Ok, I Feel Like I Need To Like, Expand A Bit.

Why Tedros of Camelot is not a Mary Sue

I’ve seen a bunch of people on the SGE wiki calling Tedros a Mary Sue/Marty Stu/Gary Stu and I disagree so here’s a FRICKING ESSAY.

WARNING: This is gonna be a full-blown essay. Also I’m using Mary Sue as a gender neutral term because I don’t see the point in the term Gary Stu but I’m not opening that can of worms…Also, very mild book 3 and 4 spoilers.

DISCLAIMER: I’m tired and grumpy. I’m not trying to attack anyone with this post and I am not usually this tired or this grumpy. But today I’m tired and grumpy. Also: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=08YRWuK4bso watch this because I’m too tired to repeat her message.

Reasons why Tedros of Camelot is not a Mary Sue

1) Tedros has flaws.

Mary Sues are flawless characters - and this includes characters whose flaws are physical things, or things other people have done to them. Mary Sues are “X character is kind and brave and caring and has unlimited superpowers but they have two different coloured eyes and their parents hate them so they’re totally flawed.”

Tedros is not flawless. Tedros is stupid. Reckless. Impulsive. He holds grudges. He is stubborn. He values his pride too much, which leads him to land everyone in trouble. He is absolutely terrible at communicating. He has SERIOUS trust issues. Did I mention he’s stupid?

But this doesn’t make him a bad character, because…

2) Tedros grows as a character.

I would argue that Tedros is the character who goes through the most character development throughout the series. Tedros begins the books as someone who sees the world as black and white. He is someone who believes he knows the boundaries between good and evil, and refuses to change those views. Take his first proper scene with Agatha, for example. When Tedros sees the gargoyle in Agatha’s arms, he doesn’t stop to ask himself what is going on - he instantly categorizes the gargoyle as evil, and kills it. Even when Agatha protests that the gargoyle was innocent, he just considers her evil by association. He does the same thing with his mother - he resents his mother for abandoning him, so he paints her as the villain of the story, building up his father as a hero, despite having seen his father’s descent into paranoia and alcoholism. He refuses to change his views of Arthur = good and Guinevere = bad. He also holds grudges and doesn’t trust his princess, despite Agatha often knowing better then him.

But throughout the books, Tedros learns. He learns that people are multifaceted, and that there is more to people than Ever or Never, boy or girl. He learns to swallow his pride and let Agatha take the lead. He learns to put away his prejudices and admit his own flaws. He even learns to forgive his mother, and actually listens to her side of the story. And even though he does have a bit of a backslide in book 4, he apologizes and proceeds to be more careful about his actions. In fact, he does this even better than Agatha, who continues to keep trying to take charge even in book 6, when it’s not her battle to fight. (No hate to Agatha. It’s just that Tedros’s arc is slightly more impressive.)

3) Tedros is not a personality vaccum.

Part of the problem with Mary Sues is that they cause everyone around them to lose all personality beyond what is needed to make the Sue look good, as the whole universe’s point is to make them look good. The world literally revolves around a Mary Sue. A smart character cannot be as smart as the Sue, an edgy character cannot have a backstory which is more tragic than the Sue’s, an attractive character cannot be as attractive as the Sue, etc.

But with SGE, this is clearly not the case. Every major character has a reasonably developed and multifaceted personality. (Except Anadil, but Anadil’s whole thing is that she doesn’t have a personality.) Think of Hester - she was introduced as Sophie’s edgy, cool, black-hearted rival. But as the books progress, we see a different side to Hester: she is very driven and determined to prove herself as more than a girl, as seen when Evelyn Sader revamps the school, she is very emotionally mature, as shown when she doesn’t hold a grudge against Hansel and Gretel, and she clearly cares about her close friends a lot - even though Dot is constantly the butt of Hester and Anadil’s jokes, they are willing to do anything to protect her, even attacking the Sheriff.

Another example is Reena - she is present throughout the books as Beatrix’s sidekick, and she is often thought of as nothing more than that, as Sophie explicitly states. But in book 6 she suddenly takes control, revealing herself to be a strong leader, quick-thinking and smart and a QUEEN.

This started as me defending Tedros and dissolved into me just stanning best girls Hester and Reena……..anyway back to the show.

4) JUST BECAUSE YOU DON’T LIKE A CHARACTER, THAT DOESN’T MAKE THEM A MARY SUE.

Being stuck up is not a Mary Sue characteristic. Being perfect is. Look me in the eyes and tell me this dopey golden retriever of a prince is perfect.

In conclusion:

Tedros is not a Mary Sue. He is a bicon and a puppy and I love him.

(Thoughts on OTK coming soon!)

SOPHIE'S TRAUMA (Or lack thereof)

Something that's always irked me about TCY is how flippant Sophie is toward references to Rafal. This old ass bitch groomed and took advantage of her, manipulated and brainwashed her with the Swan Gold, and by the Ever-Never Handbook she's talking about him like he’s an unfortunate ex and not, you know, a fucking monster.

