57020 réponses à ce sujet

[SurelyForth]

Addai67 wrote...

River5 wrote...
Anders will be a complete **** to Fenris in that scene only if Hawke chooses the option to give him back to Danarius.  If you don't that piece of dialogue will never have happened.

No, I think it's safe to say that Anders is a complete **** in that scene whether you give Fenris to Danarius or not.  Saying "you're just jealous of her, you bloody hypocrite" is not exactly tender understanding when a guy has just found out that his only living relative sold him out to his former master for personal gain.

There is that, too.

And (I'm not bashing Fenris here, just pointing this out) it's the flipside of Fenris needling Anders about Ella. It's vicious how he does it, and shows quite clearly what Fenris thinks about Anders which is...not much.

ToP again. >.>


by EvilBunnyKing

Modifié par SurelyForth, 05 juillet 2011 - 05:05 .

[CulturalGeekGirl]

@River5

That was generally what I had in mind when I said "Can't it be both?" I also think that while what you describe sounds like an ideal balance between rhyme and reason, (Oh my god why did I say poetry and logic instead of that?) there are a number of different configurations of those two qualities that will lead to a decent relationship, but you need some of both or it doesn't sing.

Modifié par CulturalGeekGirl, 05 juillet 2011 - 05:03 .

[River5]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

CulturalGeekGirl wrote...
Basically I'm saying don't be an idiot, but there's also gotta be some poetry there, otherwise people wouldn't devote like 90% of bloody media to the subject.

I think that's a social construct more than anything else. Or perhaps just natural. Not too dissimilar from animals howling louder than others to attract a mate (the comparision might be harsh and not 100% acurate, but it's worth pondering on).

Of course I am not saying that my version of love is:
"According to my calculations and logical estimates, I think we have a 90% probability of being able to form a healthy partnership for the long term. Will you agree to establish such a relationship with me?"

"My calculations seem to agree with yours and I see it as mutually beneficial for us to enter such an arrangement. I therefore concure."

Because that....would be weirdly boring.

There has to be passion in it. Firey passion at that (for me at least). But one managed by reason, as opposed to passion overriding reason. That's my taste at least.

ROTFLMAO!  

Weirdly boring you say?  I don't know!  Since I have this uncanny natural attraction to complete geeks, this is exactly the kind of weirdly boring stuff that might have made me go wild!  

Of course, it's the humor in it that would have done it for me, so if that turned out to be 100% serious and you kept a straight, almost wounded face if I started laughing, then it would completely break the charm.

But that's definitely the kind of silly thing that I would find very endearing. 

But yes, I agree, passion (especially in the initial stages) is a must.  Though you must be able to expect needing to make efforts to keep that passion alive as the years go by.  It's very easy to start feeling "too comfortable" in the relationship, and put the passion aside.  Both partners ideally shouldn't lose sight of that.  Oh!  And passion doesn't only cover the sexual aspect of the relationship either, but a bunch of other couple interactions / activities.  Always good to know!  

[schnln01]

Delurking to try and post a somewhat relevant pic, lets see if it works. >.>;;

[KnightofPhoenix]

River5 wrote...
ROTFLMAO!  

Weirdly boring you say?  I don't know!  Since I have this uncanny natural attraction to complete geeks, this is exactly the kind of weirdly boring stuff that might have made me go wild!  

Of course, it's the humor in it that would have done it for me, so if that turned out to be 100% serious and you kept a straight, almost wounded face if I started laughing, then it would completely break the charm.

But that's definitely the kind of silly thing that I would find very endearing. 

Lol well yea, if it's the joking kind.

What would make me go wild is something like this:

"With our combined strength, we can inscribe our place in history and make the world in our own image" 

.... (made me fall for Bastilla easily)

But yes, I agree, passion (especially in the initial stages) is a must.  Though you must be able to expect needing to make efforts to keep that passion alive as the years go by.  It's very easy to start feeling "too comfortable" in the relationship, and put the passion aside.  Both partners ideally shouldn't lose sight of that.  Oh!  And passion doesn't only cover the sexual aspect of the relationship either, but a bunch of other couple interactions / activities.  Always good to know!  

