|
|
Post by rylfrazier on May 24, 2021 23:41:10 GMT
I disagree that the hatred of Tony has been adequately shown in the comic. I also disagree that it doesn't matter if we see opposing views in comic. In doing so I hope to explain why this is ringing flat for a lot of people. -We have Eglamore, whose majorly biased and easily dismissed -Parley, biased and based on Eglamore's bias and therefor dismissable -Kat, who changed her mind. -Surma who loved him -Renard, who seems completely over any resentment you used to have -The Donlans who are his friends and remain as such -Jones who is incapable of hate -Juliette who at least trusts Tony enough to come to him for help -Coyote who was angry, then took one whiff and then found him more amusing and pitiful than worthy of scorn -The classmates which was more presented as students gossiping about that one strict teacher than actual hatred And I think that's everyone we see him interact with in person? No one really hates him except Eggs. That's why when Annie says she knows how badly they hate him and talk about him it seems almost nonsensical. Because the worse thing I think her classmates said was....they didn't get why she would want to live with him? And that he gave her a lot of homework. You know. Things teenagers say about ANY authority figure they see as strict. That is not how teens express hate. But Annie expresses that she accepts their hatred because Tony's attitude sometimes justifies it but... Out of all those people.....none of them actually have any negative emotions toward Tony for his attitude, whatever it is, that prevents him from being open around more than one person. All of their concerns, which for the most part are far too mild to be called hate, are born out of concern for Annie, because she had a mental breakdown when he came back. Not dislike of him as a person or for his anxiety. The only place we really see Tony get treated with hatred as a person...is the forums. Which is why so many people feel this is Tony preaching at the audience. Had we been shown people treating Tony disdainfully, with real hatred for being different, we might understand how this monologue and Annie's conclusions are rational. This lack of showing here makes this monologue feel misplaced because it isn't addressing the situation as presented in universe. This is where more balanced perspectives in universe would have helped. The sheer length of Annie's monologue, and the melodramatic way it's framed, is hard to justify both narratively and structurally with what has been shown in universe. Because without this visceral hatred the literal entire world is supposed to have for Tony ever appearing on screen, I must conclude the hatred being referenced to is meta-textual. Does that make sense to anyone? I really just remain baffled by what exactly Tom is trying to do with the story. I went back and re-read the chapter where Tony is introduced and to me it could not be more clear that Tom was presenting a new antagonist and that Annie or Annie's friends were going to need to help save her from the soul and mind crushing behavior of Tony, who was arbitrarily and capriciously cruel to her. The idea of a very long, very tedious "redemption arc" for tony with no actual redemption is so bizarre to me. |
|
|
|
Post by rylfrazier on May 25, 2021 0:15:35 GMT
I really don't think Tom is doing himself or the fans any favors with this chapter for reasons I think I've already covered (I simply do not agree with what appears to be his / the comic's clear 'take' on how to deal with parents like Tony, and I also feel like the execution has been pretty heavy handed) but it appears to be almost over, so that's a positive in my book. As a writer myself who sometimes writes characters I don't entirely approve of (great characters are not necessarily good people), I want to point out the hazard of interpreting the writer's opinions from the actions of a single fictional character. Particularly when there are already a bunch of other characters who have expressed different views. I'm also an amature writer, so I do understand that the "voice of the writer" and the "voice of the main character" are not always the same thing, but in this case (as others have pointed out) the dissenting voices have been largely converted over to "yay Tony" or "Tony is OK I guess", with the only firm negative being Eggy, who has always basically been presented as the jealous resentful ex with his own axe to grind. The closest Annie has come to addressing her dad being arbitrarily cruel to her really for no reason other than "Tony's a mess because of mind cage!" by at least admitting that there is "a mean part of him" - but overall from the moment he broke her will and she cut her hair she has been very firmly "I love him, he's right and I'm lucky to have him". It is just such an odd turn IMO for a never realistic fantasy story about an adventurous child to just go in the direction "adventures were stupid and dangerous, it's a good thing my dad made a bunch of arbitrary rules for me, separated me from my friends and shut me in a white void for a year. I should stay with my dad and should just do whatever he says and offer him 100% love and support no matter what, that's a much better use of my time". |
|
|
|
Post by todd on May 25, 2021 0:33:15 GMT
After reading all of this, I wonder whether the real problem is that because "Gunnerkrigg Court" is a webcomic (in essence, self-published), Tom had no editors or beta-readers who could point out to him that the Anthony thread might come too close to cases of abusive parenting for the comfort of many of his readers, and advise him to tweak it accordingly.
I've been wondering for a while (ever since the debate heated up here) about why Tom brought in the Ahthony thread, including rereading many of the chapters and thinking over the overall story.
1. Tom was clearly planning this almost from the start; take a look at the way Annie talks about Ahthony as early as Chapter Six. Anthony was repeatedly established (thought other characters' reminiscences, flashbacks, etc.) as withdrawn, distant, seemingly emotionless.
2. While only Tom can explain why he took the courses he took with the story, I'd like to offer my speculations here. Tom had planned Annie to be asocial from the start, from the evidence. I suspect that he, from there, sat down to work out why she was that way, and that her backstory (the first twelve years of her life in a hospital, Surma's death, Anthony's withdrawn tone, etc.) arose from that. I suspect that he, in particular, saw Anthony's distant behavior as a major reason for Annie's similar behavior, a case of "like father, like daughter" - and from there, was interested in working out why *Anthony* was that way.
3. I also suspect that a major point about the nature of Anthony's return was plot necessity. The way Tom had drawn up Anthony's characterization, he wouldn't want to return to Annie of his own accord; he was too burdened with guilt, too uncomfortable to be around her, would choose to keep himself away from her. In order for him to return, it would have to be through the agency of another character - hence the Court forcing Anthony to return. (And a few chapters later, Coyote so intimidates the Court that it backs away from Anthony, thus removing that element once it's completed its narrative function, and allowing the Anthony thread to concentrate on what - I assume - Tom really meant it to be about: Anthony's remoteness and Annie's response to it, rather than the restrictions he'd placed upon her and the punishment for cheating.)
(I think that the manner of Anthony's return in "The Tree" may have had a few drawbacks, though I suspect, also, that it was the best that Tom could come up with. For a start, since Annie really was guilty of cheating - and on a scale that, in real life, would have meant serious consequences for her - it made her response, in the eyes of many readers, seem like a spoiled brat making a fuss over being caught and justly punished for her wrongdoing; I remember a few such comments here back when "The Tree" came out - and drew the attention away from the real point, Anthony's emotional distance. To others, Anthony's punishment came across as heavy-handed enough to, as rylfrazier said above, made him seem as "a new antagonist" whom Annie's friends needed to rescue her from. But I'm having a hard time thinking of how Tom could have arranged for Anthony's return to the Court and the establishment of their troubled relationship without something like that - or indeed, how he could have handled the Anthony thread so that it would accomplish its purpose without getting too close to real-life emotional abuse from parents. I do think that one problem with the approach rylfrazier mentions is that, since the official reason why Anthony was acting as he was was to discipline Annie for cheating, Tom would have had to make certain that the "rescue Annie from her father" attempt from Annie's friends wouldn't come across as excusing cheating or denying that those actions needed some sort of disciplining.)
