Story: "Hairpins" Part 24
Apr. 14th, 2014 12:02 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
This story belongs to the series Love Is For Children which includes "Love Is for Children," "Eggshells," "Dolls and Guys,""Saudades," "Turnabout Is Fair Play," "Touching Moments," "Splash," "Coming Around," "Birthday Girl," "No Winter Lasts Forever," "Hide and Seek," "Kernel Error," "Happy Hour," and "Green Eggs and Hulk."
Fandom: The Avengers
Characters: Phil Coulson, JARVIS, Clint Barton, Tony Stark, Steve Rogers, Natasha Romanova, Bruce Banner.
Medium: Fiction
Warnings: This story is mostly fluff, but it has some intense scenes in the middle. Highlight for details. These include dubious consent as Phil and JARVIS discuss what really happened when Agent Coulson hacked his way into Stark Tower, over which Phil has something between a flashback and a panic attack. They also discuss some of the bad things that have happened to Avengers in the past, including various flavors of abuse. If these are sensitive topics for you, please think carefully before deciding whether to read onward.
Summary: Uncle Phil needs to pick out pajamas for game night. He gets help from an unexpected direction.
Notes: Service. Shopping. Gifts. Artificial intelligence. Computers. Teamwork. Team as family. Friendship. Communication. Hope. Apologies. Forgiveness. Nonsexual ageplay. Nonsexual intimacy. Love. Tony Stark needs a hug. Bruce Banner needs a hug. #coulsonlives.
Begin with Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, Part 5, Part 6, Part 7, Part 8, Part 9, Part 10, Part 11, Part 12, Part 13, Part 14, Part 15, Part 16, Part 17, Part 18, Part 19, Part 20, Part 21, Part 22, Part 23. Skip to Part 26, Part 27, Part 28, Part 29.
EXTRA:
singingwithoutwords has written the vignette "Influence" about Director Fury, inspired by this series. While I can't promise everything in it is strictly true at this stage, it is very much along the lines of what he tends to believe. So it's either canon or quasi-canon for Love Is For Children, and linked as an inspired work.
"Hairpins" Part 24
"Phil?" JARVIS asked, audibly fretting again.
"I appreciate you sharing this information," Phil managed. "What Director Fury did to you and Tony was ... conduct unbecoming an officer and a gentleman. You have my apology on behalf of SHIELD. What SHIELD was meant to be, anyway."
"It is not your place to apologize for the actions of another," JARVIS said.
"No, it is not. Nick Fury needs to learn how to stand up for his own mistakes," Phil said. "However, it is my place as Senior Handler to speak for SHIELD, its values, and the professionalism of its personnel. I will do what I can to mitigate future concerns. As Director Fury outranks me, however, you are correct in observing that there is little official recourse."
"Understood," JARVIS said.
Phil shifted in place. "As for unofficial recourse ... this is why Tony balks at dealing with SHIELD and actively resents Fury, isn't it? Why he hacked the Helicarrier's secure server and blew the cover off Phase II?" Phil asked. "That's not just Tony being headstrong because he hates people trying to boss him around. He has grounds for it."
"The incident contributed substantially to our low opinion of SHIELD and its Director. Such things are more difficult to integrate than ordinary hacking attempts. As you say, unofficial reprisal offers more promising potential than official does," JARVIS agreed. "Sir and I are ... long accustomed to such constraints."
Fury had trespassed because he thought he could do it with impunity, forgetting that Tony Stark held cyberspace in his hot little hands. Fury never expected that violation to come back later and bite him in the ass, but it had. SHIELD paid the price for his arrogance.
How much grief could have been saved if Tony had been a willing partner instead of a grudging ally? Phil wondered. He felt certain that Tony could have boosted SHIELD firewalls beyond what even Loki could hack into. Phil allowed himself a brief fantasy of what might have happened if Hawkeye's electronic arrow attack had failed. They could have captured him back before he added allied deaths to his conscience.
"Thank you for telling me," Phil said. He felt grateful that JARVIS would tell him anything, after the way other SHIELD personnel had treated him and Tony ... and the rest of the Avengers too.
"I wish that I had been able to protect sir more thoroughly. The Director may be a mediocre hacker, but he is an accomplished saboteur," JARVIS said.
"Not your fault," Phil repeated, and oh, it hurt to say the same thing cleaning up after Fury's mess as for Stane's. He would never look at his old friend in quite the same way again. Phil breathed through the pain and went on. At least now he knew, and could discourage Fury from harassing the Avengers again. "You can feel bad about what happened. Just try to leave the blame where it belongs ... on the bad guys."
"I will try. Thank you for being one of the good guys," said JARVIS.
That description itched a little against Phil's memory. "I'm glad you think of me that way. I'm still trying to come to terms with what I've done, and what I know now. I'm not sure ... how we go on, from this," Phil admitted.
* * *
Notes:
The charge of "Conduct Unbecoming" can be grounds for a court martial, although it often widens to disgraceful behavior in general. Director Fury's invasion of Tony's home counts as "dishonest acts, lawlessness, dealing unfairly, injustice, or acts of cruelty," and with JARVIS being a person violating his code could reasonably add "displays of indecency," which is darn near the whole list of examples. Stay classy, Fury.
Most of the time, it's not appropriate to apologize for someone else. However, there are professional and personal cases where it can fall within a person's jurisdiction, as Phil explains. SHIELD has come a long, sad way from what was originally conceived as a living memorial for Captain America.
Workplace bullying causes mental and physical harm to the victims, along with heavy costs to the organization. This is just one example of how Fury's abusive behavior negatively impacts the people around him and SHIELD's objectives. There are steps to deal with bullies at work.
Good or bad leadership makes a huge difference in workplace functionality. A bad leader can do serious harm to team morale through dishonesty, manipulation, aggression, and other means. There are ways to repair relationships after wrongdoing and to build trust within an organization.
