Anyway Reblog To Make Sure All The Investors Know That, According To U/spez AKA Steve Huffman, The CEO

Manga is 100% superior, if only because it's not dumbed down/made more lighthearted for TV. Like, i watched 1st season (perpetually distracted by 'spot how they're cheaping out on animation/pad out screentime with animation(???)'), then read the manga, then haven't touched anime since. Between tumblr screencaps and being tempted to watch it i just think back to what they did to the source material in S1 and am instantly cured. That said, some bits do kind of feel like Asagiri has an agenda and that agenda is to make people write/read, but the manga is just better at willing suspension of disbelief/has higher concentration of The Good Stuff. By the time the truly stupid shit comes out, the author(s!) have signalled for long and hard enough that they know what they're doing/don't add stuff just because - so you just roll your eyes and roll with it. Plus, chapter-by-chapter it kind of feels like they address the immediate online commentary? Ex. "okay but how are they fed in Meursalt? -> next chapter you get an offhand panel showing you"

Sorry part 2 since I guess I really can't send you manga screencaps on anon but Meursalt also uses square shapes for the prison, which seems more industrial and real vs the hamsterball prison in the show. The glowing balls look like abilities, which wouldn't work on our damaged dearest, while a white and steel fifteen by fifteen box which separates him from the possibly ability derived space in the bottom level does work.

And yeah... I wouldn't trust twitter or any other online space for nuanced discourse but people have hated this show since it first came out. At least we are finally getting fed season 4 after a million years

Aha on ANON, that makes sense actually - the picture I got the other day was not an anon ask (I'm wiping tiny little tears from the corners of my eyes).

Listen, I am not an actual fan of Bungo Stray Dogs as a story. I'm an imposter, really, a fake fan. I'm there for certain characters, and some interesting bits about mashing them together and seeing unique abilities. The actual plot is like 90% Atsushi (whom I hate) and at the same time 40% bullshittery (math what's that?), 20% what the fuck is Asagiri taking, and 30% I can't stand seeing depression treated like this anymore time for fanfics.

I didn't get any sleep last night so I apologize if this sounds deranged and/or delirious but I thought I should come clean. I only enjoy BSD for anything revolving Dazai, Fyodor, Mori (when he's not salivating over Elise), Akutagawa (overdramatic edgelord though he is) and a handful of other characters' interactions and plot developments. My favorite episodes were the 15 Port Mafia days flashbacks, and then literally anything to do with Fyodor. And Dazai but that's obvious.

I should stop rambling. I bet the manga's better though. I just don't read manga except Tokyo Ghoul and yaoi (for drawing references of course).

Lu's Guide to Sin Analysis

Welp, since my brain is too focused on having K Corp Hong Lu go full unga bunga in Mirror Dungeons to write full analyses, I decided I might as well give something else to all the people starving for Limbus Theory content.

So, here we are. A basic guide on how I approach the Sin Analysis portion of my analyses, covering my personal interpretations for each Sin, as well as how to use those when analysing both E.G.Os and Identities.

That way, ya'll can dabble in doing some of this on your own when I'm too busy grinding my way to 400 hours of play time on Limbus to write up full analyses.

Sounds good? Awesome. Under the cut we go, wheeeee!

Sin Interpretations

Let's start with the most important part - the Sins themselves.

I want you to take a moment and think about your own associations with those Sins. Perhaps your immediate thought is to take the words used literally. Maybe you immediately think back to the Biblical ideas of the Seven Deadly Sins. Mayhaps there's some other media you know that also uses Sins in some way, which you subconsciously default to when thinking about them.

Whatever those associations are, I want you to throw them away.

That's right. Whatever is telling you that Lust = Horny, Wrath = Angry, Envy = Jealous, etc, etc? Throw all of those preconcieved notions away.

This is the biggest mistake I see people make when trying to analyse Identities and E.G.O based on their Sins - they assume that those Sins have the same meanings in the context of Limbus as the popular, more common interpretations of them.