4. I think it matches the tone of "Gunnerkrigg Court" that the story explains why Anthony is the way he is, reveals his "cold and distant" tone towards Annie to be the result of his "mind cage"/social anxiety, and has Annie seeking to understand rather than to condemn him. The webcomic's shown a preference to avoid villains and thorough unredeemed evil (except with a few bit characters such as Hetty in "Quicksilver", who seem to have been designed largely as plot devices - Hetty, for example, as a means of exploring Reynardine's character). Take the way Tom's handled the Court and the Forest. Both sides have committed many atrocities in their struggle, but Tom takes care to show their motives for those actions - fear of the other side and belief that only by committing said atrocities could they keep themselves safe. It's been made clear that Annie's goal is to resolve this conflict by making peace - genuine peace - between the two sides, rather than to help one destroy the other. We also got a statement in the last chapter that Kat would set the Court onto a better path, showing that it can be redeemed. In light of this atmosphere, I think it natural that the story would seek to understand Anthony and make his acts those of a weak and broken man who needed to be explained.
Should Tom have maybe handled the details differently, to make the Anthony thread less evocative of real-life parental abuse? Perhaps, though I don't know as yet how he could have done it. As I've mentioned in other threads, I think that much of the reason why Anthony comes across as unsettling is that he's more "realistic" than the other characters; he has no etheric trappings, for a start (which I think is vital to his characterization - his rational scientific outlook, unwilling to accept the etheric as existing without a scientific explanation, is a major part of who he is), unlike other characters whose actions, if treated in a more mundane fashion (such as Coyote, Ysengrin, or Zimmy) would trouble us. Indeed, as I've also mentioned before, you could transfer the essential relationship between Annie and her father to realistic fiction, making some surface changes (like having Surma die from a real-world illness rather than as part of an etheric cycle, leaving out Anthony's deal with the fake guides and how it threatens Annie's life, making the Court into an ordinary boarding school without the "science fantasy" aspects, etc.), but making the essential relationship issues the same. Maybe it's just too realistic and that's the source of the trouble.
(We could use another "essay" from Tom, like the one he did for "A Week For Kat" about how Ally's turning into a bird was a metaphor for childhood friends moving away, this time on the Anthony subject, but I doubt we'll get one.)
|
|
|
|
Post by todd on May 25, 2021 0:38:57 GMT
It is just such an odd turn IMO for a never realistic fantasy story about an adventurous child to just go in the direction "adventures were stupid and dangerous, it's a good thing my dad made a bunch of arbitrary rules for me, separated me from my friends and shut me in a white void for a year. I should stay with my dad and should just do whatever he says and offer him 100% love and support no matter what, that's a much better use of my time". This might be another argument for the thought in my post above that maybe the manner of Tony's introduction in "The Tree" wasn't the best one for the story; it drew the readers' attention too much towards the discipline-laying down, and not towards what (if I'm reading the story correctly) is the root of the trouble: Anthony's problems interacting with Annie, problems he had displayed long before she went to the Court and were independent of her breaking Court rules. |
|
|
|
Post by todd on May 25, 2021 1:14:36 GMT
This one being my biggest complaint about the story. I don't really understand how Kat went from hating Tony to the point where she confronted him in front of her family and Annie, to casually joking around with him in a lab. This is not the kind of thing that is done off-screen, it should require a chapter, much like this one, to explain the process in which the characters arrived at such state. I suspect that Tom wanted us to share in Annie's shock in finding Kat's approach towards Anthony so suddenly changed. |
|
|
|
Post by SilverbackRon on May 25, 2021 1:56:51 GMT
I'm kind of neutral on Tony where I find the idea of him very interesting and have been fairly torn on how that idea has been explored. I like the chapter where he's talking to Donny as Annie observes secretly. I like the part of this chapter where him and Jones are speaking. I LOVE the chapter with him and Surma in the woods. I hate that Kat suddenly forgave him off panel because he was charming, when her coming to respect and forgive him over time could have been such a strong arc. I also hate that Annie's feelings about him were presented in a long monologue, to a character with no particular reaction. I wish this had been more of a back-and-forth conversation. As it was it was a very flat way to find out vital information about the protagonist. I'm disappointed this is how this conversation is wrapping up. I feel like, for many people, Tony is just someone they have no interest in exploring, and that's fair enough. He's a hard character who did some incredibly cruel things. I also feel like more people would be on board with this chapter if its content had been presented a bit more dynamically. Text heavy pages in a comic are always a slog. I am certainly in the disliking of Anthony camp most of the time. Is he guilty of child abuse by the way he has ignored/neglected his daughter, or the way he treated her when he belatedly returned? This is hotly debated. Or is he a victim of mental illness, perhaps somewhere on the Autism spectrum, or some other issue? Is he therefore deserving of our sympathy, support or at least patience? Again, hotbed issues. You have SO many good points that I have to quote you! Those points you raise are all valid. I truly am dismayed that Kat went from hating Anthony to being best pals without any real explanation. Antimony got in a great monologue in this chapter, but it was just that. One sided, speaking to the one person in the entire comic who is incapable of sympathy or true understanding of the issue. Oh, she has seen abuse, mental illness and much much more in her life. She simply doesn't care because she can't. That doesn't mean Jones isn't still one of my favorite characters in GKC. We have seen Jones proactively pushing characters into situations to see how they react, this is more like she is just recording data points. Hopefully the next page or two will provide some bigger picture view of this. But then again I have been hoping for that for several years now (when it comes to Anthony). |
|
|
|
Post by Fishy on May 25, 2021 2:38:40 GMT
Can't deny that the chapter has felt overlong, but in a weird way, I feel it's more like this chapter isn't meant for me. Like... I kinda wish I was in the category of people who just sorta... forgot everything about Tony since his introduction, which I assume is what's happening with so many people, because a lot of the stuff in this chapter is repeat information. It felt very "This is kinda repetetively hammering it in, didn't we discuss this years ago?" but on the threads for the pages where I felt that, there were always people surprised.
A bit off topic from what I'd planned to say. I forgot, I wanted this to be about Jones.
It must be really easy, and especially nice even to talk to Jones. I get that the chapter's been really long with people monologuing at her, but god that just has to be the most freeing thing ever. Therapy's nice and all, but it's still a human behind that notepad. Could you imagine being able to talk at length about the things most important to you or what you're most passionate about to someone that is guaranteed to not judge, not even internally? And yet still be 100% listening the entire time? Not even just listening because it's polite, but someone who would legitimately hear every word and be able to talk to you about it with zero emotional stance. It's gotta be better than therapy. Gotta be better than talking to a mirror. Maybe not better than talking to the people who really support you, but definitely high up there for if the topic is something uncomfortable. Basically, Jones is my ideal drug.
|
|
|
|
Post by frankehfresh on May 25, 2021 3:07:25 GMT
I was a part of the Tony Hate brigade but now I just find him an intriguing tragic character. Someone (can't remember who) compared Annie's interactions with the Court and Tony's reactions to their threats of removing her from 'the program' to a parent of a minority child trying desperately to protect their kid from a hateful, discriminatory system, and that made it click for me. Tony isn't an 'abuser,' he's a neurodivergent man who fears for his child's life and reacted by treating her harshly. That was wrong of him to do, but the reasons why he behaved that way make sense and are honestly gutwrenchingly resonant.