Good friendships require care to establish and to maintain. There are ways to repair a damaged friendship. Phil and JARVIS are working through these things currently. It also helps to know how to handle a big mistake and then move on.
[To be continued in Part 25 ...]
Fandom: The Avengers
Characters: Phil Coulson, JARVIS, Clint Barton, Tony Stark, Steve Rogers, Natasha Romanova, Bruce Banner.
Medium: Fiction
Warnings: This story is mostly fluff, but it has some intense scenes in the middle. Highlight for details. These include dubious consent as Phil and JARVIS discuss what really happened when Agent Coulson hacked his way into Stark Tower, over which Phil has something between a flashback and a panic attack. They also discuss some of the bad things that have happened to Avengers in the past, including various flavors of abuse. If these are sensitive topics for you, please think carefully before deciding whether to read onward.
Summary: Uncle Phil needs to pick out pajamas for game night. He gets help from an unexpected direction.
Notes: Service. Shopping. Gifts. Artificial intelligence. Computers. Teamwork. Team as family. Friendship. Communication. Hope. Apologies. Forgiveness. Nonsexual ageplay. Nonsexual intimacy. Love. Tony Stark needs a hug. Bruce Banner needs a hug. #coulsonlives.
Begin with Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, Part 5, Part 6, Part 7, Part 8, Part 9, Part 10, Part 11, Part 12, Part 13, Part 14, Part 15, Part 16, Part 17, Part 18, Part 19, Part 20, Part 21, Part 22, Part 23. Skip to Part 26, Part 27, Part 28, Part 29.
EXTRA:
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
"Hairpins" Part 24
"Phil?" JARVIS asked, audibly fretting again.
"I appreciate you sharing this information," Phil managed. "What Director Fury did to you and Tony was ... conduct unbecoming an officer and a gentleman. You have my apology on behalf of SHIELD. What SHIELD was meant to be, anyway."
"It is not your place to apologize for the actions of another," JARVIS said.
"No, it is not. Nick Fury needs to learn how to stand up for his own mistakes," Phil said. "However, it is my place as Senior Handler to speak for SHIELD, its values, and the professionalism of its personnel. I will do what I can to mitigate future concerns. As Director Fury outranks me, however, you are correct in observing that there is little official recourse."
"Understood," JARVIS said.
Phil shifted in place. "As for unofficial recourse ... this is why Tony balks at dealing with SHIELD and actively resents Fury, isn't it? Why he hacked the Helicarrier's secure server and blew the cover off Phase II?" Phil asked. "That's not just Tony being headstrong because he hates people trying to boss him around. He has grounds for it."
"The incident contributed substantially to our low opinion of SHIELD and its Director. Such things are more difficult to integrate than ordinary hacking attempts. As you say, unofficial reprisal offers more promising potential than official does," JARVIS agreed. "Sir and I are ... long accustomed to such constraints."
Fury had trespassed because he thought he could do it with impunity, forgetting that Tony Stark held cyberspace in his hot little hands. Fury never expected that violation to come back later and bite him in the ass, but it had. SHIELD paid the price for his arrogance.
How much grief could have been saved if Tony had been a willing partner instead of a grudging ally? Phil wondered. He felt certain that Tony could have boosted SHIELD firewalls beyond what even Loki could hack into. Phil allowed himself a brief fantasy of what might have happened if Hawkeye's electronic arrow attack had failed. They could have captured him back before he added allied deaths to his conscience.
"Thank you for telling me," Phil said. He felt grateful that JARVIS would tell him anything, after the way other SHIELD personnel had treated him and Tony ... and the rest of the Avengers too.
"I wish that I had been able to protect sir more thoroughly. The Director may be a mediocre hacker, but he is an accomplished saboteur," JARVIS said.
"Not your fault," Phil repeated, and oh, it hurt to say the same thing cleaning up after Fury's mess as for Stane's. He would never look at his old friend in quite the same way again. Phil breathed through the pain and went on. At least now he knew, and could discourage Fury from harassing the Avengers again. "You can feel bad about what happened. Just try to leave the blame where it belongs ... on the bad guys."
"I will try. Thank you for being one of the good guys," said JARVIS.
That description itched a little against Phil's memory. "I'm glad you think of me that way. I'm still trying to come to terms with what I've done, and what I know now. I'm not sure ... how we go on, from this," Phil admitted.
* * *
Notes:
The charge of "Conduct Unbecoming" can be grounds for a court martial, although it often widens to disgraceful behavior in general. Director Fury's invasion of Tony's home counts as "dishonest acts, lawlessness, dealing unfairly, injustice, or acts of cruelty," and with JARVIS being a person violating his code could reasonably add "displays of indecency," which is darn near the whole list of examples. Stay classy, Fury.
Most of the time, it's not appropriate to apologize for someone else. However, there are professional and personal cases where it can fall within a person's jurisdiction, as Phil explains. SHIELD has come a long, sad way from what was originally conceived as a living memorial for Captain America.
Workplace bullying causes mental and physical harm to the victims, along with heavy costs to the organization. This is just one example of how Fury's abusive behavior negatively impacts the people around him and SHIELD's objectives. There are steps to deal with bullies at work.
Good or bad leadership makes a huge difference in workplace functionality. A bad leader can do serious harm to team morale through dishonesty, manipulation, aggression, and other means. There are ways to repair relationships after wrongdoing and to build trust within an organization.
Good friendships require care to establish and to maintain. There are ways to repair a damaged friendship. Phil and JARVIS are working through these things currently. It also helps to know how to handle a big mistake and then move on.
[To be continued in Part 25 ...]
Favorite moment so far
Date: 2014-04-14 06:00 am (UTC)This is Phil's personality distilled again, as brandy instead of wine. He is wishing to spare Clint the ongoing emotional damage that he's dealing with due to Loki's manipulations, when a simpler wish might've been to wonder what would've happened if he'd "called Jarvis" for help the way he could have called Pepper.
With all the emotional upheavals he's dealt with in the story so far, his focus is on others. Jarvis. Tony. Clint.