And while, sure, some of them can definitely overlap with what one would expect them to be, I think relying on those during analysis instead of trying to understand what the game itself is trying to tell us by using those Sins as symbols is doing its storytelling a massive disservice.

Do I think my personal interpretations of the Sins are a 100% accurate reading? No, of course not. I can't see into the mind of Kim Ji-Hoon or whoever else at Project Moon might have been the mastermind behind deciding what Sins connect to what. I have no way of knowing what exactly they intended here.

However, I do wish to believe that my interpretations not only strive to meet the game's storytelling on its own terms, but also hopefully make further analysis based on those interpretations a bit easier to wrap one's head around.

...God I really need to stop writing massive preambles and just get to the fucking point.

So let's actually get to The Fucking Point. Sin Interpretations, one by one. Let's fucking do it.

Wrath

The flames of revolution burn bright in the face of cold winds.

Wrath is the Sin of self-righteousness and defiance. To act with Wrath is to decide that one deserves better, that things around then should bend to their will, and then take matters into their own hands. It's the Sin of deciding one has the right to change something simply because they don't like the current state of things.

There are many ways one can act because of Wrath. It can show through trying to rebel against authority, to subvert one's fate, to escape one's unfavorable circumstances, or to even reject one's own true nature. To act with Wrath is to stand up for oneself and tell reality "No, I refuse!" loud and clear.

A common misconception of Wrath is the idea that anger is an inherent part of it. While it's true that those feelings often coincide with defiance, they're not required for one's acts to be fueled by Wrath. Some can be Wrathful while being completely calm and collected, as their acts of defiance could be more on the quiet and simmering side.

Likewise, being quick to anger isn't always a sign of Wrath. It's very possible for someone to have a short temper, while also being fully accepting of the reality they live in (Ryoshu, I am looking directly at you), thus lacking Wrath.

Lust

One's base insticts go all the way back to that genetic code.

Lust is the Sin of self-indulgence. It's the Sin of letting one's own desires and whims dictate one's actions. It's also the Sin of seeking personal fulfillment above all else. To act with Lust is to give up one's self-control and let one's instincts and wants guide them.

Unlike what the name and symbol might initially imply, Lust can include many different types of desires, not just the carnal.

Likewise, acts of Lust can be just as varied as one's desires. Satisfying one's most basic of needs, searching for a form of spiritual enlightenment, or even just saying the first thing that comes to mind because one feels like it are just a few examples.

Sloth

A stone will not care for what happens to it, nor the world around it.

Sloth is the Sin of apathy and resignation. Unlike other Sins, which mostly show through one's direct actions, Sloth can also show through inaction.

To act with Sloth is to ignore reality, to let oneself go along with whatever is happening with barely any complaints. As such, Sloth is commonly associated with blind obedience or unwillingness to act out.

Due to its nature as a Sin of resignation, Sloth can be seen as the direct opposite of Wrath, the Sin of defiance. This creates a unique situation where the inclusion of one can drastically shift the context of the other if both are a part of the same Identity or E.G.O.

Gluttony

Plants never stop waging wars, always wanting just a little bit more.

Gluttony is the Sin of hunger, and it's unique from the other Sins in that it equally represents two different ideas of that hunger, which can appear together just as often as they can be completely seperated.

The first type of Gluttony is one of the starving hunger of survival. In this context, to act with Gluttony is to do anything for the sake of scraping by and living to see another day.

The second type of Gluttony is the hunger for more, or in other words: greed. In this context, to act with Gluttony is to do everything for the sake of this idea of "more". To gain more wealth, to find more recognition, to make more progress.

Both of these types of Gluttony are unified in one main point - they are, by definition, endless. The struggle for survival never ends, unless one fails to survive. Likewise, there is no finite "more" that greed is reaching towards, it's a neverending process of one-upmanship.

Gloom

When a wave of emotion rises, many will be swept away in its wake.

Gloom is the Sin of dwelling on feelings. To act with Gloom is to be guided by one's negative emotions, to buckle under stress and let it control one's mind and actions.