Of course. The sexual aspect is important, but certainly not the only thing or the most important thing even (imo).
My kind of passion goes beyond the physical, though doesn't deny it.

For me, an intellectual convo can be passionate. 

[CulturalGeekGirl]

River5 wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

CulturalGeekGirl wrote...
Basically I'm saying don't be an idiot, but there's also gotta be some poetry there, otherwise people wouldn't devote like 90% of bloody media to the subject.

I think that's a social construct more than anything else. Or perhaps just natural. Not too dissimilar from animals howling louder than others to attract a mate (the comparision might be harsh and not 100% acurate, but it's worth pondering on).

Of course I am not saying that my version of love is:
"According to my calculations and logical estimates, I think we have a 90% probability of being able to form a healthy partnership for the long term. Will you agree to establish such a relationship with me?"

"My calculations seem to agree with yours and I see it as mutually beneficial for us to enter such an arrangement. I therefore concure."

Because that....would be weirdly boring.

There has to be passion in it. Firey passion at that (for me at least). But one managed by reason, as opposed to passion overriding reason. That's my taste at least.

ROTFLMAO!  

Weirdly boring you say?  I don't know!  Since I have this uncanny natural attraction to complete geeks, this is exactly the kind of weirdly boring stuff that might have made me go wild!  

Of course, it's the humor in it that would have done it for me, so if that turned out to be 100% serious and you kept a straight, almost wounded face if I started laughing, then it would completely break the charm.

My questions are much simpler than either of yours.

"Is this enjoyable or interesting?" 
"Is it likely to harm either of us?"

Those questions only determine whether or not I want to pursue the relationship at all, though. I guess my question as to whether or not it was love would be:

"Does this feel like it means something?"

There's a reason I said poetry rather than passion. Poetry is... meaning drawn from words that are not the simplest or most direct way to express that meaning. For it to be love, for me anyway, you have to look at the parts and see that the whole is greater, or that some meaning emerges from an assemblage of things that you never considered in that particular way before.

The best example I can think of that people here might relate to is the Garrus romance. Take a bond of comradeship, a high level of trust, and some fundamental curiosity about chemistry, and you could end up with a nice casual friends with benefits situation. But instead, love becomes an emergent quality that is not pre-determined by the components.

I still sound like a robotrobotrobot.

The Anders romance is more difficult to analyze, because people have such wildly divergent opinions of what constitute its basic components. I assume that most people consider it more of a "romantic love" than a "true love," based on the definitions from the previous page, and that's what troubles me. I can see a way to get to something approaching "true love" with Anders, but I may be reaching too far outside the script now, and telling one of the stories from my head over top of a thing that is not the same again.

God damn it what is up with my voice today?

[KnightofPhoenix]

CulturalGeekGirl wrote...
God damn it what is up with my voice today?

You speak your posts out loud?

[CulturalGeekGirl]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

CulturalGeekGirl wrote...
God damn it what is up with my voice today?

You speak your posts out loud?

Writerly voice! I think rereading Gunnerkrigg Court has gotten me into a weird pseudophilosophical mindset that has been exacerbated by the fact that we're discussing the fundamental nature of love, which is something that I always try to apply a combination of science and magical theory to, with the result of nothing working because come on, if we could actually solve that problem we'd pretty much revolutionize human society.

[River5]

CulturalGeekGirl wrote...

I've had relationships that amounted to "hey, we get on reasonably well and are attractive to each other. Let's spend time together for a while." I don't define those as love, though. Perhaps normal people would? And in the end we get bored, and they usually wander off looking for something more dangerous, and I'm left mourning not the loss of a specific person, but the loss of a particular form of companionship. Man I'm sure I must seem robotic here.

I've had relationships based on logic and they don't make the songs seem like they're true. Well, other than certain magnetic fields songs that are all about relationships that don't include actual love, but you get the idea. I feel that there has to be something to "love" beyond what I've seen. Otherwise... well... there isn't really much to write home about, is there?