Annie making excuses for Tony makes sense, because she's come to understand why he behaved the way he did, how his mental state limits his behavior to certain modes of thinking depending on his environment, and she decided she loves the person he is, even if she still resents some of his actions.
So I'm all here for the themes of the chapter, but I've grown so tired of it. Hopefully this is the last we have to hear about Tony and Annie's deal.
I do suspect this is building to something, but for the life of me I couldn't guess what with any confidence. My gut says that the Court finally finishes the Omega Device, Tony tries to warn Antimony about it and either gets disappeared or otherwise silenced, and Annie and friends have to navigate Loup's attempts to take control of the Omega Device while also either getting it out of the hands of the Court or outright destroying it.
|
|
|
|
Post by antiyonder on May 25, 2021 3:28:39 GMT
I was a part of the Tony Hate brigade but now I just find him an intriguing tragic character. Someone (can't remember who) compared Annie's interactions with the Court and Tony's reactions to their threats of removing her from 'the program' to a parent of a minority child trying desperately to protect their kid from a hateful, discriminatory system, and that made it click for me. Tony isn't an 'abuser,' he's a neurodivergent man who fears for his child's life and reacted by treating her harshly. That was wrong of him to do, but the reasons why he behaved that way make sense and are honestly gutwrenchingly resonant. A fair assessment and sometimes we need to remember to be absolutely sure before assuming such actions to be a fact. And while Tony may not be an abuser, one doesn't have to be acting out with hostile, malicious intents. Heck sometimes such people honestly believe those acts to benefit/help their child(ren). |
|
|
|
Post by Gemminie on May 25, 2021 4:10:59 GMT
I really just remain baffled by what exactly Tom is trying to do with the story. I went back and re-read the chapter where Tony is introduced and to me it could not be more clear that Tom was presenting a new antagonist and that Annie or Annie's friends were going to need to help save her from the soul and mind crushing behavior of Tony, who was arbitrarily and capriciously cruel to her. Perhaps it's because you're seeing it through the lens of a protagonist-antagonist relationship? After all, he wasn't introduced in chapter 51 as an antagonist. He was introduced in chapter 2 as a plot arc for Annie to deal with in some way yet to be determined. The arc developed more in chapter 6, when we found out that he'd disappeared. After that, it resurfaced from time to time, even though Tony himself didn't. It was made clear in chapter 37 that Annie had both positive and negative feelings toward him. When he finally appeared, it was as a complication in that existing arc that led to various other developments. His presence has continued to cause both complications and developments. I don't see a reason why that wouldn't continue. Taking the long view, Annie's only just recombined, so recently (storywise) that we haven't even gotten an explanation for that yet, but we're first seeing the effect that's having on her relationship with her father – which isn't too much of a stretch, considering that the conflict that arose between the two Annies seemed to center on how she handled her memory of her mother. Taking an even longer view, for the first 12 years of Annie's life Tony was an emotionally distant father, and then Surma's death smashed everything apart, and Tony became physically distant too. He met some Bad Guys who took advantage of him, which I absolutely cannot see as his fault. Then he returned to the Court in a messy collision of bad choices, causing lots of fallout, but after it settled, things pretty much went back to the way they'd been for the first 12 years, only without Surma, so not really the same. As someone who lost their mother at a young age and whose father therefore had to be away at work a lot, I find the story resonates with me. (He remarried several years later, and most of the time things were OK, but nothing was really the same again.) I don't see Tony as an abusive father – he's a deficient father, a man whose disability makes him highly unsuited for being a father, a man who's made bad choices but not malicious ones, and a man who's lost control at one particularly intense moment, hurting his daughter emotionally. But he's also a father who loves his daughter and wants the best for her. He also knows things that she and we don't, and he doesn't often explain himself. There is no evidence of a pattern of abuse, just a guy who isn't really well equipped to be a father and raise a child, like a lot of others. Should I post this? I've written several posts like this during this chapter, then decided not to post them. I don't want to fan the flames. But I just can't see Tony as an antagonist. He'd have to oppose Annie in some ongoing way. |
|
|
|
Post by puntino on May 25, 2021 4:31:14 GMT
I really just remain baffled by what exactly Tom is trying to do with the story. I went back and re-read the chapter where Tony is introduced and to me it could not be more clear that Tom was presenting a new antagonist and that Annie or Annie's friends were going to need to help save her from the soul and mind crushing behavior of Tony, who was arbitrarily and capriciously cruel to her. Perhaps it's because you're seeing it through the lens of a protagonist-antagonist relationship? After all, he wasn't introduced in chapter 51 as an antagonist. He was introduced in chapter 2 as a plot arc for Annie to deal with in some way yet to be determined. The arc developed more in chapter 6, when we found out that he'd disappeared. After that, it resurfaced from time to time, even though Tony himself didn't. It was made clear in chapter 37 that Annie had both positive and negative feelings toward him. When he finally appeared, it was as a complication in that existing arc that led to various other developments. His presence has continued to cause both complications and developments. I don't see a reason why that wouldn't continue. Taking the long view, Annie's only just recombined, so recently (storywise) that we haven't even gotten an explanation for that yet, but we're first seeing the effect that's having on her relationship with her father – which isn't too much of a stretch, considering that the conflict that arose between the two Annies seemed to center on how she handled her memory of her mother. Taking an even longer view, for the first 12 years of Annie's life Tony was an emotionally distant father, and then Surma's death smashed everything apart, and Tony became physically distant too. He met some Bad Guys who took advantage of him, which I absolutely cannot see as his fault. Then he returned to the Court in a messy collision of bad choices, causing lots of fallout, but after it settled, things pretty much went back to the way they'd been for the first 12 years, only without Surma, so not really the same. As someone who lost their mother at a young age and whose father therefore had to be away at work a lot, I find the story resonates with me. (He remarried several years later, and most of the time things were OK, but nothing was really the same again.) I don't see Tony as an abusive father – he's a deficient father, a man whose disability makes him highly unsuited for being a father, a man who's made bad choices but not malicious ones, and a man who's lost control at one particularly intense moment, hurting his daughter emotionally. But he's also a father who loves his daughter and wants the best for her. He also knows things that she and we don't, and he doesn't often explain himself. There is no evidence of a pattern of abuse, just a guy who isn't really well equipped to be a father and raise a child, like a lot of others. Should I post this? I've written several posts like this during this chapter, then decided not to post them. I don't want to fan the flames. But I just can't see Tony as an antagonist. He'd have to oppose Annie in some ongoing way. I agree completely. Don't worry about your posts, as long as they are respectful, they are fine. People feel the need for a character to directly antagonize Anthony's actions, but several events throughout his appearances act as the consequence of the choices he took and his misguided behavior. Being misled by etheric entities, being threatened by the court, being called out at the donlan's dinner, being scorned by Coyote. The list goes on. All of these go to show that he has barely made any proper parenting and life decision throughout the story, it's just that it's not direct confrontation. That's what I mean when I say this feels like people need confirmation to their opinions, coming from a character. This being said, however: This lack of showing here makes this monologue feel misplaced because it isn't addressing the situation as presented in universe. This is where more balanced perspectives in universe would have helped. The sheer length of Annie's monologue, and the melodramatic way it's framed, is hard to justify both narratively and structurally with what has been shown in universe. Because without this visceral hatred the literal entire world is supposed to have for Tony ever appearing on screen, I must conclude the hatred being referenced to is meta-textual. Does that make sense to anyone? I understand your point of view and I agree. While I don't think it would be strictly necessary, due to the reasons mentioned above, I still feel a little more display on the flak Tony has been receiving would better explain why this chapter exists, in the first place. And finally, I don't think Tony antis are unreasonable, nor that they resonate with Eggs. So far I don't think I have seen this kind of argument (the eggs-critics link) in the forums. |
|
|
|
Post by rylfrazier on May 25, 2021 4:31:47 GMT
People have stated repeatedly that "there is no pattern of abuse" as if that's just something we all accept is true. We don't have to agree, but I don't accept that as true.