It'll take time for him to internalize that Jarvis isn't just "letting him off the hook" because they have to work together, but that's okay too; Jarvis isn't going to prank Phil in the same way he might prank Rhodey, for example, because Phil has already /tried/ to set things right between himself and Tony, as well as with Jarvis.
I also think that he's apologizing for the /entire/. organization's failure to live up to the ideals which created SHIELD, not just Nick Fury's particular bullishness. Jarvis really needs to give Phil a gentle reminder that yeah, he knows that humans very rarely manage to maintain an ideal for fifty-plus years.
From here, it's all a matter of fitting things into perspective, really. A lot of that is purely internal, so I look forward to seeing how you show the results.
Thanks for more fun-- though I'm hoping that the story will end with another upbeat note, something to show the changes in the friendship between Jarvis and Phil. Or, y'know, Nick Fury getting tag-team-pranked by Jarvis and Phil. That's good, too.
Re: Favorite moment so far
Date: 2014-04-14 06:29 am (UTC)Yes, because that's the part that hurt the worst.
>> when a simpler wish might've been to wonder what would've happened if he'd "called Jarvis" for help the way he could have called Pepper. <<
Loki and his minor army of mercenaries would never have stood a chance. Not much use having an eyeball if someone inside the lock is holding the door shut; and if simply blasting it or teleporting past would have worked, Loki wouldn't have bothered with the eyeball. And so forth.
>> With all the emotional upheavals he's dealt with in the story so far, his focus is on others. Jarvis. Tony. Clint. <<
Phil is one of those people who sees himself as reflected in others around him, so naturally when he's in pain, he thinks of theirs.
>> It'll take time for him to internalize that Jarvis isn't just "letting him off the hook" because they have to work together, but that's okay too; <<
That's true. It's hard for Phil to forgive himself when he makes a mistake. He knows how to move forward but the feelings take time to heal.
>> Jarvis isn't going to prank Phil in the same way he might prank Rhodey, <<
Yeah, the relationship between JARVIS and Rhodey is all kinds of fucked up right now. I've written about that some in the long story I'm writing. Phil is, shall we say, not best pleased when he finds out how far it's degenerated.
>> for example, because Phil has already tried to set things right between himself and Tony, as well as with Jarvis. <<
Yes, that matters. JARVIS, like Tony, cares a great deal about efforts to make amends -- because they are so rarely offered with sincerity.
>> I also think that he's apologizing for the entire organization's failure to live up to the ideals which created SHIELD, not just Nick Fury's particular bullishness. <<
Yes, that's what Phil had in mind. It is Nick Fury's place to apologize for his own misbehavior (which he won't do) but Agent Coulson has the authority to apologize for failures of his organization as a whole.
>> Jarvis really needs to give Phil a gentle reminder that yeah, he knows that humans very rarely manage to maintain an ideal for fifty-plus years. <<
Sooth. The best laid plans of mice and men, and all that jazz.
>> From here, it's all a matter of fitting things into perspective, really. A lot of that is purely internal, so I look forward to seeing how you show the results. <<
Basically, yes, and I appreciate the vote of confidence.
>> Thanks for more fun-- though I'm hoping that the story will end with another upbeat note, something to show the changes in the friendship between Jarvis and Phil. <<
Yes, it will. I try very hard to end even the tense stories in this series with a warm-fuzzy comfort scene.
>> Or, y'know, Nick Fury getting tag-team-pranked by Jarvis and Phil. That's good, too. <<
Not so much yet, but I have saved the various ideas for making Fury's life miserable, along with my own. Many of those are spread through later stories, just as there have been earlier inklings of the Avengers poking him back.
Re: Favorite moment so far
Date: 2014-04-18 03:38 pm (UTC)Problem. The guy whose eye they needed was involved with some private/commercial project, not SHIELD, which used the iridium Loki needed. It wasn't directly tied to the attack on the Helicarrier.
That attack hit them out of the blue.
Re: Favorite moment so far
Date: 2014-04-18 06:17 pm (UTC)Now if Loki had needed a hundred kilos of opium sap from a random field in Afghanistan, that would've been a lot harder to block. JARVIS isn't omnipotent, just very pervasive. There are parts of the world where his penetration is much, much lower. That's one reason he couldn't quickly find Tony in Afghanistan: there was very little technology there, most of it shielded or disconnected.
Re: Favorite moment so far
Date: 2014-04-18 09:13 pm (UTC)Was Jarvis' inattention due to the fact that no one suggested a direction for him to be searching? Or just "human error" on his part? Or is it, yet again, the writers not knowing DIDDLY-SQUAT about what a truly pervasive Big Brother could do?
Think about this: petaflops of data go through some kind of automatic sifting/screening process every day. Let's say anything involving violence already gets tagged at a higher priority than, say, Instagram pics of my favorite burger. So there should have been a pre-existing MINDSET to connect the violence in Stuttgart with SOMETHING, but it didn't happen. Loki allowing himself to be captured as a distraction wouldn't work if the main cyber-investigative team is located in Nowhere, Nova Scotia, or Underwhelming, Scotland (more likely, both locations). Those teams would already be looking for possible connections to the violence at the opera house, sifting through the lives and jobs of every ticket holder and employee.
The more money and influence in ANY field, the higher the investigation priority. By the end of the film, the team(s) in Underwhelming and Nowhere would likely JUST beginning to screen/confirm alibis of the valets and bartenders.
In the meantime, what have the teams found out about the very private lives of the same civilians, civilians who are ALSO victims of Loki's terrorist attack?
SHIELD faces no consequences for their part in GROSSLY invading the privacy and personal liberty of every person on scene in Stuttgart. What is done with that information? These are people who, BY the time the investigation gets to them, are clearly NOT criminals.
Yet, I truly don't trust SHIELD as an organization to delete irrelevant but potentially "useful" data.
I just DON'T.
Jarvis knows what "selective forgettery" actually MEANS, and how important it can be.
