fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #1986 ]

[ SECRET POST #1986 ]

⌈ Secret Post #1986 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.

__________________________________________________

02.

__________________________________________________

03.

__________________________________________________

04.

__________________________________________________

05.

__________________________________________________

06.

__________________________________________________

07.

__________________________________________________

08.

__________________________________________________

09.

__________________________________________________

10.

__________________________________________________

11.

__________________________________________________

12.

__________________________________________________

13.

__________________________________________________

14.

__________________________________________________

15.

__________________________________________________

16.

__________________________________________________

17.

__________________________________________________

18.

__________________________________________________

19.

__________________________________________________

20.

__________________________________________________

21.

__________________________________________________

22.

__________________________________________________

Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 05 pages, 119 secrets from Secret Submission Post #284.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0- not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ], [ 1 - take it to comments ], [ 1 2 - going to have to be a little more subtle than this ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

They...don't make any comments at his expense? And there is absolutely no evidence of them being "generally assholes to him." They're shocked at his becoming king, yes, but that was a pretty shocking moment. And Loki's the one who pulls rank on them and shuts them down.

And tell me how Odin prefers Thor more than Loki. Because I'm really wondering how this is so obvious. There's just absolutely no evidence for it, unless you use "Odin made Thor king," and that's stupidly problematic because a) one of them was going to be left out no matter what, b) Thor was the firstborn son anyways, and c) even Loki says that the problem was that Thor wasn't ready for the throne, not that Thor was going to be king (Loki, incidentally, as also not ready to be king, as evidenced by his "let frost giants kill Asgardians to ruin Thor's day" fiasco).

Really, the only person we see getting chastised or punished is Thor. Odin is quick to correct Thor when he says something dumb as a kid, he calls Thor out on not being king yet, oh yeah and then he banishes Thor when he royally screws up. What do we see him do to Loki? Oh yeah, that's right, nothing. The worst thing he says to Loki is, "no, Loki," when Loki just tried to murder all frost giants. That's also disregarding the fact that it was actually Loki who ended up on the the throne anyways, so obviously Odin and Frigga didn't have a problem with Loki being a frost giant and were in fact treating him like their true son.

There is absolutely nothing in the text that gives any indication that Odin preferred Thor. In fact, believing that is hilariously misreading the text. It's one of Loki's key character traits/flaws that he takes what people says and does and twists it to what he believes to be true. Odin even calls him out on it, and so does Thor in Avengers. Taking everything Loki says at face value is just completely missing the point of his character.

All of this!

AYRT

I actually made all of my observations based on the film, and not simply what Loki said (though I don't believe every word out of his mouth was a lie, as you apparently do). I would be more than happy to write an essay on the subject, but it's been a few weeks since I've seen the film and would need to rewatch it first and take notes; I hope you'll excuse my not doing that, since I have actual work to do tonight.

I really hate your saying that anyone who thinks Loki was emotionally abused is "hilariously misreading the text." Actually, if you don't think there can be more than one interpretation of the scanty text we're provided with, I'd say you're the hilariously wrong one.

A couple things here.

1) I don't think every word out of Loki's mouth is a lie, I just think that the audience is pretty much forced (due to the amount of lies Loki does tell that we know are lies) that the audience needs to be discerning in what Loki says that they believe.

2) People can have multiple interpretations of the text. But, in my opinion, interpretations based on evidence have more weight than those based on "because I want it to be that way." We have absolutely no evidence of implications in the text, besides Loki feeling sad, that he was in any way abused (emotionally or otherwise). In fact, that belief goes against Loki's entire character and pretty much the whole point of the movie. People can feel free to believe that Loki was abused if they like, but I will feel free to disagree with them.

1. But you said right in your post that people who believe anything Loki says about his life are misreading the text! You can't have it both ways, you know.

2. So, basically, "I can interpret the text the way I want, and that's fine, but anyone who disagrees with me, no matter how much evidence they present, is wrong wrong wrong... but people can interpret the text multiple ways, really!"

1) HAHA. No. I said that anyone who takes anything Loki says at face value is hilariously misreading the text. Because, you know, that's pretty damn obvious. Loki is a lying liar who lies. Just accepting what he says because it goes along with your pet theory illustrates a complete lack of discernment (and does the character a great disservice).