He literally placed her in a all white prison with bare walls, isolated from everyone but him *for a very long time*. That is abusive and it didn't just happen in an instant, he chose day after day to let that remain the state of affairs to make sure he had broken her.
He also lost control and was extremely cruel to her and never apologized for it, but it wasn't all one moment of weakness. He wanted something from her, which is to break her will and spirit completely, and he got it. Now that she's compliant he has stopped abusing her. If she stood up to him again, would the abuse start again? He's a fictional character so who knows, but if he were a real life abuser? I would bet hard on it starting again.
|
|
|
|
Post by puntino on May 25, 2021 4:35:50 GMT
People have stated repeatedly that "there is no pattern of abuse" as if that's just something we all accept is true. We don't have to agree, but I don't accept that as true. He literally placed her in a all white prison with bare walls, isolated from everyone but him *for a very long time*. That is abusive and it didn't just happen in an instant, he chose day after day to let that remain the state of affairs to make sure he had broken her. Yes, I will just say I partly agree with Gemminie now.  Tony has made several mistakes throughout the story, and one of those was resorting to what is essentially torture to "set Annie back on track". |
|
|
|
Post by antiyonder on May 25, 2021 4:43:19 GMT
I don't see Tony as an abusive father – he's a deficient father, a man whose disability makes him highly unsuited for being a father, a man who's made bad choices but not malicious ones, and a man who's lost control at one particularly intense moment, hurting his daughter emotionally. But he's also a father who loves his daughter and wants the best for her. He also knows things that she and we don't, and he doesn't often explain himself. There is no evidence of a pattern of abuse, just a guy who isn't really well equipped to be a father and raise a child, like a lot of others. Should I post this? I've written several posts like this during this chapter, then decided not to post them. I don't want to fan the flames. But I just can't see Tony as an antagonist. He'd have to oppose Annie in some ongoing way. But surely you can at least agree that abuse doesn't have to be a product of malicious intent even if it's hasty to call Tony as such. |
|
|
|
Post by Gemminie on May 25, 2021 5:52:20 GMT
But surely you can at least agree that abuse doesn't have to be a product of malicious intent even if it's hasty to call Tony as such. I don't think there has to be malicious intent in order for something to be abuse. I think a parent could even commit abusive acts believing them to be good for the child in some way, "believing" being the operative word. That is, there'd have to be a reasonable yardstick by which the parent is wrong and their acts aren't good for the child. Because discipline is also a thing; if the child has been breaking the rules, there have to be consequences. But reasonable consequences. It's actually more than reasonable for Annie to have to repeat year 9, considering she'd been cheating not just throughout year 9, but back in year 8 as well. It's unreasonable to send her out of the room to remove her makeup and for the class to sit in silence until she comes back. Ugh. I was telling myself I wouldn't rehash all of this, which has been rehashed ad infinitum already. |
|
|
|
Post by antiyonder on May 25, 2021 6:27:06 GMT
It's unreasonable to send her out of the room to remove her makeup and for the class to sit in silence until she comes back. Ugh. I was telling myself I wouldn't rehash all of this, which has been rehashed ad infinitum already. Also having her in that large room by herself and not notifying her of having to go back a grade before her arrival to class with the whole passing out books in her absence. I mean would you possibly consider the more unreasonable aspects as abuse if Annie wasn't in need of discipline? Or would you agree that her misconduct means that any it doesn't make hypothetical abusive consequences less abusive? I mean I'm pretty sure that parents who qualify as abusive will employ some reasonable punishments too. |
|
laaaa
Full Member
Posts: 247
|
Post by laaaa on May 25, 2021 7:32:31 GMT
People have stated repeatedly that "there is no pattern of abuse" as if that's just something we all accept is true. We don't have to agree, but I don't accept that as true. He literally placed her in a all white prison with bare walls, isolated from everyone but him *for a very long time*. That is abusive and it didn't just happen in an instant, he chose day after day to let that remain the state of affairs to make sure he had broken her. Did he specifically choose that room for her? I was under the impression that because all the dorms were full, the Court placed her in an independent room. Who's to say that Tony saw this room and was all like "Hmm yes, this will do, I want her to go to THIS one" and not that the Court said "She's gonna go over THERE". Compliant? Annie didn't stay compliant. She demanded Renard back, and he promptly gave him back to her. She demanded to wear makeup again, and he didn't oppose her. She resumed her job as the forest medium (and I know Coyote interfered in that, but Tony also stated that her job there was good and it's good to resume it, he didn't allow her begrudgingly). The only thing she stopped, is cheating (and that's a relief). Tony's motivations never were "Now I'm gonna crush my daughter to pieces and tie those to myself" (which would be horribly abusive) and the reason we know that is that Annie is demanded her freedom back and he gave it to her without a fuss. That's not a complicated plot to tie her back to him again (he'd have to point out to her all the time how nice he is now, and he doesn't do that) it's just someone how doesn't know How To Parent and is trying to figure it out, failing spectacularly at the beginning. The only potentially abusive thing he did in my book was sending her off to Court and then disappear without an explanation or goodbye. This could be considered neglectful, but then another question arises: isn't the right thing for a parent who believes themselves incapable of being a parent (due to poverty, mental illness, physical illness, an addiction, a toxic home situation, etc) to send the child off to someone who would provide in a better way? I mean, it would definitely be neglectful for a PTSD-ed war veteran to have a child and barely cater to its needs. Is it also neglectful for the PTSD-ed war veteran to say "hey, I can't do this, and my child deserves better. I'll send it to this high-quality full time boarding school"? Tony still should have told her "I can't take care of you because I'm a hot mess of issues. I love you, but I'm ill. I'll send you to GC, you'll be happy and safe there." I'd have zero grievances against him if he'd done that. |
|
|
|
Post by worldsong on May 25, 2021 8:02:08 GMT
People have stated repeatedly that "there is no pattern of abuse" as if that's just something we all accept is true. We don't have to agree, but I don't accept that as true. He literally placed her in a all white prison with bare walls, isolated from everyone but him *for a very long time*. That is abusive and it didn't just happen in an instant, he chose day after day to let that remain the state of affairs to make sure he had broken her. He also lost control and was extremely cruel to her and never apologized for it, but it wasn't all one moment of weakness. He wanted something from her, which is to break her will and spirit completely, and he got it. Now that she's compliant he has stopped abusing her. If she stood up to him again, would the abuse start again? He's a fictional character so who knows, but if he were a real life abuser? I would bet hard on it starting again. I'm going to give a hard no to the idea that Tony has been trying to break Annie's spirit, for reasons already explained by Iaaaa. If that's what he was trying to do he's really, really bad at it and should feel ashamed of his incompetence as a torturer.
