Idk What Ricks Daemon Would Be But I Feel Like Their Relationship Would Be Really Volatile Cus Ricks

Though I prefer Barry and Ross’s voices for the skelebros. - this moment was just too perfect not to animate!!

I think that instead of giving Remus movie-fanon facial scars from his werewolf attack, JK should’ve given them to Snape in the books.

Imagine how much more interesting Snape would have been if he had four jagged claw marks across his face. It would also give a much greater gravity to Snape’s attack during the Marauders’ “prank.”

The first year feast goes like this:

“Who’s that teacher talking to Professor Quirrel? The one with the scars?”

Percy leans in—“Oh, you know Quirrel already, do you? No wonder he’s looking so nervous, that’s Professor Snape. Nobody knows for sure about his scars, but rumor says he had a werewolf sicced on him once and killed it with his bare hands. Then again, he’s so mean he likely sneered at it and the poor thing keeled right over.”

It’s not until Lupin’s term as DADA Professor that Harry realizes why Snape hates him so much: then again, the reason is quite literally etched across his face.

When Snape changes their lesson plans to study werewolves nobody argues, because they see what happened to a teacher and they know better than to argue with someone who has such obvious firsthand experience with them.

Every time Harry gets recognized for his telltale scar he thinks of Snape, and how much worse he has it.

Agustín tells Bruno His Secrets

Do you think Snape hate has increased since we found out he was poor?

I think there’s a number of reasons, but yes, I think it’s a possibility.  We can quickly compare and contrast how Draco and Snape are perceived by fandom, or even Regulus and Snape.  I suspect that the poverty that the Snape family were steeped in is too difficult for some readers to wholly grasp, whereas perhaps it is far easier to admire and aspire towards the riches and decadence of the Blacks and the Malfoys.  

Maybe it’s also easier for some modern readers to imagine the psychological impact of not agreeing with the politics of your parents than it is to imagine the undercurrent of domestic violence and living in a destitute environment in a dilapidated house.  Additionally, there are uncomfortable messages for some from Snape - this dirty, unloved, dishevelled child is as powerful and as capable as any other wizard, and given the opportunity, he flourishes.  Depending on your class, you may read Snape’s success as a powerful message of triumph over adversity - or perhaps, a dangerous message about competition from the underclass.  

Still, I suspect the real issue is generational - and not necessarily generational from Harry starting at Hogwarts in 1991 and us discussing this almost 30 years later, but generational from JK.  I’ve spoken a lot previously about how her depiction is of teachers from the mid 70s put into a book set in the early 90s and how that doesn’t wholly translate to the kid of the late 10s.  

With that in mind, I think her notion of a love story is also mired in history.  For someone of JK’s age when she started writing, unrequited love was seen in positive terms - it wasn’t meant to be creepy.  Love is a huge theme throughout the series, and the idea that Snape - who had walked down this horribly dark path and was outwardly a mean and nasty and spiteful man - would completely change his ideology and allegiance due to his unrequited love for Lily was supposed to have been indicative of the power of love.

But we read Potter now with modern eyes, and unrequited love has not aged particularly well.  It seems rare that people genuinely ‘quietly love from afar’ - and instead, fandom insists on applying traits to the character which don’t exist in the text.  For instance, there’s no indication of Snape being a stalker or a creep, there’s no indication that he wanted a sexual relationship with Lily, there’s no indication that he bothered her or harassed her.  He isn’t a ‘nice guy’ or an ‘incel’ - but some readers can’t find the trope that they’re expecting, so they apply others to the series, even if they don’t quite fit.

So, I think the author and the readership are in conflict.  The author wrote a tale of genuine unrequited love, and the readers are trying to view it through modern frameworks, and they draw incorrect conclusions about the character’s motives.

I suspect this is exacerbated by the readership not ageing with the series.  Everyone who read Potter whilst it was being published had to wait for the next book to be written, but these days, they’re binge-read.  I think that lack of distance between each book (and the subsequent lack of maturity, because you’re reading the next one within a week, and not waiting three years, so you can’t have matured further) means that many struggle to separate Snape from being a cipher for their mean teacher at school to becoming the secret hero that he is.