While sadness, grief, and depression are the states of mind most commonly associated with Gloom, and are often a part of it, they're not inherent to it. The only "requirement" here is the experience of severe emotional duress, and acting out in direct response to it.

In a way, Gloom is the Sin of losing control over oneself, not dissimilar to Lust. However, the main difference here is the cause of losing that control. Gloom is the loss of self-control due to being overwhelmed by negative experiences, while Lust is the loss of self-control due to seeking out positive experiences.

Pride

Be careful, for that double-edged sword may cut you as well.

Pride is the Sin of ignoring consequences. Acts of Pride are all actions taken because of the belief that their benefits outweigh the cost in some way. While the most common way this can present is through actions that benefit oneself at the cost of others, it's not the only way Pride can manifest.

One can be Prideful when believing the benefit to many outweighs the consequences. Likewise, refusing to acknowledge the harm one brings to themself because their actions benefit them in some other way also counts as Pride.

The idea that Pride is inherently tied to selfishness or self-confidence is another common misconception. In fact, Prideful acts can manifest just as often from a lack of self-confidence or a misguided selflessness. Rather, one could interpret Pride as a form of willful ignorance, in a way.

Envy

Thorns don't go out of their way to harm, they merely react to your touch.

Envy is the Sin of reaction and retribution. It's the idea of doing something because of what someone else has done. By definition, one cannot act with Envy without some form of provocation.

Like is the case with many other Sins, acts of Envy can take many forms, from taking revenge to following orders. The main connecting idea here is letting oneself be influenced by another person, whether it's being coerced, provoked, ordered, or otherwise manipulated.

Out of all of the Sin misconceptions, seeing Envy as inherently tied to jealousy might be the worst one of all. While acts done out of jealousy would likely count as acts of Envy, they are but a miniscule part of the sheer scope that Envy represents.

...

Alright, so you know what each of those Sins means. Now it's time to figure out how to Actually Apply Them.

Sin Affinities in the context of Identities

The main way Sins play a role in a given Sinner's Identity is through their Sin Affinities. Mechanically, these are the Sins attributed to each of their skills, signifying both their type of Sin damage and what Sin resource they generate upon being used.

However, this is Project Moon we're talking about, and these fuckers can't keep their gameplay mechanics seperate from the story to save their lives.

So, this begs the question: what can we learn about a Sinner's given Identity through their Sin Affinities?

Here is the method that I believe works best in my experience:

The Sin affinities of each of an Identity's skills represent a different layer of their psyche and motivations. I'm going to try to show what I mean by using base Identities of the four Sinners who already had their own Canto.

Skill 1's Sin Affinity is the surface level motivation of the Sinner's actions. This is the most obvious and "shallow" reading of them and their actions, and also likely the one the Sinners themselves are most aware of.

Gregor's Skill 1 is Gloom due to him being constatly haunted by his trauma, with much of his cynicism and dark-ish sense of humor being shaped by his war experiences. Rodya's Skill 1 is Gluttony due to her tendency to value material goods and love for food, which are signs of her greed and will to survive respectively. Sinclair's Skill 1 is Pride due to him taking many actions (such as sharing his father's secrets or giving Kromer his basement key) for their immediate benefits, without considering the consequences. Yi Sang's Skill 1 is Gloom due to him falling into deep depression and letting the trauma of the past shape his current actions.

Skill 2's Sin Affinity is a deeper motivation of the Sinner's actions. It's delving deeper into their psyche to see what guides them in less obvious ways. This Sin Affinity can also have noticeably closer ties to the Sinner's background in one way or another.