As a parent he tries to keep Annie away from what he considers problematic behaviour. As a person he's horrible at dealing with Annie so he botches his attempts at setting her on the right path and puts her through a lot of stress and suffering.
But that's worlds apart from this almost diabolic "And now I must bend you to my will" narrative that you're putting in there.
|
|
|
|
Post by pyradonis on May 25, 2021 8:11:17 GMT
This one being my biggest complaint about the story. I don't really understand how Kat went from hating Tony to the point where she confronted him in front of her family and Annie, to casually joking around with him in a lab. This is not the kind of thing that is done off-screen, it should require a chapter, much like this one, to explain the process in which the characters arrived at such state. I suspect that Tom wanted us to share in Annie's shock in finding Kat's approach towards Anthony so suddenly changed. If he wanted that it certainly worked, but a proper explanation afterwards how that could happen would have been in order.
People have stated repeatedly that "there is no pattern of abuse" as if that's just something we all accept is true. We don't have to agree, but I don't accept that as true. He literally placed her in a all white prison with bare walls, isolated from everyone but him *for a very long time*. That is abusive and it didn't just happen in an instant, he chose day after day to let that remain the state of affairs to make sure he had broken her. Did he specifically choose that room for her? I was under the impression that because all the dorms were full, the Court placed her in an independent room. Who's to say that Tony saw this room and was all like "Hmm yes, this will do, I want her to go to THIS one" and not that the Court said "She's gonna go over THERE". Compliant? Annie didn't stay compliant. She demanded Renard back, and he promptly gave him back to her. She demanded to wear makeup again, and he didn't oppose her. She resumed her job as the forest medium (and I know Coyote interfered in that, but Tony also stated that her job there was good and it's good to resume it, he didn't allow her begrudgingly). The only thing she stopped, is cheating (and that's a relief). Tony's motivations never were "Now I'm gonna crush my daughter to pieces and tie those to myself" (which would be horribly abusive) and the reason we know that is that Annie is demanded her freedom back and he gave it to her without a fuss. That's not a complicated plot to tie her back to him again (he'd have to point out to her all the time how nice he is now, and he doesn't do that) it's just someone how doesn't know How To Parent and is trying to figure it out, failing spectacularly at the beginning. And just for the sake of completeness, the white room was not a prison. Literally the first time it is seen, Kat visits Annie, which is apparently no problem. There was literally zero indication Annie could not come and go whenever she wanted, all Tony seemed to be interested in at that point was that she did all of her homework.
And, hmm, well... It appears that Annie and Annie were not... exact copies of Annie. Indeed, they appeared to be *SPLIT* instead of *copied*. Which makes it pretty jarring that Zimmy simply forced these two different personalities into one. I am still of the opinion that two independent persons were destroyed. |
|
|
|
Post by antiyonder on May 25, 2021 8:28:17 GMT
Okay, I'm going to rephrase my question.
What would a person have to do at minimum to be considered abusive without doing it malicious and consciously?
|
|
laaaa
Full Member
Posts: 247
|
Post by laaaa on May 25, 2021 9:25:11 GMT
Okay, I'm going to rephrase my question. What would a person have to do at minimum to be considered abusive without doing it malicious and consciously? For me, it'd have to be self-centered. Tony has never explained his feelings and motivations to Annie. He explained them to Donny, but it was done in a matter-of-fact-way, without trying to excuse himself or absolve himself from responsibility. At SOME point in the story, after he has managed to mull over things and gathered his courage, he'll probably have the same conversation with Annie. Now, if that went: "I CAN'T do any better, that's just who I am, deal with it" in stead of: "I can't do any better right now but I promise you I'm trying, because you deserve better. I have started seeing a psychologist, but I know it might not be enough, and it will certainly not undo everything I've done. You don't owe me anything. If at any point you want to distance yourself from me, I completely understand. If you want to continue, it will be on your own terms" "You have to understand me" in stead of "You are right to be angry with me" "I don't want to apologize for my failings because everything I did, I did for you" in stead of "I don't want to apologize for my failings because I don't deserve your forgiveness" "Please don't leave me, I have no one else" in stead of "Would you like to live with me?" "Nobody understands me. I'm happy I have you." in stead of "I know other people don't like me, and that's fine. Don't feel obliged to take my side. It's not the child's job to support the parent, it's the other way around" "I did it for your own good" instead of "I'm sorry I failed you so many times. I should have done better" I'd call that relationship abusive. It may not be conscious manipulation on Tony's part, but it'd still pull the focus from the child to the parent, put enormous pressure on the child to conform and lower her boundaries, guilt her into keeping the relationship, pressure her to feel sorry for the parent, remove her right to be upset, set demands that she has to meet, etc. I know he hasn't had that conversation yet, and that's Not Good. If he gets himself together by the end of the year and has a proper conversation with Annie, I'd say it's okay. If he postpones it for the next decade, it's Not Okay. |
|
|
|
Post by sebastian on May 25, 2021 9:29:59 GMT
Okay, I'm going to rephrase my question. What would a person have to do at minimum to be considered abusive without doing it malicious and consciously? The make up thing was abusive, but one instance of abuse (especially when not in full control of one mental faculties) don't make one an abuser. |
|
|
|
Post by silicondream on May 25, 2021 9:33:09 GMT
And, hmm, well... It appears that Annie and Annie were not... exact copies of Annie. Indeed, they appeared to be *SPLIT* instead of *copied*. Courtnnie was more assertive and put her foot down when having to deal with her father. She demanded to start wearing makeup again. Sylvannie was not sure he'd let her, *but even when she found out he'd let her, she STILL didn't start to wear make up*. Courtnnie was more keen on remembering her mother, while Sylvannie was more willing to let go. They could still have been exact copies at first, though. Courtnie was rejected by "Ysengrin," failed in her diplomatic mission and then was locked out of the Forest for six months, making her medium role more or less irrelevant. Sylvannie learned about Loup, confirmed that Ysengrin's shade still cared about her, came back to the Court bearing critical info and promptly found herself treated like an alien. That's more than enough difference in their histories to impact their personalities, especially for a kid as complex and mercurial as Antimony. On the makeup specifically: I think Annie's makeup is war paint she uses whenever she has to accustom herself to a new social environment, and needs a veneer of maturity to gain space and attention. She first started wearing it when she came to the Court; she hastily applied it when Jones brought it after she moved in with the elves; and Courtnie demanded it because she wanted to redefine herself as a full-time student and Tony's companion. Sylvannie didn't need the war paint because her role never really shifted; she never stopped being a medium doing important medium things. Plus, with Coyote and Ysengrin gone, Courtnie had to cling extra-hard to her other emotional supports: Tony, Kat, Renard and her mom's memory. He literally placed her in a all white prison with bare walls, isolated from everyone but him *for