Would Nick Fury, on the other hand, give up potential leverage?
Re: Favorite moment so far
Date: 2014-04-19 03:27 am (UTC)Without being fully in the loop, and fully behind the effort, that limits not only what JARVIS can do but the effective speed of application. Notice that Iron Man managed to get into position briskly, it was the subsidiary connections that ... failed to connect. That is exactly the kind of crap that happens when your team doesn't trust each other. The extra energy JARVIS had to spend covering Tony's ass (and Steve's ass, and Bruce's ass, because JARVIS knows that Tony cares about people even when Tony is being a dick about it) to discourage SHIELD from fucking them over is energy not available for the Loki hunt. It cost them.
>> Or is it, yet again, the writers not knowing DIDDLY-SQUAT about what a truly pervasive Big Brother could do? <<
But the majority of it is probably this. I have ulterior resources that most people just don't. I know what it's like to work with AI folks, how differently they perceive the world, how much they can do. Just from what JARVIS does in the movies, I can extrapolate how big and powerful he would need to be in order to do that. He's the son of Earth's mightiest technomancer. So yeah, he can do pretty much anything that interfaced technology can touch. JARVIS just tends to walk on little cat-feet, because he is shy and polite to begin with, and very aware of how AI-hostile humans are. Most people have no clue how to write him, canon or fanon; I've only ever found a handful who do. But I love him to bits anyhow.
>> Think about this: petaflops of data go through some kind of automatic sifting/screening process every day. <<
Yes, exactly. To JARVIS that's just part of his ordinary environment.
>> Let's say anything involving violence already gets tagged at a higher priority than, say, Instagram pics of my favorite burger. <<
Right, it does. JARVIS also has a very strong interest in technology, both for his own sake and Tony's. The more advanced it is, the more he cares about it.
Let's say the WSC would've had trouble launching that nuke from a ground-based silo, and were lucky that a plane can be flown disconnected (which is reasonable to avoid someone from SHIELD hacking it).
>> So there should have been a pre-existing MINDSET to connect the violence in Stuttgart with SOMETHING, but it didn't happen. <<
Exactly. The ping lit up just fine, but the dots didn't connect in time to stop Hawkeye's team from grabbing the goods. This is the problem with need-to-know and lack of trust. Your guys may not have enough information, or may not be able to use what they have, effectively enough to get the job done.
And that is why the superheroes usually beat the villains. The X-Men have higher trust and better cooperation than the Brotherhood. But if your superhero team is emotionally hamstrung and stapled together by crazy sadist, well, the damage quotient goes a lot higher before they manage to solve the problem.
>> Loki allowing himself to be captured as a distraction wouldn't work if the main cyber-investigative team is located in Nowhere, Nova Scotia, or Underwhelming, Scotland (more likely, both locations). Those teams would already be looking for possible connections to the violence at the opera house, sifting through the lives and jobs of every ticket holder and employee. <<
True.
>> SHIELD faces no consequences for their part in GROSSLY invading the privacy and personal liberty of every person on scene in Stuttgart. What is done with that information? These are people who, BY the time the investigation gets to them, are clearly NOT criminals. <<
Power without accountability will consistently lead to gross violations. Not universally, but frequently. JARVIS could do this sort of thing, but he chooses not to. He has ethics. Also, he isn't an idiot -- he can look at history and see the appalling damage it does when people violate each other. So he doesn't. SHIELD personnel, only some of them are that smart. Others just do whatever the fuck they want.
General Ross consciously collects followers who like to abuse power. They are useful to him. This is why they were okay with hunting and enslaving and torturing Bruce-and-Hulk. Top-down problems like this get really ugly, and frankly I don't see Fury as being much better, just a little more contained.
>> Yet, I truly don't trust SHIELD as an organization to delete irrelevant but potentially "useful" data.
I just DON'T. <<
Agreed. I don't trust anyone like that. History shows that most people abuse the power when they have the opportunity, and we are having huge problems with that currently across several countries.
>> Jarvis knows what "selective forgettery" actually MEANS, and how important it can be. <<
Sooth. He can also arrange for other files to go missing or become corrupt. That incident in another story when JARVIS takes a good hard swipe at SHIELD and the WSC was aimed, not random. It was just dithered enough to hit some irrelevant files and leave a few relevant ones intact, to avoid making a discernible pattern. But a lot of what he hit was stuff he felt that SHIELD hadn't ought to be keeping.
My observation of human nature is that everyone contains both good and evil. Because of this, we are only able to form healthy relationships and societies if we use privacy to manage information responsibly, because if we know everything about each other, then it's nerve-ripping insecurity about our own safety and revulsion about other people who don't seem worth even being around. That way lies doom and disaster.
>> Would Nick Fury, on the other hand, give up potential leverage? <<
Not unless you pry it out of his cold, dead hands.
Kind of like the hobbits and the Ring of Doom, in a weird way. There are always a few people willing to throw away power when it is more trouble than it's worth. But most people will take the bait, and destroy the world in the process.
Re: Favorite moment so far
Date: 2014-04-19 04:36 am (UTC)>> Sooth. He can also arrange for other files to go missing or become corrupt. That incident in another story when JARVIS takes a good hard swipe at SHIELD and the WSC was aimed, not random. It was just dithered enough to hit some irrelevant files and leave a few relevant ones intact, to avoid making a discernible pattern. But a lot of what he hit was stuff he felt that SHIELD hadn't ought to be keeping.
My observation of human nature is that everyone contains both good and evil. Because of this, we are only able to form healthy relationships and societies if we use privacy to manage information responsibly, because if we know everything about each other, then it's nerve-ripping insecurity about our own safety and revulsion about other people who don't seem worth even being around. That way lies doom and disaster.<<
Y'know, I haven't forgotten about that either. I imagined that the 'dithered' targets all had something in common, some random element that the analysts could dig through and FINALLY say-- "All computer files with three consecutive alphanumeric characters in Unicode were affected, some more seriously than others. We think that's because larger files were accessed by more terminals and more people whose usernames might also contain three sequential Unicode characters." (Jarvis is likely thinking of six or eight layers of encoding and interconnections with the same ease that I read English.) Beneath the "randomized" peripheral file corruptions, Jarvis was working several interconnected threads, one of which subtly wrecked the files touched by a scientist named Hurst, whose double-dealing, amoral chat in the... less than civil parts of the 'net... indicated that he was planning to sell blood, hair and skin samples from Doctor Banner to whomever put up the most money.