Gregor's Skill 2 is Gluttony due to him being driven by the will to survive, most notably expressed by him leaving the rest of the veterans to escape the war and try to live after it ended. Rodya's Skill 2 is Pride due to her fully believing in what she does working out in her favor, completely ignoring consequences on the way. Her killing the pawnbroker is the biggest example of an act of Pride, as she fully believed that it would help her neighbourhood despite the consequences that murder would bring. Sinclair's Skill 2 is Wrath due to him not accepting his circumstances. His want to defy his future prosthetics procedure is what eventually led him to agreeing with Kromer, and his will to defy her is what drove him through the events of his chapter. Yi Sang's Skill 2 is Envy due to his passive nature and how easily he lets other people dictate his actions. It's especially notable in how after the League fell apart, he would have been willing to do anything Gubo told him at that moment.

Skill 3's Sin Affinity is what I would like to call a Sinner's Core Sin. It's the true main reason behind their actions, and has a much closer and direct tie into their past than the other Sin Affinities. In a way, this is the deepest layer of their psyche.

Gregor's Skill 3 is Sloth as his resignation to his circumstances is what colors much of his past. He learned that resistance is futile early in life, and it shows. Though he didn't want to fight in the war, he felt like he had no choice but to. All of his life, he simply listened to orders without complaint, unable to see a way to change his situation. Rodya's Skill 3 is Wrath as her self-righteousness and defiance is what drove her actions at the deepest level. She first joined the Yurodiviye because she wanted to bring change the state of her neighbourhood, and likewise left them when she no longer agreed with how they did things. Her murder of the pawnbroker was her biggest act of defiance, of taking matters into her own hands and trying to bring change to her reality at all cost. Sinclair's Skill 3 is Envy as much of his actions were dictated by other people. Social pressure was what led to him first breaching the trust of his family, and Kromer's coercion and manipulation is what then led to his family's death. In a way, you could also interpret Sinclair's arc in Canto III as one big act of Envy, as he finally tries to take revenge on Kromer for what she has done. Yi Sang's Skill 3 is Sloth as his apathy to the reality around him is what led to him ignoring the warnings signs of the League falling apart, and the resignation that followed could have resulted in him helping Gubo and the New League out with their horrible plans had there not been an intervention. It's only by the end of Canto IV that he finally manages to break out of this state for long enough to stand up for himself and decide to keep on living.

So, that's the basics of Sin Affinities when it comes to Identities! Now, some of you might be asking, "Hey Lu, what about Sin resources needed for Passives?", and my answer to that is...

Honestly, I don't entirely know! I do think there probably is some reason beyond pure gameplay mechanics... Buuuuut I don't think their importance is as major as the main Sin Affinities of a given Identity, especially since there isn't a single Passive that is activated by a Sin that the given Identity doesn't have any Affinity to.

Sin Affinities in the context of E.G.Os

Alright, so, when it comes to E.G.O, we run into some additional complexities. Unlike Identities, which can usually have their Sins Analysed with minimal additional context, E.G.O Sin Analysis has to be done under a specific angle.

This is because while Identities represent the Sinner as a whole person, E.G.Os represent a specific singular part of that Sinner.

Base E.G.Os usually seem to tie back to a specific event or action or some other thing in that Sinner's past. Likewise, E.G.Os derived from Abnormalities represent the ways that Sinner connects to that Abnormality's own themes.

In a way, the game's worldbuilding even acknowledges the fact that a Sinner can only use the E.G.O of an Abnormality they relate to in some way, as Dante's Notes describe the process of the Sinners using E.G.O as trying to make the Abnormality's emotions and identity their own.

That little tangent aside, there are two main things to analyze sin-wise when it comes to E.G.O - the Sin Affinity, and the Sin Resources necessary to use that E.G.O.

An E.G.O Sin Affinity works similarly to an Identity's Sin Affinities - for a Base E.G.O, it's the main Sin that action manifests as. For an Abno-derived E.G.O, it's the Sin that contextulizes the way the Abno's themes connect to the Sinner in question.

The Sin Resources an E.G.O needs is where things get fun. These are what a Sinner needs to be able to use the E.G.O, both mechanically AND story-wise. The Sins here represent what a Sinner has as their motivation and drive to fully reflect what that E.G.O represents. For Base E.G.Os, it's why they took the actions they did. For Abno E.G.Os, it's why they connect to that Abno's themes and why they're able to relate to it.

