their father?  ONLY when it appeared he had made a self-sacrifice in extremis, and was dying.

--What was Loki in Ragnarok?  A traitor and a laughable clown. How dare he lay around eating grapes and watching theater that craftily reinvented his image to a previously disdainful populace?  How dare he SURVIVE?  Thor is angrier at Loki for surviving, seemingly, than he is relieved! Simply because Loki didn’t die for him, so of course, to Thor, it’s tantamount to another betrayal, it can’t be anything in between total self-effacement and total selfishness: it isn’t all about Thor, God forbid!  Loki must be again a passive receptacle! How dare he cunningly outwit all of that lifelong conditioning to be silent and obeisant?  So Thor acts juvenile, and emotionally strongarms Loki (yep, electrocution scene) and refuses to speak to him, and unfairly blames him for Hela’s return (WHEN IT’S ODIN WHO RAISED HELA TO BE A MONSTER AND THEN IMPRISONED HER! but if you’re groomed to be a narcissist by your father and emotionally dependent on your father’s praise then you can’t turn on your father, EVER) untilllll? Loki shows up with a ship from Sakaar and fights on Thor’s behalf.  

“If you were here I’d give you a hug” translates to “If you would only abide by MY rules for what connotes a good person (cause after all Thor knows best, right? ‘That’s what heroes do!’) then I’d reward you for it.”  And the whole movie ends with Loki going “I’m here” which is tantamount to saying “I YIELD.”

PASSIVE. RECEPTACLE.

Ergo Odin remains the benevolent all-controlling patriarch. Ergo Thor remains the petulant narcissist who always gets his way. Ergo Frigga, dead, is more absent from stopping the toxicity than ever, because fridging! Ergo, Loki remains the silent scapegoat.

My Tumblr Crushes:

wash-tell-me-im-pretty

turnswithus

matchgirl42

juliabohemian

coppercorn-and-cauldron

luthienebonyx

alwaysdearie

mrs-stiltskin

I have all kinds of lovely tags and messages and fic notifications (and multiple ones from some people!), and I *will* get to them! I’m not ignoring you, my dears, I promise—I’m just utterly overwhelmed by The Everythingness of It All.

Here’s a Loki to convey my apologies (especially to @writernotwaiting, @malicemanaged, @mastreworld, @juliabohemian, and @pedeka), and to keep you company for now!

I never read it as a win for Nat. Loki didn't reveal anything he didn't completely intend to. If anything, he played her.

I disagree. I know this is a common thing that pops up especially in the Loki end of fandom, but I think it undersells Natasha’s ability to manipulate people and undermines the whole scene (which, frankly, I love).

Loki tends to underestimate people around him, and he definitely underestimates humans - both him and Thor have a lingering tendency to see humans as - well, Thor says it later in the movie: “petty and tiny.” (True, Thor’s under the (scepter) influence at the time, but I think the scepter mostly just distorted what was already there rather than manufacturing emotions that didn’t exist.) He pegged Natasha when she walked in as someone there for a selfish reason - to save Clint - because that’s the kind of thing he would do, and Loki sees himself in Natasha (as is even more obvious in the speech he gives her, which, as discussed often in fandom, is as applicable to Loki himself as it is to her, right down to the mirror image of his face being visible almost superimposed on Natasha’s as he’s talking). 

Additionally, as someone for whom vulnerability is anathema, Loki I think has a very hard time taking the position that Natasha does - pretending at weakness. Especially at this point in his timeline, when everything Loki is doing is about acting bigger than he is (right down to the costume), the idea of someone actively exposing their metaphorical throat as part of a tactic is genuinely something I don’t think would occur to Loki. 

I consider Ragnarok Thor to be woefully inconsistent with other films. My analysis of Ragnarok Thor is based on the premise that the film is intended to be part of a continuous narrative -despite its failure to be so. All of my analysis is based on my study of human behavior/child development & has zero to do with who I do or do not ship. I do not mind you disagreeing with my views & continue to enjoy your discourse. But I do not wish to be misunderstood.

No, I didn’t think it was a consequence of your not shipping Thorki; sorry for giving that impression. If anything it would be the reverse: Loki fans who have a darker view of Thor to begin with are unlikely to ship him with a character they love. (That doesn’t really explain the Thor*-stanning Thorki shippers who seem to believe that Loki has absolutely no redeeming characteristics, maybe beyond physical attractiveness... but then I don’t really expect consistency from people who don’t seem to know what it is.)

I’m looking forward to the Grandmaster awkwardly hitting on Loki and Loki being like “well, when in Rome, I guess…”

Not sure what you mean by abelist. They are simple people for sure, which is what makes them so easy for Dopplecooper to manipulate, but I don’t think they are developmentally disabled. They are certainly skilled in their own way, but you are either that devoted to someone out of love or fear, and they don’t really seem to be afraid of him per se.

i’m a bitter mentally ill southerner who has a nasty gut reaction to the phrase ‘crazy hill billies’ my dude. i’m not saying they’re geniuses its just....really bad wording. and I agree that their whole situation makes it easier for booper to manipulate them

not much to analyze here. kinohole’s whole response had a lot of wording I didn’t like the tone of and don’t feel like engaging with  ¯\_(ツ)_/¯