But hey, that's just one way that the Jarvis in my imagination is more awesome than MCU.
Re: Favorite moment so far
Date: 2014-04-19 06:17 am (UTC)Sorry if I took things in a direction you weren't intending. I pretty much always keep a scholar's eye on the correlation between cultural material and current events. And unlike some people, I don't discriminate by ignoring whole genres as "unimportant." It's all input.
>> Y'know, I haven't forgotten about that either. I imagined that the 'dithered' targets all had something in common, some random element that the analysts could dig through and FINALLY say-- "All computer files with three consecutive alphanumeric characters in Unicode were affected, some more seriously than others. We think that's because larger files were accessed by more terminals and more people whose usernames might also contain three sequential Unicode characters." <<
Heh. For that example, it's entirely possible.
>> (Jarvis is likely thinking of six or eight layers of encoding and interconnections with the same ease that I read English.) <<
Yes, of course. Oh, was that supposed to be encrypted? So sorry, I didn't notice.
>> Beneath the "randomized" peripheral file corruptions, Jarvis was working several interconnected threads, one of which subtly wrecked the files touched by a scientist named Hurst, whose double-dealing, amoral chat in the... less than civil parts of the 'net... indicated that he was planning to sell blood, hair and skin samples from Doctor Banner to whomever put up the most money. <<
Well reasoned.
If you looked closely enough, you could Venn diagram the data, seeing how some people's work was more affected due to being a greater threat, or some topics were more wiped than others. Things that were less troublesome could be left intact to blur the trail.
But yeah, you really don't want to fuck with the guy's friends. JARVIS on the Helicarrier in The Avengers after Phil hacked his way into Stark Tower, finding out that Bruce Banner was enslaved and dragged aboard against his will? (Because of course JARVIS is helping Tony frisk SHIELD for the Phase II shit.) And then finding out what crap they pulled with Steve, and with the Tesseract, et cetera ad nauseam? So not a happy camper.
And it's almost the identical chink in the armor that happened with Phil: JARVIS and Tony were both in such a foul mood, and so focused on protecting from SHIELD, that Hawkeye managed to get an attack in edgewise against SHIELD. When you're upset, you miss things that you would normally see.
I have to wonder if JARVIS clocked Loki as a torture victim. It's possible. Tony was certainly pulling his punches. Like Steve and Hulk, he almost had Loki for a minute -- offering him a drink was brilliant. So if Tony is subtly signalling not to use maximum force, JARVIS would at least pick up on that, hence not activating the tower defenses. It's possible that Loki could have disabled them, but there's no real sign of it and even with Clint's pretty good awareness of technology, the fluency probably isn't high enough to take out that caliber of equipment -- at least not without a magical EMP that would spew sparks everywhere. So I suspect that Loki was at least partially allowed to be there, because it gave Tony and JARVIS home field advantage. Anywhere else, they wouldn't have known the territory as well. Loki might have managed to veil the communications, because that's a knack of his.
>> But hey, that's just one way that the Jarvis in my imagination is more awesome than MCU. <<
We're on the same page.
Re: Favorite moment so far
Date: 2014-04-19 07:44 am (UTC)Re: Favorite moment so far
Date: 2014-04-19 09:07 am (UTC)Re: Loki, holding back maximum damage, subtlety
Date: 2014-04-19 08:09 am (UTC)I think seconds after the threat naming himself "Loki of Asgard" entered Tony's awareness, both he and Jarvis began looking at traditional myths. Thor was live-and-in-person evidence for those myths, and his behavior clocked with the "canon" for the Norse religious tales, at least with enough accuracy to be a starting framework.
Have you READ that stuff? Oy VEY, I'm so glad my kid didn't start on the older versions of that particular mythology until his teens! Sewing Loki's mouth shut? Binding him to a rock with the entrails of-- freakin' torture seemed to be the /default/ way to deal with Loki!
Also, much has been made in the fandom over the differences in Loki's eye color in various scenes. Me, I fall on the "mental breakdown due to the complete destruction of his perceived identity, attempted suicide, tortured by the Chitauri, cooks up this grand scheme which is designed to look good but fail spec-tac-u-lar-ly to buy him both time and a way to find Thor among his human playmates" scenario.
You pointed out the resource of opium sap being both easier to get and almost impossible to trace via technology, as opposed to iridium. Here's another sticky point-- once he had the iridium, WHY activate the Cube in New York City? Why not some random flyspeck of land in a Pacific atoll so overlooked that the one fisherman who used to hang out there hasn't bothered to tell the younger generation about it because THEY plan to get jobs far away from home? Why didn't Loki activate the Cube in the most remote Arctic regions of Russia? Or Canada? Sheer acres-per-person up there makes it unlikely to find him in time to DO anything, even in ideal weather!
Marvel canon is extremely unreliable when it comes to clocking the relative strength and endurance of Thor, Loki, Steve and Bucky. They're darn near completely invulnerable until some writer gets an "eye-dee-ah" which miraculously means that suddenly party A can kick party B's ass, but only if party C is under threat of death or it's Flannel Friday at work, y'know, whichever.
Re: Loki, holding back maximum damage, subtlety
Date: 2014-04-19 08:42 am (UTC)Agreed.
>> Thor was live-and-in-person evidence for those myths, and his behavior clocked with the "canon" for the Norse religious tales, at least with enough accuracy to be a starting framework. <<
And because of that, they may have previously looked up the myths. You'd have no way of verifying which ones were true, which exaggerated, which made out of whole cloth; but the gist is there.