I've also never been attracted to anyone dangerous to me or harmful to me. There were a few times when I told a story about what kind of man someone was and it turned out to be not true, just a clever fancy laid out upon a blank slate. In two of those cases, the man underneath was... not a great person, but not a terrible one either. And I learned. I learned to keep my dreams inside my head and not see hints of them outside.

Basically I'm saying don't be an idiot, but there's also gotta be some poetry there, otherwise people wouldn't devote like 90% of bloody media to the subject. My picture of love contains the poetry of infatuation and the logic of companionship.

Many people are in love with the idea or concept of love, I think...

And I don't know if "falling in love" (that "infatuated feeling") is truly necessary in order to develop a solid, loving relationship with someone.

Perhaps there are people who will never "fall in love" that way, yet are completely able to achieve the other stages of "being in love" without any problem at all.  They know how to love, and have that ability, but they just don't naturally "target" the object of their desire, and/or "obsess" on it for a while the way most would do.

Also, teenagers seem to "fall in love" faster, and stronger than most adults.  So there's probably a certain level of emotional maturity to consider in there as well.

Looking at the lenght of your posts, and the quality of their content, I would venture that you may be a very rational person, and perhaps the type to naturally intellectualize your emotions and relationships.  "Infatuation" implies a certain loss of control over one's self, and thought processes.

Personally, I don't think it is even necessary to experience that particular form of  "love", or that you are missing out on something vital by not having experienced it yet.

It would be far more tragic if you spent your whole life waiting for that "Romeo & Juliet" romance to come your way, before allowing yourself to truly love another, or seek companionship.

Songs and romantic books/movies are poetic, but can be misleading.  I know that most of the fanfictions I write have absolutely nothing to do with the "reality" of love, and that's sort of the whole point, if not that wouldn't be fantasy. 

So I'll write these stories about the all encompassing kinds of love where one cannot exist without the other...  Big soulmate, written in the stars kind of stuff...  Bring on the angst, and the tragedy, deaths, suicides and all that...  But that's pure 100% fantasy that some part of my twisted mind finds disturbingly beautiful, and likes to feed on!  Lol!.

My Hawke falling  for Anders?  100% fantasy self manifesting and being incredibly self indulgent by totally going for it!  Lol!

[CulturalGeekGirl]

SurelyForth wrote...

Normally I'd agree with you, River5, but the fact that Anders/Fenris, in seven years of moving in the same circles and sharing the same friends, are neither closer nor less terrible to each other is pretty much...yeah. There has to be some level of want on the part of one or more of the parties and even as Fenris evolves, his attitude towards Anders remains firmly at "hypocritical abomination."

Anders sorta devolves, too, which would make him even less attractive to Fenris (seriously, why am I coming at this from Fenris' perspective?). He becomes even more unstable, singleminded and dangerous while Fenris is starting to enjoy his life and the very simple pleasures of being with people he can relax around. Fenris isn't looking for a project, or a cause, because he has enough of his own anger and he wants to get rid of it, not take on more via someone like Anders.

@CGG

See, I think Justice becomes singleminded when he merges with Anders. He goes from All The Injustices to Injustices Against Mages. I mean...that's part of the problem. And it's why he'd be ok with Fenris being taken back by Danarius, because it's not an injustice that he cares about.

And Anders isn't exactly a saint in Awakening. I don't think that he killed the templars, but he was certainly glad to see them die (and he was there when they died, and did nothing to save them). If he dislikes someone enough...yeah, I can see him being glad that they get their comeuppance and it being in character.

(Bah, have had this post in the draft hopper for an hour, working on it between nonsense. It's got to be done-ish-enough by now)

I agree that Justice becomes singleminded... but I also feel that that is fundamentally unhealthy for Justice, piled on with all the other things that are hurting our friend the spirit. But nobody ever engages Anders on that subject, except for one banter with Isabella, and even she is all about undercutting the idea of Justice, rather than expanding it. Also at that point it's act 3 I think, and too late.

