So I've been thinking about the ways in which I am predictable lately, for no specific reason, and I've come to the conclusion that not only do I not mind signposted tragedy, I actually really enjoy it.
But here's the thing: It has to be signposted. (This may not be the right word; basically the narrative has to be aware that it is a tragedy on some level.)
Idk. I just think there's something fascinating about the inexorable march of tragedy when you know it's on the move. It's a trainwreck in slow motion. It's mesmerising
It's Norse myths, for example, which is essentially one long tragedy. You always know Odin and Loki will betray each other, the gods will die and the worlds will end (and for extra bonus points, odin knows it too). Once things are set in motion -- be that when Odin and Loki become bloodbrothers or when odin cosults the völva or, hell, when Ginnungagap gets bridge -- everything starts falling down like a HOLY OVERREACTION BATMAN set of dominos.
where the line that sold me on the whole thing was Burr going "And me? I’m the damn fool that shot him".
Okay, so part of the reason for this post is that I am still listening to Hamilton
a lot and I recently told rachelmanija
: "I like the idea that Hamilton "threw away his shot" and Burr didn't "wait for it" at the duel FOR MAXIMUM TRAGEDY :D". Then earlier today I remembered that when I'd tried to sell ljlee
I had used "The world was wide enough" and she'd asked me if Burr/Hamilton hit me in my Hannibal/Scipio place* and yeah, it kind of does.
Sidenote, while I'm on the subject of works that announce from the very start that they will end in doom: You know what else does that? Billy Shakes' Romeo and Juliet
. I keep wanting to draw this parallel between Burr and Hamilton and Romeo and Juliet, because they are both very intense relationships that end in tragedy and not knowing where to put said parallel so here you go.
Speaking of Billy Shakes: it takes a lot of skill to get people invested in a story when you tell them the ending six lines in
Also earlier today (my days are full of earliers, what can I say), I saw this gifset
of Padme, Anakin and Obi-Wan and it broke my heart in all the best ways. I really like the Star Wars prequels, but it wasn't until this gifset that I realised that it's because they're so tragic -- and they do actually feel like myths to me, because that tragedy grounds them into myth (I imprinted hard on Norse myths, lmao).
And I was thinking about how I was totally meh on Obi-Wan/Anakin pre-my recent Revenge of the Sith rewatch and not I am not meh about it at all! It's goes: Obi-Wan/Anakin before Anakin goes darkside = "not my thing, but you do you"/"sure, why not" and Obi-Wan/Anakin after Anakin goes darkside = "man, it's a good thing maythe4thbewithyou
is right around the corner".
This makes it sound like I only like stories or ships with tragedy in them. Not true! I ship some perfectly tragedy-free ships
. I pretty much low-level ship just about anything, by the law of averages some of them must be tragedy free. Like Parker/Hardison/Eliot from Leverage
. There's a tragedy-free ship from a tragedy-free show that I love.
It's just that I am very predictable in certain ways. I'm almost ashamed of how fucking predictable I am, but at the same time I don't even care.
*New people: I am very invested in Hannibal Barca/Scipio Africanus
. And now I want a Star Wars AU.