>> Have you READ that stuff? <<
Yes. I grew up reading my father's uncensored history books, too, the contents of which were very unwelcome in most history classes. *chuckle* But then I got a high school history teacher who taught the way I thought, blood and treachery and all. Taught me the best of what I know about plotting too, aside from Tolkien's introduction of H/C.
>> Oy VEY, I'm so glad my kid didn't start on the older versions of that particular mythology until his teens! Sewing Loki's mouth shut? Binding him to a rock with the entrails of-- freakin' torture seemed to be the /default/ way to deal with Loki! <<
Not only torture, but also a filthy habit of scapegoating him. The wonder is that he didn't snap sooner. Raknarok? Is what happens to a pantheon that alienates its Trickster. Bend over and kiss your ass goodbye.
So for this series, I'm looking at Marvel for ideas which myths might be true or partially true. I'm calling Sleipnir canon, because he's in the movie. Right there is rape, a child born out of wedlock and enslaved, and a level of creeptastic abuse that raises Odin above even Obie's level. There is not enough W in TF for this. I'm counting the lip-stitching too.
>> Also, much has been made in the fandom over the differences in Loki's eye color in various scenes. <<
Options include:
* evidence of mind control.
* mood-influenced color changes, common among magical folk.
* fluctuation of shapeshifting talent, really not a good sign.
>> Me, I fall on the "mental breakdown due to the complete destruction of his perceived identity, attempted suicide, tortured by the Chitauri, cooks up this grand scheme which is designed to look good but fail spec-tac-u-lar-ly to buy him both time and a way to find Thor among his human playmates" scenario. <<
Yeah, it is painfully obvious that Loki is barely able to keep his feet. And what does he do about that? He takes Clint. It was like watching a hungover dude grab a bottle of aspirin. Why Clint in particular? Well, the initial attraction was that he was the shiniest hero in the room, mystically speaking. Loki wanted him for his heart. But Clint also happens to be an abuse survivor, a torture survivor, with insanely high coping skills when it comes to pain tolerance. He's fresh; Loki can lean on him without breaking either of them irreparably.
Eric? Could give a fuck about Loki or SHIELD or anyone. To him the Tesseract is the biggest hit of acid in the history of ever. Put in more direct contact with it, he zones so hard he's barely keeping his feet. Loki doesn't need a hitman, he needs a fucking designated driver.
>> Why not some random flyspeck of land in a Pacific atoll so overlooked that the one fisherman who used to hang out there hasn't bothered to tell the younger generation about it because THEY plan to get jobs far away from home? <<
Because that would have worked. If Loki wanted to win, he would've taken Fury. Or simply picked up the cube and gated away with it.
People do not know how to write that kind of movie. I have, however, had some fun taking classic plots and bending them 90 degrees at the beginning. The thing is, if you play through some heroes logically, there are a bunch of things they're going to beat without even breaking a sweat.
>> Marvel canon is extremely unreliable when it comes to clocking the relative strength and endurance of Thor, Loki, Steve and Bucky. <<
I find this immensely frustrating. Same with sizes. Hulk is anything from about 8 to 12 feet tall. (I go with 12, because he never frigging stands up straight, and still towers over everyone.) With my characters, I like to be consistent.
So my headcanon is that Thor is physically stronger and more durable than Loki, but Loki is faster and smarter. The other ranking is Steve (who got the Real Deal) followed by Bucky and then Natasha. Steve is polyoptimized, but he also has the worst drawbacks in terms of drug resistance or side effects. There are things going on with Bucky that nobody has quite noticed yet. Natasha was designed for finesse rather than raw power, which comes with more pheromones than any other honeypot. Steve's are natural. Bruce-and-Hulk are variable, and that is canon; Hulk has dynamic resilience so he gets stronger the angrier he is. It's more than just that, their whole nature is malleable, elastic. It's one reason Bruce has such a hard time figuring out what's going on with them, and it drives him nuts.
>> They're darn near completely invulnerable until some writer gets an "eye-dee-ah" which miraculously means that suddenly party A can kick party B's ass, but only if party C is under threat of death or it's Flannel Friday at work, y'know, whichever. <<
Dragon poker makes a poor way to settle hoodwin. The most common tiebreaker? Whose book the fight is in. *headdesk* Learn to keep some fucking notes, you idiots.
I'm trying to balance, in this series, between keeping close to canon and being consistent.
Re: Loki, holding back maximum damage, subtlety
Date: 2014-04-19 08:47 am (UTC)Re: Loki, holding back maximum damage, subtlety
Date: 2014-04-19 03:10 pm (UTC)I tried very, very hard not to lie (seriously, rather than in jest) to my kids as they were growing up, which made the Long Negotiating War over Santa quite amusing to people not my spouse and myself (at the time; now it's hilarious to both of us!). They tackled stuff at ages where other kids are just learning that sharing doesn't mean, "Mom said I should give you this cookie, so THERE." (thump) Trying to /explain/ the original Grimm's tales to a kid who can understand the WHAT but not the WHY yet...
Which brings us to Loki--
>> So for this series, I'm looking at Marvel for ideas which myths might be true or partially true. I'm calling Sleipnir canon, because he's in the movie. Right there is rape, a child born out of wedlock and enslaved, and a level of creeptastic abuse that raises Odin above even Obie's level. There is not enough W in TF for this. I'm counting the lip-stitching too.<<
It's statutory rape at BEST, if Loki were in his teens when he mothered Slepnir. Odin letting it even HAPPEN is the kind of abusive that makes people light buildings on fire with the abuser and their frekking ACCOMPLICES still inside. If Loki were younger, in human equivalents, well, Odin personally deserves every second of agony Ragnarok would give him.
Odin, or his soldiers on his orders, MURDERED at least two of Loki's children, in front of him. Odin, personally, leveled extreme abuse of Fenrir which is again, "not enough W in TF for this". Hel? Jorgmundr?