I think that’s my real conclusion.  The problem is that this is an old text which is being read as if it is modern - and that leads to a clash between reader expectation and authorial intent.

Had an idea that max transforms into the shadow monsters sense its part of his own world or nightmare?

ImJustUpToDrawMonsters

How do you view Albus’ and Severus’ relationship? Do you think Albus’ genuinely cared for Severus’ or was he just - using him?

(Once again, disclaimer that I am working from memory and don’t have the books on hand to double-check the details.)

Anon, thank you so much for asking, because this relationship is an absolute goldmine. My tl;dr is “it’s a mess and I love that”.

To start with though, I need to address the framing of your question. Because “genuinely cared” and “using” are not mutually exclusive categories, especially when it comes to Albus. Albus cares about people, just in general. He can be clumsy about showing it when it’s too much for him, or when he’s conflicted, or when he thinks he needs to hold back, but he undoubtedly cares. I don’t say this often because I’m a big believer in the subjectivity of interpreting literature, but - any interpretation that says he doesn’t is wrong, and probably deliberately misreading out of spite. (Am I being uncharitable here? Maybe. But I’m tired of reading some people’s takes so I’m going to be uncharitable.)

People are Albus’ greatest strength and he wins their loyalty not by manipulating them into following him but by genuinely caring about and understanding them. But he also knows what needs to be done, and is capable of distancing himself, and prefers to keep his cards very close to his chest - because he might care for people but he doesn’t trust them. A lot of what gets deemed manipulative or “using” from him stems from his desire to take sole responsibility for things, and unwillingness to let other people in. He’s warm to people but shuts down emotionally when it’s too much or he’s conflicted. He’s never actually been the cold chessmaster fandom likes to paint him as. (Chessmaster? Yes. Cold? No.)

When Severus first approaches him, he’s quite harsh with him. But at this point, as far as Albus knows, Severus is a Death Eater who’s only interest is protecting Lily. (I firmly disagree with the interpretation that Lily is the only reason Severus ever did anything good, but she was his main concern at that time). His harshness doesn’t show that he sees Severus as a tool to me, but quite the opposite - that he sees him as a person capable of growth, wants to see him grow and holds him to that standard. If he were a discardable tool, Albus would have just told him what he wanted to hear in order to win his loyalty. Instead he gives him what he needs - an anchor he can use to pull himself up. Albus places himself as a figure that can offer Severus forgiveness and absolution, and there’s definitely a power imbalance there, and Severus probably resents it quite a bit, but he still latches on to it. Albus and Lily are probably the only two people in his life at that time who’ve ever seen him as someone worth expecting something from.

I don’t think, at this point, that it’s personal for Albus. I doubt he would turn away any Death Eater who genuinely wanted to change, and he is aware of the massive advantage that having a potential spy on his side would offer. He cares, but he’s also in the middle of a war and has other people to protect who take priority. You could say he’s using Severus to an extent - Severus is emotionally vulnerable and desperate, and Albus sees that and knows how to make use of it. A part of him is aware that he needs to use Severus and tries to keep an emotional distance. But his “making use of it” isn’t so much calculated manipulation as offering Severus a way out, which Severus chooses to take.

Albus and Severus make excellent foils that both mirror and contrast each other. Albus plays the role of the hero (I say plays not because I don’t consider him genuinely heroic but because it’s a role he deliberately assumes for others even when he thinks he doesn’t deserve it) because people need him to look up to, but also because it’s hard to shatter the image others have of him. Severus plays the role of a villain out of practical necessity as a spy, but also because he’s so used to it that it’s easier and more comfortable than trying to change people’s perception of him. Both are uncomfortable with emotional vulnerablity or letting people see behind that mask. Both are lonely and isolated and secretive. Both have a lot of guilt bottled up that they don’t talk about. Both are willing to sacrifice themselves to win the war. And both harbour enough self-hatred that they probably strongly dislike seeing themselves reflected.