My big problem with DA2 is that Anders is like "oh no this merger has gone horribly wrong!" and nobody ever says "Ok, why don't you think about how it went horribly wrong and try to work on it?" Hawke comes teasingly close, with the "only you can make it work" line, but... that whole conversation is more about suppressing than fixing it, which is not the right path and argh.

A lot of the fic I like involves "little pushes" that change the story. Or to put it differently, stories that ask the question "what if everyone wasn't such a god damned idiot all the time?" This isn't just something I enjoy in fanfiction, mind you... this is a theme that started with pastiches and interpretive lit or whatever you would call modern retellings of Shakespeare and new stories about Sherlock Holmes. So many modern stories can be completely fixed in act one or two if you put just one person with a hint of goddamned sense in the universe, and I get frustrated with that. I literally can't watch any retelling of Romeo and Juliet because the tragedy of that play is that all the primary players are idiots, and while I know that such things happen in real life, I have no interest in witnessing them.

A long time ago a friend and I wrote a joke one-act called Ophelia's Oil Can, which is all about Ophelia figuring out what was wrong with Hamlet and chewing him out about it. Of course, that ruins one of the greatest works of literature of all time, and I don't think it's actually reasonable for Ophelia to posess that level of cleverness and willpower... she's just a child, after all, and women back in that era weren't taught to meddle or have agency. But as a frustrated sixteen-year-old myself, it seemed reasonable that maybe Hamelet's girlfriend would actually yell at him to stop being stupid rather than going off and killing herself. (also, you guys should totally check out this completely legitimate lost ending to Hamlet which is much better than my idea and also the best thing ever. I would pay ready money to see that production of Hamlet.)

Anyway, back to the topic at hand. I'm OK if a character's basic intractability is reinforced by having it challenged in a way that is reasonable and having that person take an absolutist stance from which all future absolutist stances can be reasonably inferred. Sebastian is a great example of this: his dialogue with Anders about how the Maker gave Anders to the Circle and Sebastian to the Chantry so really nobody is free defines his ideals clearly, and tells us a lot about how he views injustice, and fate. But Fenris is less intractable: he respects Bethany or Hawke. He agrees that blood magic is the real threat, much more than any other kind of magic, and entertains the premise that some mages are strong enough to resist its lure. There is a doorway there, it just needs to be opened. Or at least knocked upon. And it never is. If someone tried and he responded in a way that closed and locked it forever, then that would be fine. It would satisfy me, and it would remove the idiot ball from play in my mind.

I've had arguments with friends in real life that have lead us to agreeing that there are certain subjects upon which we disagree at base principles. But there is just enough common ground between Anders and Fenris (both agree that some mages are dangerous and some can be trusted) that there is room to maneuver. They're just both too pig-headed to take that first step. So you need a little push.

[Evilnor]

I find it interesting that Fenris can trust some mages (read: Bethany), but can't trust the only one capable of healing his wounds from a distance for most of the game almost solely because he's an abomination, and not even the sort of abomination he's used to. Granted, there are some other things about Anders that doubtlessly get on his nerves (preaching about mage rights and going after Hawke come to mind), but Anders never earns Fenris' trust for some reason in spite of probably saving his life dozens of times over. I guess Bethany's just too damn nice.

Incoming Fenris/Bethany pairing? *shrugs*

[River5]

CulturalGeekGirl wrote...

My questions are much simpler than either of yours.

"Is this enjoyable or interesting?" 
"Is it likely to harm either of us?"

Those questions only determine whether or not I want to pursue the relationship at all, though. I guess my question as to whether or not it was love would be:

"Does this feel like it means something?"

There's a reason I said poetry rather than passion. Poetry is... meaning drawn from words that are not the simplest or most direct way to express that meaning. For it to be love, for me anyway, you have to look at the parts and see that the whole is greater, or that some meaning emerges from an assemblage of things that you never considered in that particular way before.

The best example I can think of that people here might relate to is the Garrus romance. Take a bond of comradeship, a high level of trust, and some fundamental curiosity about chemistry, and you could end up with a nice casual friends with benefits situation. But instead, love becomes an emergent quality that is not pre-determined by the components.

I still sound like a robotrobotrobot.