2) You can interpret the text any way you want. Just like I can feel free to disagree with you. And it makes me even easier to disagree with you if it's based on absolutely no evidence whatsoever, and is consistently refuted by other people. I'm not going to say, "YOU CAN'T HAVE THAT INTERPRETATION, GO DIAF!" But I am going to say, "I think you're pretty obviously wrong, and here's why."

(Also, I'm amused that you say, "no matter how much evidence they present," when, after I asked you for evidence to support your interpretation you went, "...No. For reasons." Yeah, that's SOME evidence right there! No wonder people might disagree with you!")

A+++

AYRT

I presented evidence above. I also mentioned above that I would be happy to present further evidence, but I haven't seen the movie in a while now and would want to rewatch it to ensure that I was correct in anything as the people in this thread will pick it apart like rabid dogs to try to prove me wrong in my interpretation of a character whose presentation leaves so much open to interpretation that your whole "ha ha you're wrong!" schtick is just ridiculous.

If you want evidence, read the rest of the thread. Look at the lovely essays written by people more articulate than myself on Tumblr. Frankly, your condescension has made me feel less like trying to state my case to you than ever. I doubt you would be receptive in any case.

So to summarize, you have strong enough feelings to spend hours egnaging in this thread and these feelings are based solely and solidly on textual evidence that is important enough to give you these strong feelings but not important enough to remember accurately in order to call upon it in defense of your strong feelings in a debate and also why should you bother because people are mean and you're taking your toys and going home.

AYRT

Actually, uh, no, but thanks for being a dick?

I feel I remember things accurately to a point, but there are nuances and details I may be forgetting at this very moment. I am also concerned about accuracy because of people like you who are likely to use any minor, tiny mistake about anything ever to discredit my entire argument, because for some weird reason, proving that Loki was not emotionally abused is very important to you.

And I've been in here on and off, not continuously for hours. Please don't flatter yourself by thinking arguing with you and others like you has really been that important to me. :) If you simply must know, my girlfriend is at work and I've spent much of the day being spectacularly bored, watching anime on Crunchyroll and doing some chores, and in between that I've posted here. It takes me about a minute or less to post a reply. It.. really isn't all that time-consuming.

It's kind of weird that you think my replying more than once means I'm ~really invested~ or something to the point that my not wanting to launch into a thousand-word analysis of the movie Thor and the possibility of Loki being emotionally abused discredits everything I have to say and is somehow strange.

uh, personallyI haven't said a word to you on the substantive matter of whether Loki was or was not emotionally abused. News flash: not everyone is out to get you. Some people might have been interested in genuinely examining different viewpoints from a textual basis but found it hard when one side of the argument amounted to little more than 'he was because I say he was and also because he got teased that one time I remember.'

Though I do admit that at this point I'm more amused than anything else. And still couldn't care less what did or didn't happen to Loki, his childhood angst doesn't float my boat.

(nad you've been posting pretty far and wide and fast for someone here "on and off." If you were so bored why didn't you do that rewatch you claimed to be happy to do to support your position?)

I apologize then; I mistook you for one of the previous anons.

I have argued my point kind of extensively, I felt? I did bring up examples in the canon. I also feel like other people could look at the movie themselves and see what I meant.

(And yet, on and off it has been! And there are several reasons I didn't just rewatch Thor:
1. I don't have it available.
2. I'm trying to take a break from excessively rewatching those movies because I don't want to stop enjoying them from watching them too much.
3. As I pointed out, I wasn't continuously on the computer anyway. I was also doing chores and things, making phone calls, and so on.
Which... are not really things I should have to tell you, because I don't believe I have to justify what I do with my time, but whatever.)

Okay I'll take a step back and stop being sarcastic.