Now... There is one more thing about E.G.Os that I don't really talk about.

Sin Resistances.

The reason why I don't talk about them... Is because I have No Fucking Clue how to interpret them. There has to be some importance to them (Hong Lu being weak to Wrath in all of his E.G.O thus far, I am looking at you), I just don't know what it is. In fact, I doubt we even have enough information available to us right now to be able to say for sure.

I don't know how to end these posts dear fucking lord-

So uh. Yeah. That's. Everything that I think is important to mention on the topic of Sin Analysis and how I do it. If I ever change my mind on something or have an epiphany regarding one of the things I currently have no idea about, I'll probably reblog this post with an addendum or something, but until then...

Uh. Yeah. Hope this helps the people who wanna get into analyzing Limbus stuff but don't know where to begin. Or just people who wanna understand the method to my madness a little bit better.

I'm gonna go to sleep now, cause it's 4 AM already and I spent like the whole fucking night writing this post.

>#poison is unfair to the reader because it requires them a knowledge of chemistry And i still find the "oh i can stop my heart on command" bit ridiculous. It doesn't work that way, as control over it is part of autonomic nervous system/too mission-critical for manual control, so to speak. In other words: within BSD universe it's perfectly legit, and this 'legitness' is a tool that can be fired at maximum drama. But i like your version better~

I don’t think that Dazai and Fyodor are really poisoned. Dazai would probably know about a poison that could kill  him in 30 minutes but didn’t seem to know it, it wasn’t said that it was a poison made by a gifted, and there was no chemical name or even street name given. Not to mention the fact that it has an antidote and is an injection, and would take thirty minutes before killing them with seemingly no symptoms until then. Injections normally work really fast, or at least puts people in pain quickly before killing them. Poisons with antidotes are really rare. And the most important part of this theory?

We don’t know how long Dazai has actually been poisoned for.

When the time stopping gifted is killed, Dazai says the signals just stopped. He was continuously receiving signals with time pausing. For all we know, he’s  been poisoned longer than thirty minutes by now, and is still experiencing no symptoms. He and Fyodor have effectively been poisoned for different lengths of time, and Dazai doesn’t seem worse off. I think that they’re not poisoned, and they both know it.

Now what would Nikolai’s plan be with this?

Well, the antidote being the real poison feels like the exact kind of chaotic bullshit he would pull.

here various Big Important Authors occasionally take end-of-mandatory-education exams (the language/literary analysis part), including those whose works are in the curriculum AND on the exam.

Needless to say, they do not pass with full marks.

Or simply fail.

i learned that in 1963 a 16 year old sent a 4 question survey to 150 well-known authors (75 of which replied) in order to prove to his English tutor that writers don't intentionally add symbolic content to their books (x)

#everything is a fucking lie from both sides at this point

No it isn't. The product defends itself.

So is everyone gonna just ignore the fact that the leaked Document that PM sent over to the Union states that Vellmori was the one to resign herself and was the one who didn't want the info being spread around?

Like, I'm not saying PM handled this shit well, because they absolutely didn't, but the whole thing of her being fired is apparently just a straight up fucking lie.

And, if the Document PM sent to the Union is to be trusted (which, if they lied about that, I imagine that would be even more legal trouble than is worth for them with all this shit going on), that means that everyone being mad at PM for not saying anything more is being mad at them for Following Vellmori's Wishes.

Again, I'm not saying that PM handled Any of this well. They absolutely should have made sure that Vellmori didn't feel so threatened that she felt the need to resign. They absolutely fucked up in that department.

But the main thing people focused on, Vellmori's firing, allegedly just wasn't even real.

What the fuck is even going on anymore.

//Btw, here's the source for the translation of the Certificate of Contents that PM sent to the Union and which was later leaked.

finding this curious as i was debating whether or not to link your Summation in there. Like, someone solved DQ 'just' before canto 7 and response was ecstatic? what gives?

A momentous occasion is upon us.