The Anders romance is more difficult to analyze, because people have such wildly divergent opinions of what constitute its basic components. I assume that most people consider it more of a "romantic love" than a "true love," based on the definitions from the previous page, and that's what troubles me. I can see a way to get to something approaching "true love" with Anders, but I may be reaching too far outside the script now, and telling one of the stories from my head over top of a thing that is not the same again.

God damn it what is up with my voice today?

I believe that the only difference between a "friend with benefit"  v.s. a  "romantic partner", is actually the level of commitment you have towards each other.

"Friends with benefit" can be "in love", yet they do not feel that they share enough similar goals / dreams / viewpoints in their respective lives to make the relationship grow, or work long term.

They don't see a "future" with that particular person, but it doesn't stop any of the other feelings from happening.

About Anders, this is EXTREMELY tricky, and my "romantic self" would REALLY want to say that yes, "true love" can be achieved with him...

However, my rational, "been there, done that", having had few similar experiences self is doubtful.

Okay, I think there could be hope.  But NOT if Hawke is the only thing in his life keeping him sane.

Hawke either has to be his therapist, or his lover.  He can't be both!

Anders would need a very strong source of support / stability that remains emotionally neutral, and that is situated OUTSIDE of the couple he forms with Hawke, in order to make this work.

I've been with men that acted like I was their very own life preserver, and that aspect of the relationship was becoming so very invasive that there wasn't place for anything else at some point.  It was either I left, or I would have wounded up dying from all the stress / responsibilities that were being put upon my shoulders.  I would've drowned with them, while what they trully needed, was to learn how to swim on their own.

Anders needs to rebuild his self-confidence and learn to stand / live / function on his own before he would be truly ready to enter a strong, healthy relationship.

I actually cheered when the character of Angel in BTVS was given his own show.  Lol!  As sad as I was by having Buffy and Angel take a break in their relationship, I was glad that Angel would be given the chance to find his own personal purpose in the world WITHOUT Buffy.

I don't know if I'm still making any sense...  Lol!

[Sialater]

CulturalGeekGirl wrote...

I've had arguments with friends in real life that have lead us to agreeing that there are certain subjects upon which we disagree at base principles. But there is just enough common ground between Anders and Fenris (both agree that some mages are dangerous and some can be trusted) that there is room to maneuver. They're just both too pig-headed to take that first step. So you need a little push.

Which is why Fenders isn't possible without Hawke being in the middle of that sandwich.  

Not that that's a bad thing....:innocent:

[ademska]

CulturalGeekGirl wrote...
I've had arguments with friends in real life that have lead us to agreeing that there are certain subjects upon which we disagree at base principles. But there is just enough common ground between Anders and Fenris (both agree that some mages are dangerous and some can be trusted) that there is room to maneuver. They're just both too pig-headed to take that first step. So you need a little push.

and this is what i was getting at before when i mentioned people giving very reasoned, well-written arguments in defense of the possibility of fenders. you recognize that fenders is not possible without changing their interactions within the game, and thus we have a supposition that either (or worse, both) must be willing to overcome their pigheadedness toward the other. i know, i know, it's fic, and you've already stated that you appreciate fic where subtle things are altered to provide an enjoyable experience. i do too. it's within the very nature of fanfic to ticker with presented canon.

however, to me? achieving even the most distant of fenders requires far, far more alteration than anything i've read in hawke/anders stuff, no matter the interpretation of anders or hawke.

i mentioned this last night as well, but now that we're operating within an argument paradigm of alteration in fic for funsies, i'll restate it: the other great obstacle in fenders is that anders falls in love with hawke. now, anyone who's been in fandom more than a day knows its predilection to eliminate the hypoteneuse, but once again you've got a dramatic changing of story events to be overcome, and i don't see the appeal. and since we're speaking in fic terms now versus what's possible or not within canon confines, appeal is everything.

the potential outcome is healthier for anders, maybe, and i understand that's why you like the idea, CGG, but what about fenris? someone, i think surely, said upthread that anders devolves significantly by act 3, especially if not in a relationship with hawke, while fenris has largely begun to progress with his life as a free man. what does this largely impossible relationship bring to the table for him?