a very long time*. Sorry, but I have to ask because I'm somewhat terrible at reading people: Is this satire? You don't seriously think Tony was using Guantánamo-approved torture techniques on his daughter, without Don or anybody objecting? Annie's door was unlocked; in fact, I'm not even sure it had a lock. She could enter and leave freely, never mind her ability to slip into the Ether whenever she wanted. And no, Annie was never isolated from everyone. She was going to school regularly, she was just doing it with the year 9 kids.What does this remind you of?To me, Annie is floating in an isolation tank. The White Room, like an isolation tank, is a sensory deprivation chamber. They can work extremely well for reducing anxiety and assisting focused meditation, especially for hypersensitive people. Tony is one such person; Annie is another. Not as much and as consistently as Tony, probably, but she has more to contend with, given the ESP and the semiautonomous Fire-personality and all. That's why she cut away the Fire, because she was experiencing too much to cope with. We're not just seeing loss and shame there, we're seeing overload--perhaps the same sort of overload that manifests as the mind cage for Tony. When you're overloaded, you need a refuge. Seriously, I've been in setups like the White Room; so have half the yuppie kids with social anxiety in the Pacific Northwest. They feel fantastic. They become torture when you can never leave, and when the whiteout is more complete, including your clothes and furniture, or simply when you're the sort of person who gets understimmed instead of overstimmed. But that's not what's happening here. Believe me, if Annie was trapped in a white room torture scenario for any amount of time, she wouldn't be doing her homework like a champ and saying hi to her friends; she'd probably be slumped on the floor hallucinating. Tom discusses why he designed the White Room here. He points out that Annie's isolation within the room is mostly her own doing--she chose to move all her stuff into the far corner there. She's exploiting the White Room to make herself more comfortable, because she withdraws under stress. Just like Tony. One of the main points of that arc was that Tony knew a lot more about Annie than we expected. Readers absolutely were meant to read "The Tree" and go "omigod, this is a horrible man who turns Annie's life upside down without knowing or caring about it"--but it turns out that Tony's return is addressing parts of Annie that were unfamiliar to us, and perhaps totally unknown to her friends at the Court. The brash, glam Annie who came back from playtime with Coyote & Ysengrin was just one side of her; the serious, straightedge, type-A Annie was always there too, and that Annie is very in tune with her dad. Honestly, I think this is exactly why the current chapter was necessary. Not to rehabilitate Tony, but because so many readers have a far different take on Annie than Tom was going for. (Not that this chapter will necessarily change their minds; there's still lots of people talking about repression and brainwashing and whatnot.) Tony has literally never refused a request from Annie on panel, unless you count his one "no" to her stammered protests about being Forest medium--and in that case, he explicitly admitted later that he hadn't realized how good she was at her job. He didn't say a word about Sylvannie and Courtnie impersonating each other to run mini-psych experiments on him. If he wanted compliance, he married the wrong woman and had the wrong daughter. |
|
|
|
Post by silicondream on May 25, 2021 11:07:34 GMT
That's all well and good, but that falls into "show don't tell" territory. Story really should have another recurring character say more critical of Tony than say Annie or Don for example. Dislike, but more controlled than say James. A person with legit reasons to dislike him, but won't let it cloud his/her/their judgment. Again most vocal Tony detracted hated him even before he did anything to wrong James. And this is after Coyote breathed deep and smelled all of him. Considering Coyote could see the war in Tony's mind, I think this is as close as a character can get to having an objective and complete understanding of Tony and disapproving of him. Coyote has no vendetta against Tony, he was satisfied with showing how unacceptable Tony's treatment of Annie was and getting Annie permission to visit the forest. Interesting interpretation. I saw it as Coyote acknowledging that oblivion is what Tony wants, but reminding him that it's not an option as long as Annie still cares for him. |
|
laaaa
Full Member
Posts: 247
|
Post by laaaa on May 25, 2021 11:53:27 GMT
He also lost control and was extremely cruel to her and never apologized for it, but it wasn't all one moment of weakness. He wanted something from her, which is to break her will and spirit completely, and he got it. Now that she's compliant he has stopped abusing her. If she stood up to him again, would the abuse start again? He's a fictional character so who knows, but if he were a real life abuser? I would bet hard on it starting again. One more thing: I seriously doubt that abuse is something that can be turned on and off according to the victim's actions. That if they are nice enough, understanding enough, patient enough, docile enough, hard-working enough, loving enough, the abuse will be paused. That's a very dangerous line of thinking. A guy who beats his wife won't stop beating if she keeps herself pretty, shows no interest in other guys, and cooks perfectly. He'll find other excuses to beat her. Maybe she looked at him wrong or forgot his birthday or had a hobby he didn't approve or didn't guess what he was thinking A parent who puts down their child won't stop putting it down if it excels in school. It'll keep putting the child down for not winning the spelling contest, for gaining weight, for getting in a fight, for having the 'wrong' kids as friends. A cruel boss won't stop being nasty if you do the work perfectly and on time. They'll comment on your appearance, they will complain that you're not a team player, they'll scream at you for not reading their mind, they'll berate you for spelling errors. A sexual abuser won't leave you alone if you're not "pretty". Abuse is not about anything the victim is doing. It's about the abuser's issues and their inability to behave in a healthy manner. That kind of thing bleeds into all interactions. |
|
|
|
Post by descoladavirus on May 25, 2021 12:29:27 GMT
My parents were physically, mentally and emotionally abusive and manipulative for all of my life I've let them be a part of.
As someone who processed this abuse, lived with it, and overcame it I can say that GKC isn't triggering for me.
However I'm disgusted by the people thinking that anyone who went through what I did would look at a web comic and say "This is how I should deal with this."
|
|
|
|
Post by todd on May 25, 2021 13:09:43 GMT
My own response to "The Tree", I recall, was not so much hatred for Anthony as "How is the story going to continue now, with the main character not only placed under so many restrictions that all she's going to be doing now is studying and homework, but also she's so dispirited she's not going to try to evade those restrictions? And, add onto that, since they're punishment for a serious offense - which she really did commit - it'd be almost impossible to undo it without making it look like condoning cheating just because she's the main character." I even wondered whether Annie would simply have to be written out for a while and Kat to come to the fore - with maybe a new etheric girl to fulfill the ether-related functions that Kat couldn't fulfill.
Of course, the story took a different turn. I've mentioned this in another thread, but I've wondered whether part of the point was to indicate that the story was taking a different turn, away from "adventures in a weird school" of the "Harry Potter" or "Worst Witch" variety, and into a more serious, grown-up tone. (This chapter seems like an illustration of that; the central point is two adults speaking to each other about one adult's difficulties in relating to other people because of his social anxieties.)