The Daiyu-Baoyu theory has its first haters on Reddit 🎉🎉🎉🎉

// Anyway don't go harass anyone over this m'kay? In fact I hope we get more haters cause I actually find these comments really entertaining.

I hope we get enough Redditors knowing about it and hating it that someone tries to make a full post trying to disprove it so I can milk that thing and talk about my own experience desperately trying, in vain, to find contradictions that would disprove it myself.

and NPR did a segment on Fritz Faber mentioned in other reblogs. That part alone starts at 28:23, but the entire ep is good

all demographics and time periods and geography taken fully into consideration, some people were just born to lose

not what you hoped for OP but it made me realise having a PoV switch right now would be 200% psych and could happen. As in: 'in the narrow room' subpart ends, as we hop to elsewhere and do plot there (Lucy team? Kenji & Tecchou? Mori movement? Atsushi getting to Fukuchi & co, even tho i keep making that call and it keeps proving wrong?) and another subpart, then in 3rd subpart resolve Meursault decisively. Thanks, i hate it.

re: topic (but still not quite): it's been grinding my gears that noone is calling this, but: regardless of DoA resolution, the optics/situation for ability users is terrible. Globally. For the average person this is a broken masquerade scenario - vampires EVERYWHERE in a way that cannot be covered up or handwaved away. If they get to know the details, it would be caused by an ability user (1) being wielded by another ability user (2) using an anomalous object created by another ability user (3!!!). Given that previously ability users weren't public knowledge, populace's 1st contact would be of "they are an existential threat". This makes them convinient scapegoats for both the actual chaos and other assorted problems, real or imagined. At this point 'removing nations'(yes i know it's a coverup, but let's be real: if it worked you could bootstrap any objective with it.) would be merely an assurance that an aggregate database of ability users would be created - which with sufficently bad PR is a very scary proposition, indeed.

as a sidenote, i've once thought myself into an interesting spot: let's take the "What is the opposite of crime?" bit from No Longer Human seriously for a moment; a 'crime' is whatever either law or society deems undesirable action. Because society is made out of smaller societies, and each will have norms that differ slightly (or even conflict with the law/norms of other societies), any given action could be declared a 'crime' by any of the above. Therefore, crime = action. Therefore, the opposite to crime would be inaction. Every living being acts (commits actions?) by the virtue of being alive (breathing, eating, sleeping). Therefore, only inanimate objects do not commit crimes. Now that we have logic'd ourselves to "The sin crime is breathing", the question remains: Do corpses count on the grounds of being alive at some point? Within these parameters, it's actually another question: Are crimes forgivable? Since multiple things can all be called 'crime', despite different severity, the answer would be a binary yes/no.

At which point, the thread splits into two:

1) From a character backstory perspective: assuming he learnt of his ability by killing family memeber(s) accidentally, who exactly could give him forgiveness for it? assuming he does not regret a kill (both in the sense of "can't logic your way out of lack of fucks to give, chief" and "doesn't go into hysterics as seen in other people"), dogma would not give him forgiveness either. Therefore, the answer is: no.

2) From what i vaguely remember of C&P, the entire thing is a setup to do a redemption arc. For a redemption to happen (as opposed to what TvT poetically calls Heel-Face Door Slam), there has to be an underlying assumption - on both the repenter's and the judge's ends - that a crime can be forgiven, with enough work. For Dostoyevsky - you know, the terrorist? - to line up with both C&P and Dostoyevsky - you know, the writer? - or rather, what hazy picture i have of his body of work. For a change to happen, the implicit assumption has to, as well. Therefore, the answer is: no. (as of right now, circa ch107)

…i recall randomly going "wouldn't it be really lulzy if the endgame was NGE's Instrumentality?" but between writing out the above step-by-step, and DoA's objective having to be something to shook Atsushi outside of black-and-white thinking backed by DoA being a treat to ADA… and it's infuriatingly self-defending against that quote you have provided; "define: death"