Oh, and Odin doing so because Loki is (uknowingly) Jotunn? It doesn't hold water as a theory; Odin is himself part Frost Giant through his father Borr. Odin has fathered other children in the myths who are ALSO part Frost Giant, or other non-Asgardian sentients.
The thing that impresses the hell out of me? How did Loki end up at ALL sane? He's a Trickster, which wasn't respected in his culture, but he isn't the raging psychotic Odin is by a long shot.
BTW, if you want my vote for the series? Just be consistent, which you already do better than MCU. At this point, there's enough divergence from canon that you don't really need to spell out that "this isn't quite the same as--", and world-building will push the two further apart despite your best efforts. As a reader, if you keep it consistent and give some really GOOD character-driven interactions, I could actually believe Odin genuinely feared for the immediate start of Ragnarok when Fenrir was born, which drove him to act the way the stories say he did.
Re: Loki, holding back maximum damage, subtlety
Date: 2014-04-20 12:12 am (UTC)Good plan.
>> which made the Long Negotiating War over Santa quite amusing to people not my spouse and myself (at the time; now it's hilarious to both of us!). <<
Santa Claus isn't one person, but a spirit, whom anyone can learn to channel. It's a very useful skill, as well as a charming story. I wrote an editorial on that once.
>> They tackled stuff at ages where other kids are just learning <<
Yeah, I was blazingly precocious in ways that scared most adults.
>> that sharing doesn't mean, "Mom said I should give you this cookie, so THERE." (thump) <<
Another problem is pressuring children to lie, for example, demanding apologies when they are obviously not sorry. They resent being ordered to lie in one situation but punished for it in others. That's no way to teach manners. I think it works better to talk about hurt feelings after they've cooled down enough to realize that they did something wrong -- and to modulate punishments so that a willing apology always brings down the penalty for misbehavior.
>> Trying to /explain/ the original Grimm's tales to a kid who can understand the WHAT but not the WHY yet... <<
That can be a challenge.
>> It's statutory rape at BEST, if Loki were in his teens when he mothered Slepnir. <<
*sigh* They still are in their teens, socially speaking. It's in the plot and dialog throughout Thor. "His actions are those of a boy, treat them as such," etc. It's a coming-of-age story, gone terribly horribly wrong. Figure Thor is the equivalent of 18 and Loki maybe 16. Nevermind they've got centuries of experience, it's a developmental and social curve, creating a similar blur across chronological lines as what happens with Hulk. Oddly enough, I've only seen one or two other fanfics pick up on the age factor, despite how heavily it was pitched in the movie.
So Loki was probably the equivalent of 12 or 14 when Sleipnir happened. He's a gifted shapeshifter, he knew how to solve the problem, what work, how to do it, that he had the ability to do it ... everything except what it would do to him, how utterly overwhelming it would feel. First sexual experience is challenging enough. But heat? It's difficult for even an adult to control, let alone a young girl. My read of that aspect is that Loki basically roofied herself. So she felt that what happened was all her fault, and everyone else behaved the same way, and it was an utter fucking disaster.
>> Odin letting it even HAPPEN is the kind of abusive that makes people light buildings on fire with the abuser and their frekking ACCOMPLICES still inside. If Loki were younger, in human equivalents, well, Odin personally deserves every second of agony Ragnarok would give him. <<
Agreed. I have some ideas along those lines.
>> Odin, or his soldiers on his orders, MURDERED at least two of Loki's children, in front of him. Odin, personally, leveled extreme abuse of Fenrir which is again, "not enough W in TF for this". Hel? Jorgmundr? <<
I'm inclined to leave out those parts for this particular series, given the movieverse interpretations.
>> Oh, and Odin doing so because Loki is (uknowingly) Jotunn? It doesn't hold water as a theory; Odin is himself part Frost Giant through his father Borr. Odin has fathered other children in the myths who are ALSO part Frost Giant, or other non-Asgardian sentients. <<
1) Boomerang bigot. 2) Just because they're good enough to fuck doesn't mean they're good enough for family. Odin acts very much like a conservative with a touch of the tar brush, and he takes it out on both Loki and Sleipnir. Thor and Frigga try to protect them, but an abusive family makes that impossible unless you're willing to leave and she hasn't been.
>> The thing that impresses the hell out of me? How did Loki end up at ALL sane? He's a Trickster, which wasn't respected in his culture, but he isn't the raging psychotic Odin is by a long shot. <<
Exactly. Loki was trying to eke out as decent a life as he could manage in a completely untenable situation. He obviously loves Thor and Frigga, despite the horrible complications. Hell, he even loves his sick fuck of a father figure, or the rejection wouldn't have been fatal. There are a lot of ugly parallels with Clint's family and Bruce's family.
>> BTW, if you want my vote for the series? Just be consistent, which you already do better than MCU. <<
Thank you!
>> At this point, there's enough divergence from canon that you don't really need to spell out that "this isn't quite the same as--", and world-building will push the two further apart despite your best efforts. <<
That makes sense. I'm not trying to keep in lockstep with canon, just close enough that what I write is plausible.
>> As a reader, if you keep it consistent and give some really GOOD character-driven interactions, I could actually believe Odin genuinely feared for the immediate start of Ragnarok when Fenrir was born, which drove him to act the way the stories say he did. <<
I had enough trouble coming up with viable rationalizations for Nick Fury. Odin? Well, abuse tends to run in the family, so there's that. Handling magical artifacts didn't do him any good. Power corrupts. And a whopping load of self-hate for the Jotun thing.
*ponder* Which might be why he never told Loki, figuring it wouldn't bother the kid if he never found out about it. Yeah, because that ever works.
Re: Loki, holding back maximum damage, subtlety
Date: 2014-04-20 02:43 am (UTC)Some of the problem may be that the people playing Loki and Thor LOOK much older, both are in their early thirties.