I wouldn’t be surprised if Albus harbours a touch of envy towards Severus - if only subconsciously - because Severus got to rely on love to redeem himself, which is so far from Albus’ own experience. And Severus almost certainly resents Albus for having seen him emotionally vulnerable and getting to hold the upper hand and remain a distant, unassailable figure. I think a part of each of them senses an emotional rawness in the other that they shy away from because it hits too close to home, so while they may care for each other they have too many rough edges between them to fully like or feel comfortable with one another. That’s a part of why Albus can seem cold and harsh towards Severus; projection and a discomfort with intense emotion that’s too similar to his own. There’s also the fact that he knows Severus is in a precarious position and might have to be sacrificed. There is a slightly mercenary slant to their relationship - both know exactly what they want from the other, and what the other wants from them. And on Albus’ side, I think he feels a certain fragility in his position over Severus - he’s been playing a role that allows him to pass judgement, but he doesn’t feel that role is fully deserved. But he never demands more of Severus than he’d demand of himself - and maybe seeing himself in Severus is what allows him to demand as much of Severus as he does of himself, which is a fairly high, unyielding bar. And this doesn’t preclude emotional attachment to each other, and on Albus’ side, while their similarities may make him want to keep an emotional distance they also, almost paradoxically, allow him to sympathise with and understand Severus.

And with all that, Albus does trust Severus by the end, which is something much rarer for him than simply caring for someone. Severus is the only one who knows the entirety of his plan. Severus is the only one who knows he’s dying. By this point the dynamic of emotional vulnerablity has come full circle and Albus is desperate and forced to show vulnerablity. He hates showing weakness because he’s always been the one that everyone - Severus included - has looked to for strength and certainty, but now he’s willing to beg Severus to kill him. At the start, Severus needed Albus because he had no-one else to rely on. By the end that dynamic is flipped. If there’s one thing I would define their relationship by, it’s “vulnerablity and mutual reliance forced by circumstance” - but I think that circumstance leads to a situation where they understand and trust each other more than anyone else, however uncomfortable it might be for them.

they are totally arguing and bickering from the two opposite lines of the war because it's the funniest thing ever like there is a mess of droids and clone fighting up on the ground and then you have two sith/jedi masters howling at each other through the force to cover the noise "you had at least FIVE BILLIONS OCCASIONS to introduce me to your padawan and you tell me YOU FORGOT" "excuse me i would have said something if i wasnt distracted by how horrid your tea and cookies are" "QUI GON"

Dooku being more outraged by Qui-gon’s comments about his tastes than the actual battle is 👌🏻👌🏻

Hi, I love a lot of your meta and analyses. Especially for Arcane. One thing that's bothering me is what exactly was Silco's reputation among the Lanes in act 1? It's odd how Vander seems to say he's worse than enforcers, and Benzo even calls him an animal and immediately tries to charge at Silco after Grayson's death. But we know that Silco only became this ruthless AFTER his attempted murder by Vander. So during the old times when Vander and Benzo knew him, Silco was apparently a "weak man" who wasn't nearly as violent as Vander. So what gives?

Sure, the "animal" line could just be because of the brutal way he killed Grayson and the enforcers, but idk, the way he immediately charges Silco no questions asked seems to indicate something deeper. It's funny too, because Silco murdered only the enforcers that were arresting Vander, and didn't even want to kill Vander until he rejected Silco's plan and refused to join him. So if Benzo just stayed calm and kept his hands to himself Silco would've probably kidnapped them both. Hell, without Benzo's murder hanging over Vander's head, maybe he could've even be persuaded to rejoin Silco for another try at revolution? But the story needs him to refuse, so ofc Benzo had to die.

I'm just wondering why exactly, if Silco was known as the less violent one before Vander tried to kill him, then why do Benzo and Vander in act 1 treat him like he's been a devil the whole time. Did they maybe catch wind of his unpleasant activities while he was underground and building his revolution plans?

Hi Anon! What a great ask! And thank you, you make me blush. It's nice that my horrendous Arcane brain rot actually serves some purpose somehow x'D

This is a very good question and a difficult one—because of the writers. I'm not sure if they really know or care to make sense of Silco and Vander's past. The timeline is shaky and vague. I think they were happy to leave things quite mysterious. Some of us desperately try to unravel it, but the bulk of viewers took it all at face value and concluded that Silco is a horrible man who did horrible things.