Modifié par ademska, 05 juillet 2011 - 06:45 .

[beckaliz]

CulturalGeekGirl wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

River5 wrote...
Oh!  My own personal conception of love is very different too.  "Romantic love" follows no logic whatsoever, and it's not a type of relationship that I am interested in real life with my significant other.
But "romantic love" follows no rules, and can be very destructive and unhealthy for those that fall pray to it.

*snip some middle bits*

"Love", a.k.a. the initial attraction one feels for another is senseless.  What makes it work eventually is what your brain does with it.

Precisely. Almost exactly what I used to say in the Alistair thread. Almost word for word.

Romantic love is way too overrated and I find it repulsive (as in very unattractive). As in if a person loves me that kind of love, I would not be attracted to her.

Can't it be both?

Then again, the only thing I know about love is that I have never been in it, and it cannot be accurately mapped from the outside. Because of that I'd take any variety of love on offer, provided it was reasonably likely not to permanently destroy me, just to be able to see the territory. I mean I have had friendship love, and I love my family of course, and I have a general sort of universal love of all mankind... you know, like you do. But those are different countries, and much simpler ones.

I was in head-over-heels love once. We were all cute and young, talking about soul mates and ooohhh it was going to be wonderful to grow old together and stuff.

Maybe we were just too young, but there were quite a few things that we were blind to just because we were too romantic and didn't think things through. Hence the young thing I guess.

Anders has made me appreciate the cute and the sap, but it's not all daisies and rainbows by any stretch. I just can't wrap my head or my emotions around lovey dovey romance anymore. I mean I'm friends with the guy again, actually, but it took a couple years after the divorce (sigh) for me to recover some semblance of self. I think with purely romantic love, you give up too much of that for an ideal that is not practical.

KnightofPhoenix wrote...


I think that's a social construct more than anything else. Or perhaps just natural. Not too dissimilar from animals howling louder than others to attract a mate (the comparision might be harsh and not 100% acurate, but it's worth pondering on).

Of course I am not saying that my version of love is:
"According to my calculations and logical estimates, I think we have a 90% probability of being able to form a healthy partnership for the long term. Will you agree to establish such a relationship with me?"

"My calculations seem to agree with yours and I see it as mutually beneficial for us to enter such an arrangement. I therefore concure." 

Because that....would be weirdly boring. 

There has to be passion in it. Firey passion at that (for me at least). But one managed by reason, as opposed to passion overriding reason. That's my taste at least. 

Sounds like Xanatos and Fox. XD [smilie]http://social.bioware.com/images/forum/emoticons/heart.png[/smilie]

Modifié par beckaliz, 05 juillet 2011 - 06:31 .

[beckaliz]

YamiSnuffles wrote...

I interrupt all this talk of love, hate, and Fenders for a finished commission:


For Beckaliz, it's Anders trying the best way he knows how to play with Dog.

I luvs it! Thank yoouuuu~

[SurelyForth]

CulturalGeekGirl wrote...
Anyway, back to the topic at hand. I'm OK if a character's basic intractability is reinforced by having it challenged in a way that is reasonable and having that person take an absolutist stance from which all future absolutist stances can be reasonably inferred. Sebastian is a great example of this: his dialogue with Anders about how the Maker gave Anders to the Circle and Sebastian to the Chantry so really nobody is free defines his ideals clearly, and tells us a lot about how he views injustice, and fate. But Fenris is less intractable: he respects Bethany or Hawke. He agrees that blood magic is the real threat, much more than any other kind of magic, and entertains the premise that some mages are strong enough to resist its lure. There is a doorway there, it just needs to be opened. Or at least knocked upon. And it never is. If someone tried and he responded in a way that closed and locked it forever, then that would be fine. It would satisfy me, and it would remove the idiot ball from play in my mind.

I've had arguments with friends in real life that have lead us to agreeing that there are certain subjects upon which we disagree at base principles. But there is just enough common ground between Anders and Fenris (both agree that some mages are dangerous and some can be trusted) that there is room to maneuver. They're just both too pig-headed to take that first step. So you need a little push.