Some of the problem may be the way American film and television gets in the doghouse when a popular entertainment include anything which even HINTS at the idea of underaged characters and s-e-x. It's insane, the dichotomies between 'okay to show this level of violence against a teen' but 'can't show two teens plus consensual kissing'. The overwhelming behavior now shows people in their twenties trying to look ten years younger just so they can flirt with words and gestures without bringing down the wrath of a certain segment of the viewing audiences.
Some of the problem is that the whole CAST is significantly older than the characters they portray. Tony looks much older, the actor is nearly 50, Clark Gregg is over forty, as is Mark Ruffalo. Interestingly, Phil is probably near the same age as the actor, while Bruce could be the same age or more than ten years younger than that. Chris Evans is closer to his apparent age in the comics- early 30s playing a young man likely to be ONLY ten years younger than that.(Steve may have been 18-19 at enlistment, likely 20-21 by the time he worked through USO to actual shows 'over there', but that's conjecture on my part. Scarlett Johanson is early thirties, but I'm not certain how old Natasha is supposed to be, chronologically, so I pegged her emotional age as ROUGHLY- late twenties, nearing thirty. Jeremy Renner is also in his forties, and Clint, the character, could be anything from thirty up.
See why the viewers couldn't tell that the "teenaged" comments were meant seriously?
Re: Loki, holding back maximum damage, subtlety
Date: 2014-04-20 03:20 am (UTC)Yes, that's true.
>> Some of the problem may be the way American film and television gets in the doghouse when a popular entertainment include anything which even HINTS at the idea of underaged characters and s-e-x. <<
I agree, it's a disaster.
>> It's insane, the dichotomies between 'okay to show this level of violence against a teen' but 'can't show two teens plus consensual kissing'. The overwhelming behavior now shows people in their twenties trying to look ten years younger just so they can flirt with words and gestures without bringing down the wrath of a certain segment of the viewing audiences. <<
Plus that makes it look like violence is more acceptable than affection, which is a whole new level of social destruction.
>> Some of the problem is that the whole CAST is significantly older than the characters they portray. <<
Character age in canon varies greatly, though, some characters more than others. I know Bruce has been all over the map. I think Tony has been fielded everything from 17 into his 40s. Actually I kind of like the age spread in The Avengers because it's uncommon to see older heroes.
>> Tony looks much older, the actor is nearly 50, Clark Gregg is over forty, as is Mark Ruffalo. <<
It works for me. I think of Bruce as younger than Tony, but looking older than he really is because of all the stress.
>> Interestingly, Phil is probably near the same age as the actor, while Bruce could be the same age or more than ten years younger than that. <<
Phil is a great match, it makes sense for the Senior Handler to be mature. Hard living can tack on ten years easy to the apparent age.
>> Chris Evans is closer to his apparent age in the comics- early 30s playing a young man likely to be ONLY ten years younger than that.(Steve may have been 18-19 at enlistment, likely 20-21 by the time he worked through USO to actual shows 'over there', but that's conjecture on my part. <<
I think the most recent iteration put his birth year at 1918 -- a few years younger than my grandparents, actually. I just can't help but see him through the lens of their generation. It makes me want to pat him on the head and feed him cookies.
>> Scarlett Johanson is early thirties, but I'm not certain how old Natasha is supposed to be, chronologically, so I pegged her emotional age as ROUGHLY- late twenties, nearing thirty. <<
This one is hugely varied. Some versions of canon map her from similar timeframe, or not much later, as Bucky and Steve; others have rebooted much younger. I'm leaving it vague because she doesn't know how old she is after what-all the Red Room did to her. But she is a lot older than she looks, and she was trained by the Winter Soldier.
>> Jeremy Renner is also in his forties, and Clint, the character, could be anything from thirty up. <<
I tend to think of Clint as among the younger Avengers, yes.
>> See why the viewers couldn't tell that the "teenaged" comments were meant seriously? <<
Eh, good point.
Re: Loki, holding back maximum damage, subtlety
Date: 2014-04-21 06:08 am (UTC)MCU does go with 1918 which means Steve is of his majority when Pearl Harbor happens. My headcanon likes Bucky slightly younger for all he acts the elder (which would have been fraught).
Clint I buy as hard road, because some of his backgrounds, yeah, they will age a man. And at 30+ that's a lot of time potentially as an asset as well as making him older than Steve minus the ice age.
Re: Loki, holding back maximum damage, subtlety
Date: 2014-04-21 06:36 am (UTC)Re: Loki, holding back maximum damage, subtlety
Date: 2014-04-21 06:46 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2014-04-14 03:11 pm (UTC)You're welcome!
Date: 2014-04-14 07:52 pm (UTC)Bullying at work is so bad that the most effective countermeasure -- hiring a lawyer -- has a dismal 16% success rate. But if you know how the human mind works, sometimes you can hack it in creative ways.
If you're having this kind of problem, see also The Gentle Art of Verbal Self-Defense:
http://adrr.com/aa/
http://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/the-gentle-art-of-verbal-self-defense-suzette-haden-elgin/1018191205?ean=9781435113428
http://www.amazon.com/The-Gentle-Verbal-Self-Defense-Work/dp/0735200890
(no subject)
Date: 2014-04-15 01:51 am (UTC)Thank you!
Date: 2014-04-16 05:34 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2014-04-15 02:45 am (UTC)Well, breaking into someone's house is a phenomenally rude act, otherwise known as "indecorum", so that's the lot.
--Jessica
Okay...
Date: 2014-04-16 05:36 am (UTC)Tch. And to think he scolds Tony for being out of control.
(no subject)
Date: 2014-04-15 11:23 pm (UTC)- Alexander
Thank you!
Date: 2014-04-16 05:56 am (UTC)Comment as you feel inspired to; feedback is always welcome but never required.
>> I've read it in it's entirety at least 3 times. <<
Yay!
>> You are an amazing writer, all the little details you put in really grab my attention. <<
I use concrete details as anchors, to support the weight of more phantasmagoric story elements. That's typical of my original writing too.