This is not me bashing other fans, all theories are valid, but I must admit sometimes I wonder if the Arcane writers managed to convey their point across. Because I've seen quite a few people theorise that Silco did something truly horrible and 'deserved' to be killed by Vander, despite the lack of evidence or accusation, or the show going to great length to harp about Vander's potential for change, of his "monster within" who caves in skulls with his fists.

(Not to mention the casual fans who thought the sun shone out of Vander's ass because they couldn't see past Vi's pov and didn't do dozens of obsessive rewatches like yours truly).

My point is that their relationship is pretty complicated and there are plenty of dissenting theories. And I think a lot of people go one way or the other precisely around those moments you mention. I'm going to give you my theory, but it's very fanon. I'm genuinely a lot less certain about this than some of my other meta. It's just what gels for me considering how I interpret the rest of the show.

I'm going to put this under a cut, because there's a lot!

What exactly was Silco's reputation among the Lanes in act 1?

I don't think Silco was weak. That's him reframing his trauma. Not just weak physically (like obviously he could never fight Vander off fairly), but for having trusted him. Weak for not seeing the betrayal coming, and not coming on top of that conflict. He calls his old self weak because he must believe in his own progress, his own resurrection into a being who can enact his plans at last. 

I think Silco was a beacon of hope and zealotry. I think he was a propaganda machine. Young Silco united a lot of Zaun under the banner of his dream. He probably worked hard, and led the movement. From the way their dialogue goes, the accusation of betrayal, saying "I trusted you", and the manner of Silco's attitude around Vander, I'm of the (generally not that popular) sentiment that Silco was the leader of the early rebellion, and that Vander was his follower. Most likely his right hand man.

In fic I've theorised that Vander, who tells Vi he used to always be so angry and violent, didn't have a channel for said violence until Silco gave him structure and a purpose. Directed that violence at Piltover, at creating (read, carving out) the Lanes.

Which, FYI, are NEVER clarified. We don't know if it's a business model or a territory or both. Writers truly don't care to explain it.

Anyway, Silco speaks of "our dream" and then uses "brother" with a LOT of irony laced in, in reply to Vander's own use of the term. They used to be brothers in arms and Vander believed in that dream. We also know that Vander used to fight for the cause and claims he's "not that man anymore".

He basically was fighting for team Silco—team Zaun—right until the day of the betrayal.

Then we're told by Vander that Silco had his respect, the Lanes' respect, "but that... was never enough for you". We're also told by Sevika that Vander created the Lanes.

This suggests to me that Silco and Vander created the Lanes together. 

I assume that over time Vander started seeing Silco's plans as too greedy, while leading the Lanes seemed ideal. 'Good enough', if you will. Vander is small minded where Silco is aiming for the sun. One wants too little and the other too much. Silco says they 'shared a vision, dreams of freedom, not just for the Lanes but for the whole of the Underground, united as One'. They used to dream of Zaun together... And then Vander realised Silco would tear the Lanes apart if it would serve his purpose (to attack Piltover). 

I think he didn't believe it'd work (and given what we see of Piltover vs. Zaun before shimmer, it might not have), and realised he wanted to rule the Lanes. Vander would now see Silco's dreams as too dangerous.

I know some people in the Zaundads community who theorised that Vander was influenced in turning on Silco by Benzo or others. It's not my prefered theory.

I think Vander wanted the Lanes for himself, and knew that Silco was too zealous to ever stop. We don't know why he got so (intimately) violent. Why they were in the Pilt. We see Vander first very cold, slowly drowning Silco, then very hot and brutal, once he's been hurt. I think he was very different indeed from the genial Vander we know in arc 1. Young Vander is the guy who carved the Lanes with his fists. The guy who built the reputation old Vander still coasts on. A guy known by foreigners! In short, it doesn't really help to look at him through the old Vander lens. He did what he did..

And THEN, he hid the (most likely black and contaminated) wound from Silco's knife. While Silco wears his scar unashamed for what must be a decade or two, Vander has his arm constantly covered. This speaks of shame to me. We know he had regrets too :

Truly a young, impulsive, violent man, who rushed into a bad decision and has regretted it since. I can picture a young Vander missing his best friend, his guiding light, and yet finally becoming the leader he wanted to be. Curtailing Silco's uprising entirely and settling, at least until his own revolt. 