If we hinge on ability user != ability, and 'ability as an analogy for having thoughts deep/insistent enough to write them down and publish', it circles back to the above, tho without an in-universe explanation. …when is an ability not tied to a user? When it's a singularity. This is the part where once again i suddenly remember i haven't read a single LN and just absorb spoilers like a sea sponge, but: is there some mention (in Stormbringer?) that singularities do not change? In the sense of 'do not adapt to stimuli'? If yes, it would not be a complete sweep as elaborated above, but would still line up with "not acting" in a way. If we tie this to the whole 'god likes order' we breach straight into an entire memeplex of "perfect order = no change" (see also: Shin Megami Tensei's law - aka christian god and angels - factions)

Everyone is in full conspiracy mode since (a little before) the last chapter with the Fyodor ability theories and I'm loving that. That got me thinking:

What was Fyodor's objective again?

Disclaimer, I fully rely on translations, but I cross-checked with two of them so...

special thanks to @ticklinglady for finding these pages!

"... a world free of sin and skill users."

1. A world free of sin

He says he wants to spill the blood of the sinners like 3 times but doesn't really give an explanation of who, what or why.

His definition of "sin" is quite vague, but could be the usual catholic/christian stuff. The one time he identified a specific behaviour as a sin was when the Agency and Port Mafia were killing each other "even though they knew they were being set up to do so" (though he also said Ace breathing and thinking was a crime and said killing Karma was freeing him).

In the Dead Apple novelization (not written, but edited by Asagiri, who came up with the original idea for the movie and gave a whole speech on Fyodor to the writing team), Fyodor does make a speech about the post-dragon red fog surrounding the Earth, transforming it into a "dead apple" by essentially killing everyone and "washing away the original sin of man". The apple motif was a sort of poetic irony.

According to the novelization, this was his true objective at the time and he never mentions the Book, not even in the epilogue, as opposed to doing so in the movie.

This scenario is kind of a contradiction, since the fog would have erased everyone except ability users, though most would have suffered at the hands of their abilities before dying. Said abilities would have then been kept in a collection maintained by Shibusawa, an ability singularity himself, which brings us to...

2. A world free of ability users

I went through the manga and never did find an instance of Fyodor speaking ill of abilities, only ability users. That doesn't mean there is a difference to him in the first place, but it's interesting.

The Dead Apple scenario is to be taken with a grain of salt, but killing everyone doesn't seem to be a problem for him (he kills nearly everyone he interacts with anyway), and this implies that to him every single human is sinful beyond redemption and can only be saved through death. Why he is singling out ability users in that case? seems redundant.

Other instances of him talking about his objective included talking about "the will of the hand of God and Demon", doing this "for the sake of a better world", and saying the death he gives is a form of salvation by severing the influence of sins from the soul. He also talks a big game about God and his intentions (order and stuff), and Dazai likes to point and laugh at him when he does so.

As a bonus, in Dead Apple, Fyodor answered Dazai's question of why he accepted to join forces with him by saying it was "simply to see the world as it ought to be" (and because he wanted entertainment, with Dazai turning out to be that entertainment, as Fyodor was in fact using him the whole time for his own agenda).

now go and apply that knowledge to your theories

no hiding The Good Stuff in the tags ;<

*clutching head* rodya and meursault would have such a good dynamic actually

I wonder if rodya would initially see meursault's indifference as like. a simpler version of her own feigned carefreeness and as a deliberate attempt to place himself as an outsider... only to realise that No, he really Is just Like That. and then she gets annoyed because it turns out that people who don't care about anything don't seem to be any fun.

(ofc he does actually care about a lot of things, just not necessarily his grander place in the world lol)

idk. nihilism vs absurdism. fun duo 👍 rodya would find meursault's genuine comfort with being a speck of dust in the universe baffling, while he would probably find her desire to assert her own importance pointless, but they could probably bond over little things like their shared desire to live in the present and appreciation of/indulgence in earthly joys. and meursault would probably listen if rodya wants to rant about anything without asking any uncomfortable questions. I think they could appreciate each other's presence.