But yeah, no, I'd just suggest considering closely that more than one person clearly doesn't- even after reading all the threads- feel clear at all on where your sense of Loki is coming from. I don't think everyone is just being utter dicks. Some are but this if f_s, what can you do? others I believe would be totally up to discuss politely but are stuck at a vague-at-best idea of where your view is rooted in the text.

and to be fair there are a lot of fucking lunatics out there who defend Loki for completely shit reasons that eventually look a lot like finding TH hot and wanting to retcon the character so they can happily sexify him up without guilt. There are also people who- and I'll give you credit as probably one of them- just dig the complex villain and see the nuances. It's just really hard to distinguish one from the other when your specifics are lacking and you let the assholes get to you and provoke reaction so you LOOK like just as much a crazy internet arguer.

#1 Fair 'nuf
#2 better not be an actual possibility or I am SCREWED fuuuuuck.
#3 i as being a dick, sorry. but see above re probably better to let that shit slide a little more so your more valid points don't get lost in the bickering shit

I appreciate that.

I admit I was more vague than I'd like to be, but yeah, a lot of people in this post have been ultra-nitpicky and kind of jerks to me and I didn't feel like arguing all effing night over this? (I try to keep my comment threads just long enough that my gf gets home around when I finish, lol.) I did have some nice convos in other threads, though.

I get what you mean, yeah, but... yeah, I definitely fit into that second category. I don't want to defend Loki or make what he did somehow "okay" -- nothing can do that. What he did was wrong and horrible. But I love to explore character backgrounds, nuances, and that kind of thing. Especially complex villains, because so little media bothers to complexify their "bad guys" and venture into that gray area of "his feelings were maybe justified but his actions were not."

I'll readily admit this thread probably wouldn't have gotten to me so much if I hadn't already been kind of raw from the accusations that I was "projecting" before, a tone which was repeated somewhat in places here. Sorry about that.

But yeah.... basically I feel there is a lot of canon evidence that points in the direction of Loki having been emotionally abused, not everybody will read it that way, but I think it's a valid interpretation? And everybody can have interpretations. And it's cool. And I'm actually gonna mostly peace out now because I need to chill after this thread. <3

It's kind of weird that you think my replying more than once means I'm ~really invested~

Yeah, you are definitely not invested in this at all.

But...you haven't presented any evidence above. I know, I've read the thread. You've just gone, "I totally believe Loki was abused by everyone and his family too, and I should know because I've been emotionally abused by my family." But you haven't backed up your claims at all.

You state that Loki has "clear signs" of emotional abuse but then don't elaborate with any kind of evidence to support this interpretation.

You say that his friends "belittle, demean and insult" him, and then when I pointed out that literally ONE person made a joke, once and that was the only time any of his friends ever mocked him (and some of them even stuck up for him later), you made up some stuff about them "making comments at his expense later" which...they don't do.

I asked you for evidence regarding Odin's clear favoritism of Thor and abuse of Loki and you...said that you wouldn't give any. And now you're saying you've already given evidence when...you haven't. Also, if the "lovely essays written by people more articulate" than yourself are as "lovely" as that one you posted up-thread...yeah, I think I'll pass.

Anyways, I think it's pretty obvious that you've got absolutely nothing to support your claim, and you're just running on what you want to believe. Which, you know, is fine, you can believe whatever you want about whatever character you like. But when you bring those beliefs to a public forum you better be ready to back them up, particularly when you imply that you already have textual evidence.

If you're done with the talk, then cool. We're pretty much just sniping at each other at this point anyways.

AYRT

As I stated repeatedly, I haven't seen the movie in some time now. I tried to find the short essay I had written on the subject some time ago and was unable to locate it (unfortunately.. it was really good, but it's not in my email or my Tumblr auuugh). I didn't want to be too specific because I know that people in this thread would look for the tiniest inconsistency to jump all over and use to invalidate my entire point (as they've already done -- I'm sorry, yes, the comments at Loki's expensive bit was meant to come earlier in the comment).

As I have tried to point out in other comments, a lot of what I'm talking about isn't really in-your-face shit. Emotional abuse very rarely is. I apologize for using myself as an example again, but few people would have guessed when I was a child that I was being emotionally abused by my family. It isn't a kind of abuse that leaves scars and it isn't as simple and clear as saying "I hate you, [son/daughter/whatever]." It's... stuff like watching your brother and his friends treat you like shit (making snide comments, Thor's "know your place, brother," Loki always seeming off to the side, separated/isolated during scenes with them) and doing nothing about it, like never telling your son you love him no matter what, like hiding a huge part of his identity from him and then expecting him to be totally cool with that, like teaching your son to hate what he is his entire life and then oh, by the way...