We know there was only one time where the rebellion went ahead, and that was well after Silco left. Vander, to the assembled Lanes people, says "we crossed that bridge once before". It's the era where he still had Silco's respect, but was immediately followed by his pact with Grayson. Which Silco knew of.

Sorry... I'm rambling to try and get all the details in... Almost there.

Finally we come to Vander holding his (shamefully hidden) wound and saying "there's worse things than enforcers out there, we both know that."

And I'm not sure WHAT HE MEANS!! Like, this is not proof he knows Silco is alive. My personal feeling is that Vander believes there's a chance Silco might be alive, but he's not actively taking precautions like that's a possibility. Silco's attack wouldn't have come out of left field and taken them so completely by surprise otherwise.

There are plenty of things worse than enforcers. Including himself!! He could mean competing chembarons. He could mean someone wanting his seat. He could mean anything, it's infuriating. 

Anyway, I think Vander came back from the Pilt with a bad stab wound and a story. I think he told everyone that Silco attacked him and died. That he turned traitor. Or any other bullshit story. But I believe he did what any new illegitimate ruler does, and shat all over Silco's reputation. Or else cried some crocodile tears over him and called him dead. But Silco never stepped back into the open, so Vander making him persona non grata is more likely. 

Whatever the case, Vander had completely taken over the Lanes by the time Silco was in good enough health to show up.

Did they run into each other? Did Vander scare him off again? I'm not sure, but I don't think so. Vander looks way too shocked when he realises who's showing up at the murder party. This isn't the expression of someone who is used to thwarting schemes. This isn't the Batman's face when the Joker appears with mischief around a street corner.

Meanwhile, why would Benzo react so negatively to Silco? The well respected man who was betrayed (a fact Vander owns up to and APOLOGISES for), who was half drowned and mutilated by Vander's hand... Yet Benzo immediately calls him an animal (which, you're right, could be in reaction to stepping into a mass killing—which, fair), and tells him to "crawl back into whatever hole he came out of."

I feel like this is the reaction of someone who thinks "wow, it's the cunt who harmed my bestie 20 years ago and (insert Vander's lies about him). Who knew he was still alive?"

Meanwhile, Vander looks like it's judgement day. I think he has excellent reasons to be afraid. He stole the Lanes, destroyed Silco's dreams, ruined his rep, drove him out of the Underground... and somehow Silco stayed under the radar all this time? And now he's got killer monsters? Of course he'd be scared. Vander knows how intense Silco used to be, and knows how guilty he himself is. I think he believes all bets are off. Precisely because Silco never had a reputation as a weak man. 

I mean, consider! If Vander was mega violent under Silco's guidance... If they built the Lanes together... If Silco was the leader who helped Vander redirect his rage... Then Silco clearly didn't mind being extremely violent. He didn't mind unleashing "the Hound" on the people who stood in the way of Zaun. 

((I think Silco's "weak" narrative is a self soothing framing device. That he's recontextualising himself, making a philosophy of life. After all, he tries to use these same terms to speak to Jinx about her own trauma, while failing to grasp that while he was at his weakest, Powder was at her strongest. His personal motto of letting the weak die doesn't work for Jinx.))

It's very revealing that Vander says "Benzo stay back!" and Silco says "you never did know when to walk away." Like if he'd stayed back and then walked away, he'd have been fine. I fully agree that this tells us that Vander thinks Silco is only after him. That he wouldn't kill Benzo needlessly. Needless deaths were probably never Silco's style, as someone wanting to 'unite' the Underground. And after all, he's not even here to kill Vander, but to recruit him.

So, yeah... In conclusion (at last lol) 

Silco was never weak, simply too big a dreamer, someone who wouldn't surrender his lofty ideals for the reality of being one of the most powerful men in the Undercity. Ultimately he got in young Vander's way. Vander impulsively sacrificed Silco for his own desire to rule the Lanes. Then he turned around, shameful and regretful, and lied to everyone about it as he usurped Silco's place and became the Lanes' sole leader. 