In TLEA it is specifically stated that Sophie is terrified of Rafal before he gives her his ring. Even after that, she makes numerous comments on feeling unsafe around him. There's no denying that she was affected by Rafal's behavior during the time they were together, so why is he written off as another guy Sophie couldn't keep? Why does Rafal become a punchline from the Handbook forward, not even a year after his death?

To put it simply: Sophie was taken advantage of by an older man. She showed obvious signs of how this was negatively affecting her in TLEA. It's safe to assume that she would gain some sort of trauma from this, but such is never exploited in QFG onwards.

Sure, Sophie is a very frivolous person, so her making a joke at the expense of an ex or commenting on how he's “still hot” doesn't come unexpected. But Rafal isn’t a Tedros or a Hort or even a Rhian. Sophie was never actually in love with Rafal—she thought he was hot as a teenager, yeah, but her romantic feelings for him were made up by the ring, and the rest was about her desire to become Evil’s queen and her jealousy toward Tagatha.

It’s like… shouldn’t the memory of Rafal affect Sophie in some way outside of, “yeah he was evil but at least he was hot”, or whatever? Isn’t there a chance that maybe the reason she was happy on her own at the end of TLEA was because being with Rafal had scared the concept of having a prince out of her? And that her lunging for the first cute boy she sees in QFG is completely out of character?

Trauma and grief affect people differently. I’m not going to pretend to be a psychology major when I’m not. I can’t speak from personal experience, but I can confidently say that Sophie “getting over” Rafal as quickly as she did felt shallow and lazy.

The closest thing to a reaction at the mention of Rafal that we see from Sophie is her comparing theSnake to him in QFG and getting a little unnerved. I find it bizarre that Sophie’s pretty much moved on from the whole ordeal not even a year later.

The argument that displaying a character suffering from trauma in a children’s book is inappropriate doesn’t work here, either, because Soman’s already written the toxic relationship she would be suffering trauma from into the damn book. That’s not to mention Tedros getting tortured in book 2, Callis getting burnt at the stake, Sophie being brutalized and left to die by the Elders—seriously, I could go on for years about the things that aren’t “suitable for a M.G. novel” in this series.

In fact, I believe it would be important to show Sophie having nervous or negative reactions toward references to Rafal. It would display the damage a relationship like theirs can have on a person, and then maybe less 12 y/o’s would find Rafal and Raphie less hot.

This can be applied to more than just Sophie, too. Literally every character in this series has lost a parent or guardian. Tedros was tortured, Sophie died in book 1, Agatha watched these horrible things happen to her friends… the list goes on. It amazes me that not one character has mourned or shown grief for a dead character or has had a breakdown over the immense amount of shit they’ve been through. Callis is mentioned maybe three times over the course of TCY. It’s insane.

Is this comprehensible? I’m not sure. It’s vvv late but I need to get these thoughts out.

Bottom line: I don’t think the Sophie/Rafal situation was handled well post-TLEA, and the representation of the trauma these kids undoubtedly should have is nonexistent.

DAY ONE OF TIT BOOK CLUB

(https://www.tumblr.com/thedoodlecat/760629420839092224/the-iron-trial-book-one-of-magisterium?source=share

<------ if you're confused about this post, i suggest to check this one out)

Ok I’ve decided I’ll stop screaming in my posts.

I trust everyone has done the reading 👀👀👀

Anyway! To spark the discussion, here’s three questions to start with! reblog or reply with the answer

What is the most iconic line in the first five chapters of TIT?

The best character in the first five chapters beside the trio (the one you find the funniest, the most intriguing one)

Rate the first five chapters on a scale from 1-10, either based on how the rest of the book compares or simply in general

Also, apologies, but I will be tagging everyone who interacted with the og post, if you don't wanna participate, just ignore this!

@ashpkat @usernamesarehard1 @yg-calroniscanon

@sleep-needer

@constantinemaddeswife

@massiveladycat

@feything-n-frothing

@quilleily

@incelalexstrike

@lunarvamp @wuffgang-ameowdeus-moozart

@fl4shluvr

soman - a rant.

a lot of people have been speaking out about soman’s horrible recent livestream, a lot of experiences shared, so I would like to propose one idea, to all of us, but especially to people who have stayed on his side. roll it over in your brain a bit.

intent doesn’t matter.

what soman meant to say, what he meant to get across in these books literally doesn’t matter. if you shoot someone, it doesn’t matter that it was an accident. they still got shot. you don’t sit by their side telling them to stop crying because you didn’t mean to shoot them. you take them to the damn hospital.