Tom probably did too good a job in making his readers hate Anthony.
|
|
|
|
Post by Polyhymnia on May 25, 2021 14:55:36 GMT
And, hmm, well... It appears that Annie and Annie were not... exact copies of Annie. Indeed, they appeared to be *SPLIT* instead of *copied*. Courtnnie was more assertive and put her foot down when having to deal with her father. She demanded to start wearing makeup again. Sylvannie was not sure he'd let her, *but even when she found out he'd let her, she STILL didn't start to wear make up*. Courtnnie was more keen on remembering her mother, while Sylvannie was more willing to let go. . Courtnie was rejected by "Ysengrin," failed in her diplomatic mission and then was locked out of the Forest for six months, making her medium role more or less irrelevant. Sylvannie learned about Loup, confirmed that Ysengrin's shade still cared about her, came back to the Court bearing critical info and promptly found herself treated like an alien. That's more than enough difference in their histories to impact their personalities, especially for a kid as complex and mercurial as Antimony. On the makeup specifically: I think Annie's makeup is war paint she uses whenever she has to accustom herself to a new social environment, and needs a veneer of maturity to gain space and attention. She first started wearing it when she came to the Court; she hastily applied it when Jones brought it after she moved in with the elves; and Courtnie demanded it because she wanted to redefine herself as a full-time student and Tony's companion. Sylvannie didn't need the war paint because her role never really shifted; she never stopped being a medium doing important medium things. Plus, with Coyote and Ysengrin gone, Courtnie had to cling extra-hard to her other emotional supports: Tony, Kat, Renard and her mom's memory.He literally placed her in a all white prison with bare walls, isolated from everyone but him *for a very long time*. Sorry, but I have to ask because I'm somewhat terrible at reading people: Is this satire? You don't seriously think Tony was using Guantánamo-approved torture techniques on his daughter, without Don or anybody objecting? Annie's door was unlocked; in fact, I'm not even sure it had a lock. She could enter and leave freely, never mind her ability to slip into the Ether whenever she wanted. And no, Annie was never isolated from everyone. She was going to school regularly, she was just doing it with the year 9 kids.What does this remind you of?To me, Annie is floating in an isolation tank. The White Room, like an isolation tank, is a sensory deprivation chamber. They can work extremely well for reducing anxiety and assisting focused meditation, especially for hypersensitive people. Tony is one such person; Annie is another. Not as much and as consistently as Tony, probably, but she has more to contend with, given the ESP and the semiautonomous Fire-personality and all. That's why she cut away the Fire, because she was experiencing too much to cope with. We're not just seeing loss and shame there, we're seeing overload--perhaps the same sort of overload that manifests as the mind cage for Tony. When you're overloaded, you need a refuge.Seriously, I've been in setups like the White Room; so have half the yuppie kids with social anxiety in the Pacific Northwest. They feel fantastic. They become torture when you can never leave, and when the whiteout is more complete, including your clothes and furniture, or simply when you're the sort of person who gets understimmed instead of overstimmed. But that's not what's happening here. Believe me, if Annie was trapped in a white room torture scenario for any amount of time, she wouldn't be doing her homework like a champ and saying hi to her friends; she'd probably be slumped on the floor hallucinating. Tom discusses why he designed the White Room here. He points out that Annie's isolation within the room is mostly her own doing--she chose to move all her stuff into the far corner there. S he's exploiting the White Room to make herself more comfortable, because she withdraws under stress. Just like Tony.One of the main points of that arc was that Tony knew a lot more about Annie than we expected. Readers absolutely were meant to read "The Tree" and go "omigod, this is a horrible man who turns Annie's life upside down without knowing or caring about it"--but it turns out that Tony's return is addressing parts of Annie that were unfamiliar to us, and perhaps totally unknown to her friends at the Court. The brash, glam Annie who came back from playtime with Coyote & Ysengrin was just one side of her; the serious, straightedge, type-A Annie was always there too, and that Annie is very in tune with her dad. Honestly, I think this is exactly why the current chapter was necessary. Not to rehabilitate Tony, but because so many readers have a far different take on Annie than Tom was going for. (Not that this chapter will necessarily change their minds; there's still lots of people talking about repression and brainwashing and whatnot.) Tony has literally never refused a request from Annie on panel, unless you count his one "no" to her stammered protests about being Forest medium--and in that case, he explicitly admitted later that he hadn't realized how good she was at her job. He didn't say a word about Sylvannie and Courtnie impersonating each other to run mini-psych experiments on him. If he wanted compliance, he married the wrong woman and had the wrong daughter. Bolded bits indicate views I especially agree with.
The bit about withdrawing and sensory deprivation reminds me a little of this page, when we first saw Annie post-Tony and found that she had cut her hair and started wearing the kind of blue dress we saw her in as a child before she came to the court. The immediate assumption was that Tony forced her to cut it, when in reality the on-screen regression was largely a coping mechanism initiated by Annie to deal the stress and loss of control that came with Tony's return. Similarly, on this page, her classmates apologize for her hair (and her dad), again assuming that it was forcibly taken from her and something to mourn, rather than a coping mechanism and act of control. (I've never been one for breakup/stress haircuts, but I imagine if I were, I'd be a little ticked off if someone consoled me on my haircut rather than complimented it, since the post-breakup haircut is about re-asserting control, finding a new start, or trying a new self-image, etc).
It's interesting seeing this last page in conjunction with earlier pages, like this, this, this, this, this, this, and this. (I'll stop here, but there may be more examples). Each one of those images involves Annie weakly or silently protesting what she sees as false assumptions about Tony. Annie didn't see herself as being controlled, though others did. (It comes off very strongly as a fawn response, which is why I think it was and is so upsetting for readers and characters).
Let it first be known that I fully think Tony's return was a traumatic experience for Annie. I think the humiliation of forcing her to wash off her makeup while the class sat in silence was wrong, badly handled, and an abuse of power. That said, in light of this chapter I think I've changed my reading. It was really easy at first to read Tony as a tyrant who forced a lot of things on Annie. Most characters shared that view. Now, I don't think so.
I think the last line on this page is really telling: "There are some things even he can't control." What's interesting is that all of the links that I posted involve Annie asserting control. I'm not saying that they're healthy, or that their relationship is healthy or functional in these pages, but Annie from the beginning has had a lot of people denying or ignoring that her choices were willingly taken and attributing them to forced actions from domineering figure. I think those were largely self-harming reactions, but ignoring that she and not her father chose them further robs her of her sense of control and autonomy, something she's struggling to maintain as it is.
I think any parental authority, even a kind, loving, communicative one would have been stressful on Annie, as she's essentially had adult-level autonomy in all aspects of her life and is now being returned to a parent-child situation, where the child inevitably has boundaries set by someone else. The manner of Tony's return made that loss of autonomy especially traumatic, as we saw in the way he forced her to remove her makeup (which is both an expression of mourning and a way to control how she presents herself), as well as callous word choices ( This is an inconvenience for everyone = you are an inconvenience for everyone. This is shameful).
The other things (being held back, moving so that she's not living with Kat, the person she's been cheating off of for years, stopping life-threatening unpaid employment as a medium/diplomat) were reasonable moves for any parental authority figure. We (and the cast) largely resent these moves because Tony wasn't present in Annie's life, so he comes off as usurping power, and because he does them in a callous manner. He doesn't seem to deserve the authority he's taking over Annie's life. This loss of power was traumatic for Annie, and she coped by seizing control. (Do I think therapy could have steered that seizing of control away from the self-harming way she did it? Absolutely, yes). Yet the characters all ascribe more control to Tony than he actually takes.
This kinda puts everyone in a bad situation, because no one addresses what Tony actually did (humiliate his daughter, aggravate her social fears, isolate her when she's always struggled with connection, put her in a situation where she feels she has to cover for him instead of addressing the trauma he inflicted). Instead, they address adjacent issues and things attributed falsely to him. Essentially, all of Annie's acts of control illustrate that this was traumatic, and that should have been addressed by letting her express why she was distressed. Instead, everyone jumped to defend her without listening to her and assumed they knew better (yet nobody actually did anything to change her situation. Mr. Donlan gave her some perspective so she could better understand/adapt to her father, perhaps so he would seem less unpredictable and capricious, but that was it).