(I personally theorised in several fics that the last Drop was actually Silco's, and that Vander took over it after the betrayal, partially explaining why Silco never leaves the place after his own takeover. Complicated feelings + it was his and fuck Vander lol)

I don't believe Benzo or Vander have any clue about Silco's plans, and simply react based on what they know and imagine (Benzo based on whatever Vander told him, and Vander based on how fucked he has to be and how insanely dedicated Silco must still be). I believe Vander has a lot of double agents in his midst (Sevika, Syd), and people who've been keeping tabs on him for years. 

Counter-argument : Marcus says he spoke to one of Vander's "old friends" and that he "wasn't always so peaceful". You could think this may have tipped Vander off... But how many people did he leave behind or crush when creating the Lanes? How many people hate him for leading the failed uprising? I think it's still plausible that Vander doesn't suspect Silco's involvement. 

Vander just lacks cunning. Another final argument for him being totally clueless is that he had a direct line to Grayson, and a quick, 'Hey, okay I'll tell you who stole your stuff' pointing fingers towards Silco would have entirely solved the situation for him.

Yet he never is shown to consider it. 

PHEW. I think that covers it?? I think I covered every point? At least that's how I interpret this situation, even though it relies heavily on my own fanon readings of the timeline and a lot of other details. 

If anyone disagrees with this, or wants to double down, as always go crazy. I love me a meta pile on. 

Sirius Black, the firstborn. The aristocrat. The one raised in a disgustingly rich, respected, and feared family. Sirius Black, the rebel without a cause, who forged his identity by opposing the values of that family. The tall guy, so handsome that girls couldn’t even concentrate on their exams. The popular one, the one who had it all. The one who didn’t have to worry about running away from home because the loving parents of his also-rich best friend took him in. Sirius Black, the one at the top, the one who did whatever he wanted to those beneath him. The one who spent seven years torturing a poor half-blood just out of boredom, for fun, because he could.

Sirius Black, who looked at that poor half-blood as a representation of everything he hated, everything that disgusted him. Despising him for wanting to go to his family’s house, for wanting to gain power that he—let’s be honest—had possessed from birth. Sirius Black, constantly laughing at Severus Snape, calling him Snivellus, mocking his appearance, ridiculing his poor, downtrodden look, encouraging him to go somewhere he’d likely end up dead. Sirius Black, convinced he was doing nothing wrong because Severus Snape was a piece of shit who followed the Death Eaters, and hurting him was completely justified.

Sirius Black, the brave one, the one who would’ve given his life for the good cause, the one who was on the right side from the beginning, who always knew where he belonged, who went to war and gave it his all—so much that he ended up in prison.

Sirius Black, who escapes Azkaban only to end up in another prison. The one who, locked in his family home, starts to see things for what they are. The one who is no longer a help but a hindrance. The one who is just a ticking time bomb for a Dumbledore who never gave a damn about his zeal for the fight. Sirius Black, who suddenly finds himself facing that same half-blood he used to insult, to hit, to hunt down like a predator after its daily meal. There he is, with them. Severus Snape, the Dark Arts freak, the greasy-haired, Malfoy’s lapdog, the one who followed the pureblood supremacists and bears the Dark Mark. The same Severus Snape who was a Death Eater and followed Voldemort, now stands as Dumbledore’s right-hand man.

And Dumbledore trusts him more than anyone. Trusts him so much that, although neither Lupin, Tonks, nor Moody like having him among their ranks, no one dares say a word against him. Only Sirius speaks up, and when he does, everyone scolds him. Because he’s no longer Snivellus; now he’s Snape. He’s a double agent. He’s someone important. He’s a rook, a bishop, a knight, while the others are mere pawns.

Sirius Black wonders why. Why, if he did everything right, if he stood up to his family, if he always defended what was right, he’s now reduced to a broken toy confined to isolation while that piece of shit who did everything wrong is the one who has Dumbledore’s favor. Because Sirius was always one of the good ones, and Severus was one of the bad ones. Because tormenting and mistreating him was justified. But then he realizes it doesn’t matter. It doesn’t matter who’s good or bad in a war; what matters is how useful you are to those who wage them.

And he has become useless, while Severus is a key piece. And that is the best revenge Severus could have had for all the years of abuse he endured: for Sirius to realize, in the last months of his life, that all his efforts to rebel had meant nothing. In a war against power structures, the aristocratic boy never has a place.*