Fenris likes Bethany, but he still nudges her towards the Circle. He trusts and respects her, but he still thinks she'd be better off there. Doesn't that sorta lock that door? If Bethany, the nicest most non-threatening mage in the history of Thedas is still someone that Fenris thinks should be locked up, doesn't that show exactly where his lines are drawn? They might agree on blood mages (which they do, even in Act 3 if Merrill is the blood mage in question), but unless it's Hawke, Fenris is probably always going to be completely for Circles because that's, in his mind, a reasonable compromise for the safety of everyone. And...we know how Anders feels about that.

Yami comes through:

Modifié par SurelyForth, 05 juillet 2011 - 06:32 .

[DragonRacer]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

I think that's a social construct more than anything else. Or perhaps just natural. Not too dissimilar from animals howling louder than others to attract a mate (the comparision might be harsh and not 100% acurate, but it's worth pondering on).

Of course I am not saying that my version of love is:
"According to my calculations and logical estimates, I think we have a 90% probability of being able to form a healthy partnership for the long term. Will you agree to establish such a relationship with me?"

"My calculations seem to agree with yours and I see it as mutually beneficial for us to enter such an arrangement. I therefore concure."

Because that....would be weirdly boring.

There has to be passion in it. Firey passion at that (for me at least). But one managed by reason, as opposed to passion overriding reason. That's my taste at least.

For some reason, my mind totally read that using Legion's voice.

And, somehow, that made it not boring, but rather strangely endearing and adorable.

....

....

....

I'll be in my bunk...

[KnightofPhoenix]

DragonRacer wrote...
For some reason, my mind totally read that using Legion's voice.

And, somehow, that made it not boring, but rather strangely endearing and adorable.

....

....

....

I'll be in my bunk...

Well Legion is an exception. I find him adorable too (though not the in my bunk variety).

[YamiSnuffles]

beckaliz wrote...

YamiSnuffles wrote...

I interrupt all this talk of love, hate, and Fenders for a finished commission:
-snip-
For Beckaliz, it's Anders trying the best way he knows how to play with Dog.

I luvs it! Thank yoouuuu~

You're welcome! <3

[beckaliz]

On the plausibility of Fenders... Speaking from personal experience, I have an odd attraction to someone who is politically and emotionally opposite me in EVERY SINGLE WAY POSSIBLE. He's an ****, he ****ed out my mother on Facebook (you do not disrespect my mother), he works for the-entity-formerly-known-as-Blackwater, and... uh... Well, other reasons.

How and why this works I have NO CLUE. I do not like him at all. I don't even think I've admitted this to anyone I know. I'm certainly not going to say who it is. x_x;;

Now, I'm not sure whose position this would be, if it would be Anders's or Fenris's. Except Anders does seem to want some kind of acceptance from Fenris. And I know I don't care about this person's approval, and he certainly doesn't care about mine.

But there's absolutely no way in hell I'd ever even consider pursuing a relationship with this guy, much less try to get his attention. *shudder*

For Fenders, as much as there are cases of people hating each other and getting over it, I think that there are some very deeply rooted fundamental differences in their personalities and in their opinions and in the way they react to the world that keep them apart. I don't think any subtle manipulations would do the trick. As somebody mentioned, there'd have to be some major alterations.

EDIT: And the fanart has to be really pretty and well done for me to get into it, because, well, Fenris is East-style and Anders is West-style, in my mind. They are two competing realms of.. of... uh. Something.

Modifié par beckaliz, 05 juillet 2011 - 06:51 .

[berelinde]

SurelyForth wrote...

Addai67 wrote...

River5 wrote...
Anders will be a complete **** to Fenris in that scene only if Hawke chooses the option to give him back to Danarius.  If you don't that piece of dialogue will never have happened.

No, I think it's safe to say that Anders is a complete **** in that scene whether you give Fenris to Danarius or not.  Saying "you're just jealous of her, you bloody hypocrite" is not exactly tender understanding when a guy has just found out that his only living relative sold him out to his former master for personal gain.