soman talks a big game about how we’ve “misinterpreted” the books. about how they’re “satire.” he tells himself that taking things too literally is OUR fault. he tells himself that his young fans are “smart” so that means he can project his entire adult life onto these books with no repercussions. he has the audacity to tell himself that he’s the victim, and we’re just trying to drag him down with baseless negativity. well, guess what? news flash, kids don’t understand satire. nor do they understand the concept of an unreliable narrator, for that matter. the average 8-11 year old will accept almost everything they read as truth. even IF they register that sophie is bad, or a “regina george type,” they still leave the book with the knowledge that people in this world worry about their weight, or stop eating so they can be skinny, or view fat people as liars/second class citizens. jesus christ, no child should have to think about that! no child should have to think about their body at all! every young person who reads these books leaves with a seed planted in their mind. every. single. one. do you know how many people I’ve talked to who felt like their insecurities mysteriously appeared when they started reading sge? people who had no outlet for the things these books made them feel, because members of this fandom are so afraid to talk about serious subjects? so, no, intent doesn’t matter. only your impact matters. and I cannot believe that soman is so full of himself he can’t even acknowledge the fact his actions have consequences.

if you actually care about someone, you care about the impact your actions have on them. in this live, soman said loud and clear that he does not care about this fandom. he does not care about any of us unless we stroke his ego. he does not care about our feelings, our opinions, our personal lives, our mental illnesses. he cares about how good we make him look and how much money we can earn him. he cares that we paint him in a positive light so he can keep getting movie deals and free promo. he sees us as a bunch of 12 year olds in honors english class whose attempts at free thought are futile and stupid. well, let me tell you something. we are smarter than he wants us to think. we are more compassionate, empathetic, and open to self growth than he’ll ever be. this, right here, this speaking out is the positive change he’s told us to band together and create. he will not silence us. we are right.

soman does not know what it’s like to be a teenage girl struggling with body image. his opinion carries absolutely no weight. we know what it’s like. we trusted him to understand us, and he let us down. we carry him on our shoulders. it’s time to let him go.

OH THIS IS BANGERRRRRR WOWOWOWOWOWWWW

...the only way out is through a fairy tale.

please do not repost on other sites!!!

... i miss sge damn

Its been so long...

Making my siblings watch the sge movie, and 10 minutes in my older sister already hates it LMAOO

why sofia is an amazing choice for agatha

so i am extremely happy with the cast and think the choices are so amazing! but i’ve also seen skepticism about the choice for agatha, mainly either about her skin tone and that her actress is very, very gorgeous and not at all unattractive like the books made her out to be.

i started thinking about why the team made this decision, and it kind of ties into a feeling i had that some of the themes in sge would be adjusted for the movie. first of all, the whole ugly does not mean you’re evil and you can still be a good person despite being ugly message is just… heavily outdated. it’s not a message that will reach the audience in this day. because everyone knows that, and i don’t think anyone will find it to be a relatable message anymore especially cause agatha’s mainly looked down on because she’s goth and… goths don’t get bullied anymore ?? so the plot of the books just don’t WORK for this film especially not in this decade.

so that leads to the question: why is agatha an outcast? why is she treated poorly by the people around her? well, i believe that’s where race comes in. in this age, racism, whether it be in the form of stereotypes, violence, lack of media representation, it’s a very big issue and black people are still not being represented properly.

addressing the racism of the real world through agatha, who is shunned by her town, immediately thought of as evil without giving her a chance both in gavaldon and at the school, not seeing herself as a princess or equal to the evers in her class and sophie… not because she wears all black and has super pale skin or whatever reason worked in the books, but because of the racism that is persistent in her world and our world.

seeing agatha’s story about how she started out shunned and stereotyped and won her own fairytale, her own prince, and respect from everyone as a black woman will be so inspiring to black girls who never saw themselves in stories like these. it’s so inspiring of the casting team to make the main protagonist a woman of color and i am so happy someone as talented and wonderful as sofia wylie gets to play our agatha.

for people who are saying that you wish agatha was played by a light-skinned actress or that “we already have nicola and dot as black women,” i’d advise you to choose your statements carefully. you may not have intended it, but they are fairly racist remarks and you don’t know who you could be hurting by saying this.

and yeah, i can understand why some people may be upset about her not matching her appearance in the books, and i have to say, the books and the movies are separate. the movie is an adaptation of the books, of course things will be changed to make the movie as inclusive and successful as possible without the weight of some parts of the book holding it back. i see two stories: book sge and movie sge. of course each of these will be different in their ways but that’s the beauty of it - the movie is one story and the book is another.

Very quick sketch about how I think Agatha might have looked like (during the beginning of book 1).

Wanted to make her hair extra choppy and thin, since I headcanon her as being a very anxious mess, and with self-esteem so low she doesn't care about her hair.

Basically, she has the bad, bad habit of brushing her hair with force (ends up breaking it and It thins out her hair), and no vanity to take proper care.

When it gets too long to be practical (in her opinion) she just chops it off with whatever.

Anyways, probably going to draw her in more detail soon??? Dunno? If my hands comply