There's more, and a lot of it is body language, inflection, tone, delivery, etc. but really I don't want to go into it ALL right now, without a fresh look at the actual movie. So you know, whatever. I have to go since my life is back, ciao.

Er, Odin didn't teach Loki to hate his frost giant heritage. It's pretty obvious in the text that Odin goes to great lengths to dispel the notion that the frost giants are EVIL MONSTERS (probably because, you know, his son is one of them). Everything he says about them is all very objective, and every time Thor acts like they're only monsters Odin is quick to call him out on it.

I mean, probably The People of Asgard considered them monsters, but Odin can't exactly control public opinion. But he can control his own actions, and he does. He is consistently measured towards the frost giants, and never acts angry or emotional at them. They are enemies of Asgard, he can't exactly pretend like the whole "they tried to kill humans," thing didn't happen, but he can make sure that he doesn't perpetuate the idea that they're mindless beasts who deserve to die.

I don't get how people miss all this. It's pretty much key to understanding...well, the whole movie.

Also, re: Odin not telling Loki about his heritage, Frigga even says why he did it, and you know what, it makes sense. He didn't want Loki to see himself as an outsider, he wanted Loki to feel like he was a true son of Asgard. And not only that, when Loki discovers the truth, Odin goes to great lengths to reiterate that Loki is Odin's son. Loki is the one who twists everything Odin says to somehow mean that Loki is a monster (Odin even calls him out on it). And guess who ends up on the throne? Loki, treated like a true son.

I doubt Odin expected Loki to be "totally cool" with the whole frost giant thing. That's probably why he starts out the whole confrontation with, "You are my son." It's only bad luck that leads to Odin being out of commission while Loki is having his little identity crisis.

As for the other stuff, well we've already covered the fact that there's no evidence that Thor's friends "treated Loki like shit." As for Thor being a dick to Loki, well, he was literally a dick to everyone. He was dismissive of his friends, he was an arrogant dick to his father. Like, that's the whole point of the beginning of the movie.

And if we say Thor is abusive because he's a dick, can we say that Loki emotionally manipulating Thor into getting banished, then visiting him in Midgard and lying to him even more to send him spiraling into a guilt trip, then KILLING HIM...maybe kinda sorta counts as abusive behavior? I mean, is it not at all possible that they were both just jerks to each other? After all, the whole plot happens because Loki wanted to fuck with Thor's head (and didn't care who got killed in order to further that goal).

*headtilt*

I rewatched the movie fairly recently (my husband couldn't remember what happened and it really set up a lot for Avengers) and I definitely remember there being some jabs at Loki toward the beginning of the movie. They were obviously meant humorously but -- haven't you ever had Those Friends who don't get when they've gone past the point of humor and are actually hurting? Particularly so when it's the same sorta joke over and over.

Unless the whole beginning of the movie is The Roast of Loki and I somehow managed to consistently miss it, I'm 95% sure that the one wisecrack is really the only joke at his expense.

For the first part of the movie, Loki mostly converses with Thor so there actually isn't much opportunity for anyone to make cracks at his expense. That's why the "silver-tongue turned to lead?" comment is so easy to remember. Because it's the only one.

I mean, Thor says some douchebaggy stuff, but considering Thor is a douchebag it goes with the territory.

And I get having ~mean friends~ but there's not any indication that they are like that at all. Actually, I think it's more likely that Loki would be the mean friend (considering the W3 talking about how he likes to play tricks or making mischief whatever), but to be fair there's nothing that really supports that in canon (besides him turning a cup of wine into snakes or whatever. Which I wish they had kept in the movie because it shows Loki being mean and also shows Thor thinking the meanness is funny, which goes a long way to show how jerky they BOTH are at the beginning of the movie.)

Anyways, I don't think the joke was funny, I just think that people who go, "AND OBVIOUSLY THOR'S FRIENDS ALL HATE LOKI," are...incorrect. Which was where the line of reasoning was leading.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

[ SECRET POST #1986 ]

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject