*guy Who Has Run Out Of Fictional Characters To Inspire Me Voice* Cuno Wouldn't Even Fucking Care About

in my Harry Du Bois era

Sadie and Charles friendship headcannons bc they barely interact in the game and that’s a CRIME:

Charles carved her a little flower when she first came to camp. He didn’t say anything just a simple gift.

Sadie always goes up to Charles and tells him “I could take you in a fight.” And he always just nods and says, “I know Mrs. Adler.”

Sadie will complain about anything to Charles. Charles get into it too. One time Sadie was saying some awful shit Micah said and Charles literally gasped and said “That bitch!”

Sadie overheard Charles say that he forgot how to braid his hair, and so she got a couple of the girls together (Karen and Tilly especially) and they had a whole night of it.

One time Sadie was being harassed in a bar and Charles (can’t handle his alcohol, has a temper, and respects women) kicked the guy square in the dick and screamed at him that no one talks to his friends that way.

They are both WAY too competitive. They once played FFF for 3 days STRAIGHT because neither one would accept a loss. Arthur eventually had to intervene.

Sadie calls Charles the most insane nicknames. “C Smitty,” “Carls Smoth,” and “My guy Chucky” being notable ones. No one else can call Charles a nickname.

i didn't get a minor in art history for no reason, so let's talk about

The Adoration of the Shepherds with a Donor by Palma Vecchio, c. 1520-1525 (held at the Louvre under the French name L'Adoration des bergers avec une donatrice, here's its collection details)

What's fascinating about this painting (done in the very very late High Renaissance to early Mannerism) is that the identity of the commissioner of the painting is the one kneeling to the far right, who Armand in the episode says is modeled by him, is actually unknown. (So that makes it very handy for the show to claim it's Armand without actually being inaccurate or anachronistic)

What this depicts is the Christmas story (though yes, I know, it doesn't look like Christmastime in the painting) where the shepherds pay Jesus a visit after he's born. There's a lark sitting in the window on the left, which often symbolizes rebirth, and there's a dog all the way to the very right, which usually symbolizes loyalty.

Of course, within the IWTV verse, the choice of using this painting (which doesn't have much, if any literature on it by itself--maybe because for a long time it was attributed to the painter Titian by mistake instead of Vecchio) is extremely fascinating to me. There's a lot of dimensions here: most notably, as another user I saw pointed out, Armand was the model for this, and the painter (Marius de Romanus in the show, Armand's maker) whitewashes Armand. Now, Armand is immortalized in room 711 in the Louvre forever as a 20 year old, looking nothing like himself, his identity effectively completely erased, while thousands of people pass and see this painting every year.

It raises a lot of poignant questions, also: since the commissioner of real life (who is the real life model) doesn't exist in IWTV, what is the motivation for Marius to paint Armand in a Christ scene? Because obviously, Armand would not have commissioned this painting. What spurs him to do that? Since the real life artist, Vecchio, was very influenced by Titian at the point when this painting was made, was Marius also? I really do want to know the team's thought process behind choosing this painting, because it's endlessly interesting to me. It's definitely one of the lesser known works in the Louvre, even just a cursory glance over JSTOR barely has any information. I might literally email my art history professors and ask if they have any material on this or Vecchio because I'm so intrigued... anyone else wanna discuss <3?

My ideal version of dating someone would be them threatening to murder me if I don’t run away and hide, followed by them obsessively stalking me for about four years (following me all around the world, standing over my bed while I am sleeping, appearing out of nowhere and asking me morally charged questions, etc.), while they become more and more persistent over time and force me to spend more and more time together until I eventually realize that they actually don’t want to kill me after all. And when I address this to them, they act confused and say, 'No, how could you think that? I love you,' and then they buy me an island.

I think there’s two reasons Daniel in 1973 had such a strong reaction regarding Louis’s view of vampirism and his story (aside from being a twenty year old know it all). One was that he identified with Claudia more—and saw the part where Louis left off at in the story as hopeful, and two he connected vampirism in Louis’ story with the ability to express queerness and be safe.

For the Claudia thing—they just had more in common at that point. Daniel gets choosing to explore and look for knowledge—he does not read as someone who’s really been in love before at twenty—at least not with a “handsome devil” and he’s not a parent. It’s also likely that after only two years out of high school Louis being “declared dead” by his family wouldn’t hit as hard.

When identifying more with Claudia at that point in the story—there’s much more hope there than identifying with Louis. I especially think Claudia going to Europe to find vampires and answers would have appealed to him. I wouldn’t be surprised if “get off the bench” meant “go with her.”

She’s getting answers! Exploring! Leaving her awful maker! Plus as far as Daniel knows Louis could be using past tense because they never made up or reunited or because she passed away—and even if she did die she might have achieved her curiosity seeking dreams so—worth it maybe! At least to Daniel! Vampirism is less inherently tragic at this point than after the trial. It’s hopeful not hopeless.

On the other side there’s also Daniel, a young queer person in 1973, who only feels safe acting queer and participating in queerness with drugs as a barrier—an excuse—meeting Louis with the beautiful long term boyfriend, and the one night stands in apartments, and the ex he’s still hung up on—comfortable and safe because he’s a vampire.

What Daniel got out of his story, the meaning he didn’t think Louis saw was life, life, and more life. Plus safety to live as you want to live. Louis breaches social norms along side becoming a vampire. He creates his mixed queer family post-vampire turning. The vampirism and the non-conformity seem linked.

He’s also so comfortable bringing boys back—even asking his boyfriend if he wants to join in! The countercultural, the ability to have, messy, yes, but also many queer relationships! Starting in 1910’s New Orleans with vampirism!

Louis ended the story with Claudia hopeful and leaving on the train—the worst part was his ex—and abusive exes are present in human lives too! You can recover! Get off the bench! The central tragedy haunting Louis narrative wasn’t explained to Daniel by that point.

Daniel saw Louis living like a mortal except for the safety to be himself in it and that’s why he wanted it!!! To be able to hide and the ability to kill any mortal who might object to you doing what you want to do!!! No need to hide behind substances to be yourself!!! Vampirism as life but more, but better!!!

cool place

rip arthur morgan, you would have loved animal crossing

Past devils minion but make it poster-ish

The only reason I can get behind RDR3 being about the early days of the gang is because I would kill to see what type of menace young Arthur and Hosea were

pressed up against your longing