There is that, too.
And (I'm not bashing Fenris here, just pointing this out) it's the flipside of Fenris needling Anders about Ella. It's vicious how he does it, and shows quite clearly what Fenris thinks about Anders which is...not much.
ToP again. >.>
<cuteness snipped>

Fenris needles Anders about Ella, true, and he does so viciously, but there's more to it than that.
Fenris knows who his sister is. Someone cared enough about his identity to remember who his family was. Anders would probably do cartwheels if mages had the same degree of autonomy. He remembers being torn from his family, but  he is forbidden from ever communicating with them again, something Fenris does freely and without repercussion. Don't forget, Vanaria betrays Fenris not because she fears Danarius will kill her but because she wants a favor from him. Danarius confirms this himself when he says "She did what any good Tevinter citizen would have done." He implies that she betrayed him out of greed, not out of fear. So, while I always let Fenris kill Varania, I have a hard time sympathizing with him when he abuses Anders. Anders would (and does) kill for the freedoms Fenris takes for granted.

[CulturalGeekGirl]

Evilnor wrote...

I find it interesting that Fenris can trust some mages (read: Bethany), but can't trust the only one capable of healing his wounds from a distance for most of the game almost solely because he's an abomination, and not even the sort of abomination he's used to. Granted, there are some other things about Anders that doubtlessly get on his nerves (preaching about mage rights and going after Hawke come to mind), but Anders never earns Fenris' trust for some reason in spite of probably saving his life dozens of times over. I guess Bethany's just too damn nice.

Incoming Fenris/Bethany pairing? *shrugs*

I also consider Anders and Ella an interesting parallel (though obviously not equivalent) to Fenris and Varania.

Justice wants so badly to save mages and help Ella, and when she calls him a demon, it must feel like the ultimate betrayal, though of course she doesn't know that. She's just seen a mage glow and do all sorts of murder, even if it is to save her life, and everything has taught her that means "demon."

On a similar level, I don't think Varania truly understands what going back to Danarius would do to Fenris. For her, freedom felt worse than slavery (though we don't know at what age she got her freedom, or what her life was like.) The difference is that yes, Varania knows that she is hurting Fenris in some way at least, and she is doing it for personal gain. Killing her is much more understanable, though I still don't usually allow it.

The point is, both are crimes of passion that Hawke can avert. And both are about feeling incredibly betrayed by the thing you most wanted to save.

Just thinking about this has just given me a sad. I picture Justice screaming inside Anders the entire game, "why do you keep calling me a demon? Why does everyone keep calling me a demon?" and Anders won't defend him, because he's scared its true, and that just makes Justice angrier, and more hurt, and more desperate.

[River5]

DragonRacer wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

I think that's a social construct more than anything else. Or perhaps just natural. Not too dissimilar from animals howling louder than others to attract a mate (the comparision might be harsh and not 100% acurate, but it's worth pondering on).

Of course I am not saying that my version of love is:
"According to my calculations and logical estimates, I think we have a 90% probability of being able to form a healthy partnership for the long term. Will you agree to establish such a relationship with me?"

"My calculations seem to agree with yours and I see it as mutually beneficial for us to enter such an arrangement. I therefore concure."

Because that....would be weirdly boring.

There has to be passion in it. Firey passion at that (for me at least). But one managed by reason, as opposed to passion overriding reason. That's my taste at least.

For some reason, my mind totally read that using Legion's voice.

And, somehow, that made it not boring, but rather strangely endearing and adorable.

....

....

....

I'll be in my bunk...

ROTFLMAO!  

Dialogue by bleedingcrow, comic can be found here: bleedingcrow.deviantart.com/art/Mass-Effect-Romance-Fail-154425384

Legion: Shepard-Commander.
Shepard: Forget the formalities Legion.  You and me, in my room.  We're making love, now!
Legion: That activity would require appliances restricted only to organic life-forms.
Shepard: Do you at least have a vibration function?
Legion: Affirmative.
Shepard: In my room please.
Legion: Yes, Shepard-Commander.