Alright so part two of my explaining BSD french authors:

Arthur Rimbaud !

This is the boy. Looks young, right ? That's cause he's seventeen in this. (Funnily enough, he's exactly the same age as Verlaine's wife. Verlaine, though, is 27 at the time they meet. Yeah, I wasn't kidding when I said he was a piece of shit.)

Rimbaud is kind of THE poet of teenage rebellion. He was born in 1854, under Napoleon III to place him back in his historical context. He wrote quite a bit in opposition to Napoleon, actually.

His father is absent at first, and then not here at all later. He has... A complex and complicated relationship with his mother. He gave her a disrespectful nickname, she was seen hitting him several times (although at the time that's hardly surprising...), but at the same time when he asked her to go see him in London (at a time where the trip was very expensive, and she'd never left France in her life before that) she came, and his sister described him then as "the happiest I'd ever seen him". She's often seen as the source of his inner anger and rebellion.

What he hates for sure, though, was living in his house, with his family, and especially in his hometown, Charleville, which he despises.

He's especially known for having fled his house a lot, as in several times a year, for several days every time, walking during the day and sleeping on the road during the night. His most famous poem, "Ma bohème" (unstranslatable title because "bohème" is a french concept, but it basically means living your life day after day, in communion with nature and/or your dreams, often with an artistic dimension and no money whatsoever - also has travel connotations because it derives from "bohemian"), actually talks solely about that.

He wrote from his fifteenth to his nineteenth birthday, and was - still is - seen as a genius, being one of the most influential french poets ever despite having written for only four years. He was famous for being uncontrollable, and it translates back to his style : he took extremely traditional forms and changed their rules. (Which weirdly enough actually kinda fits with Rimbaud's ability ??)

If we ever have a Baudelaire in BSD, know that his character will probably look up to him, seeing as Rimbaud is usually seen as continuing Baudelaire's legacy of completely revolutionising french poetry. His two most famous books are "A Season in Hell" and "Illuminations", his last one. His literary movement is symbolism, invented by Baudelaire, characterized by melancholy and an attraction to the ethereal and mysterious. Rimbaud himself thinks that "the poet must search and describe the unknown" and, well, too bad if he sacrifices his sanity. He's also one of the first after Baudelaire to write prose poems.

He stopped writing, forever, at twenty, after the Verlaine fiasco. Actually, he wrote "Illuminations" directly after, then gave it to Verlaine so that he could get it published instead of doing it himself.

That's where his life gets really weird. He tries to learn seven different skills and languages while traveling everywhere, fails, his sister dies and he shaves his head for her funeral, is forced into the military to fight in Java, then deserts, gets hired on a boat on his way back and becomes a sailor, then tries to get hired in the American Navy, doesn't get any answer, goes in a circus then a factory, and all of that while traveling everywhere in the world in the space of about three years.

Nobody knows where he was for the nine months after that - and during all of this, everyone who knows him is hoping that he gets back to writing poetry - and then he goes home to help his brother with his farm before leaving, AGAIN. He walks from France to Italy, then gets in a boat to Alexandria, where he works in a construction project to manage the workers. This keeps going for about eleven more years, so I can't list everything this guy did : we'd need a whole ass novel.

He stays in Northern Africa for almost the rest of his life, although he travels quite a lot in that region and never stops moving. In France, he's still as famous as he was at 17, and several eulogies are written for him without his knowledge. We can also note that he does weapon trafficking, for a very short period, at some point. He writes to his family that he's "bored", of all things. He's described by the people he meets then as "smart, sarcastic, not very talkative, never talking about his past".

He then dies in Marseille, in his thirties, from cancer in his leg.

I'm gonna be honest : I don't like his BSD characterization. Rimbaud's a wild card, a chaotic teenager, as an author. I also ! Hate ! That he's Verlaine's mentor. But that'll be the next part, where I'll talk of IRL Rimbaud and Verlaine.

Previous and future parts are in the #IrlBSDFr tag.