It's interesting to me that returning to the Court was also stressful for Tony, and possibly traumatic in its own way. That doesn't excuse his actions--even if his treatment of Annie comes from a place of trauma, he has a duty to take responsibility for his actions, and he hurt his daughter. He tried to control every aspect of his life upon his return, and I think that included Annie at the very beginning with the makeup, but after the initial shock, I don't think he actively tried to control her the way I initially assumed. Tony is not domineering overall, and generally speaking, his need for total control extends only to himself. Once he had an awareness of the situation, he almost immediately restored control (Reynard, being a medium, etc), and he didn't do it in a way that made it seem like he was maintaining his place in the hierarchy. There was no "I permit you" or "I will it so" vibes that made me think he was acting in a way that exceeded ordinary parental authority.
This makes the whole Annie-Tony relationship complicated. The return was stressful for both of them, but Tony was in a position of power and took it out on Annie. This worsened her loss of control, so she quietly rebelled, as we saw with the hair and Reynard, and actively rebelled, as we saw with the makeup incident. Yet she's been trying seeking to cultivate a reciprocal relationship from day one.
Even after being humiliated, Annie immediately reached out by asking what she thought was a neutral question about something that's changed in her father since she last saw him. It turned out to be a fairly personal question, given that it carried the guilt of nearly killing her and not knowing because Tony only saw Surma. Tony was extremely defensive and shut her down, which was hurtful. His ongoing tendency towards bluntness and his defensive privacy pose major challenges to having a reciprocal relationship, so I hope he works on healing/improving those things on his own (he seems to be improving--contrast this to this. But from the very beginning, Annie has been the one who's been initiating a positive relationship, and he has responded by reaching out in his own way ( here and here).
So this page is interesting in light of Annie's goals. She seems to have figured out how to conceptualize her relationship with her father, something she's been working towards for a long time. Understanding him more fully makes him seem less capricious, which helps her feel more secure. Right now, I don't see her seeking this relationship as a fawn response, though I do share concerns about parentification.
TL;DR: Annie reacted to Tony in a pretty proactive way, but others assumed she was a passive puppet. This hurt her, as others denied that her reactions were real choices and assumed they were forced on her by Tony. Thus, she wasn't able to discuss the actual trauma that she was experiencing because she felt she had to defend her father, as well as her own autonomy. No one discussed with her whether or not her reactions were unhealthy responses (except for Ysengrin, who responded by really taking away her autonomy, though he acknowledged her coping mechanisms were self-harming). Thus, she had to work her feelings out herself over time as she explored her relationship with her father, and ultimately got to a place where she can let go of things out of her control, like other's opinions or whether or not he is comfortable around her.
Tony similarly reacts to distressing situations by trying to exert total control over himself and his environment. When he did this to Antimony, he abused whatever parental power he had and hurt her. But, by and large, he is not a domineering character and usually controls only himself, and since the initial incident, he has stepped back from controlling Annie in inappropriate ways. While he is working towards a relationship, he has not made amends for his initial overstep and abuse, nor discussed with her his abandonment/essentially giving custody of her to the court and how that may have affected her. Whether he will do so remains a mystery.
From the beginning, Annie has been seeking a relationship with her inscrutable father. His return was distressing, and his unpredictability, tactlessness, and assumption of authority shook Annie to the core. The more she's learned about Tony, the less unpredictable and unsettling he has been, which has made her more confident and secure in their relationship, even though Tony cannot for the life of him figure out how to express his feelings. Since she is the one initiating this relationship and devoting herself to it, I still have some reservations about Annie's own mental health, but I do find the whole development fascinating and think it's heading in a good direction.
That was rambling, but I think I have a better picture of how I understand the Tony arc. As a side note, Tony's return marks the time when I finally got out of archives and started reading page-by-page.
|
|
|
|
Post by Gemminie on May 25, 2021 16:39:47 GMT
Also having her in that large room by herself and not notifying her of having to go back a grade before her arrival to class with the whole passing out books in her absence. I singled out the makeup thing because it was the one element that had nothing to do with school and is in my opinion the least reasonable thing he did. So if Annie had been a straight-A model student, and Tony had come back (it would have to have been for some reason other than the Court threatening her with expulsion) and done all of these same things anyway? Yes, that alternate Tony is an abusive bastard in that hypothetical alternate universe. It didn't happen in the actual story, though. I mean, Annie had been plagiarizing her schoolwork, harboring and being influenced by a supernatural entity who is known to have killed people, and endangering the entire Court with her actions regarding the Forest. It's pretty surprising that the Court didn't put her in a cell when she came back from the Forest in chapter 32. I'm not sure what this sentence means, so I'll guess based on your train of thought as I see it. Does her misconduct turn what would be abuse into mere disciplinary action, or make unreasonable actions less unreasonable, or even reasonable? It certainly can, because context matters. If the cops throw a guy in jail after seeing him steal someone's purse, that's what they're supposed to do. If they throw a guy in jail who didn't do anything, that's abuse of power. We're talking about alternate Tony dismantling Annie's life for no reason because he's out of control, vs. actual Tony taking the same actions because she's earned them with her behavior. Except, as I've said, for the makeup thing. It's the one thing that would be equally unreasonable in either case. I'm sure that can happen, somewhere, sometime, yeah. Still not calling Tony abusive, though. The mean things he's done to Annie definitely exist, but they're pretty few, and the story's tone is that they're exceptions in extraordinary circumstances. |
|
|
|
Post by Polyhymnia on May 25, 2021 17:11:52 GMT
Going off of my point about authority and how any parental authority, even the healthy kind, would have been stressful for Annie: Tony's return seems to mark the first time she's had any major structure in her life.
Given other flashbacks that I'm not up to tracking down, it seems like she's basically been given free reign since childhood. Her education was irregular and interest-based. She's shown learning martial arts with her father, but almost all scenes of her involve her sneaking around underfoot, alone. She's really not used to structure other than the classroom setting (which I have to presume she mostly adjusts to, but obviously struggles academically).
So I wonder if Tony's return marks a return to a structured, parental-guidance environment, or if it's the first time in a long time Tony has taken responsibility for parenting her, in other words, set rules, established academic expectations, limited access to certain dangerous situations (stopping Forest access does feel like grounding mixed with the implementation of a curfew to me). Are we picking up right where we left off, or are we returning to an earlier relationship paradigm?
I think there's evidence either way: that between Tony and Surma, he was the one responsible for implementing structure and teaching her in a traditional parent-child way, instead of Surma's "sink or swim," encouraging autonomy tactics, but also maybe that as Tony was more and more involved in trying to save Surma, he focused less and less on parenting Annie. So Annie went years before and after arriving at the Court doing her own thing entirely, but that even before Tony left her, he hadn't been fully operating in a parental capacity.
I'm thinking about this because it seems like Tony has decided that looking after Annie is his responsibility, so I wonder how long he's been neglecting it. I also wonder how jarring it was, and whether she remembered her father primarily as distant (from years of withdrawal) and was shaken by how much he interfered with her life, or if she does remember him as the rule-giver who just disappeared one day and so it was natural that he implemented new rules and expectations.
|
|
