I had an abusive mother. One who was neglectful at first, then physically, mentally, emotionally abusive and then back to neglectful. Eein is NOT that at all. She tried and thats more than many mothers out there do. Giving the child to the imperial family is whats best for him if she feels she's emotionally unable to care for the child. Not to mention that the child would have been taken from her anyway, so distancing herself was probably a mercy to the boy if he was eventually going to leave anyway. She couldn't hide him forever.
Also, Rein has extensive trauma she hasn't dealt with and,unfortunately, Wilhelm triggered that trauma in the worst way possible. Just because it doesn't amount to betrayal to you, or because it doesn't seem all that important to you doesn't mean it isn't for someone else. Have a little sympathy if you can't have empathy. Rein lost EVERYTHING in her first life and then in her second, she thought she had everything only to be betrayed by the one person she thought would never betray her. And not once, but twice, because she forgave him the first time. He literally lied as he told her he was telling her the truth when all she wanted was the truth. If that isn't enough for her to lose all trust in him, then I don't know what is. I would act the same way because of my trauma as well. I have a very visceral reaction to those I get close to betraying me. It literally tears me apart, which is why I have very few I get close to at all.
Also, I'm really bummed that Dietrich has someone else. I feel like the author didn't know how to resolve him so she did the amnesia thing. Seemed like a cop out to me. I'm glad he's alive, don't get me wrong, but I'm bummed the amnesia is sticking. I am glad to see he's happy and hasn't changed, though.
And yes, the child has done nothing wrong and he doesn't understand. Even Rein knows that. But just as betrayal cannot stop love, love cannot cure trauma. Part of me still loves my mother. But I don't love what's really her. I love the glimpses she showed me in public when she acted like my mom. At least Reinhardt is a good person. She genuinely loves the boy, you can tell, but she's haunted by him. She wants him to have a good life but knows she can't give it to him. Rather than possibly having that love turn to resentment or to further abuse him, she'd rather give him a chance for that somewhere else. Though, to be perfectly honest, I would have given the child to Dietrich and had him raise the child as his own instead and just played the doting mistress. But that would have only hurt Dietrich and Rio when the imperial family took him. . . There really is no win in this situation. There's only the lesser of the two evils.
Very good comment that covers a lot of the nuances here that people are somehow missing. Like "she's such a bitch giving him to his psychopath dad!" as though the royal family didn't demand she return him... People in this comments section...
I have a horrible feeling he won't make it in time but the child will be born and thats what DR will be left with. I hope I'm wrong.
I don't need sides. I barely needed the latter half of this. With the side by side comparison of the beginning of the artwork and where it is now, it reaffirms my previous opinion that the artwork was so much better at the start. It looks so bland and cartoonish (yes, I know its a cartoon regardless) with those harsh black outlines and no shadowing. Overall, I feel like th author didn't know what to do with this whole story, didn't really have a plot and didn't know how to finish it. I wouldn't classify this as a slow burn or slice of life romance. It's just kind of lacking all around in a fundamental sense. Fine for a filler but not something I would recommend nor read again.
Art often changes over the course of long-form story telling as an artist learns what's realistic and easiest to keep consistent in order to keep up with publishing timelines. I agree that the art changed, and it may not be to your taste, but there's often a reason for it. This wasn't the most gripping suspenseful read, but i don't think it was supposed to be.
I understand that art changes. I've been painting and drawing from a young age. I'm also a writer so I get, too, that not all stories are going to be filled with major drama and climaxes. That was not the point at all of what I said and you completely missed it. ╮(￣▽￣)╭
...or is the artwork getting worse and sloppy?
I mean it's not worse and sloppy per se, it's just like more simplified compared to the first chapters, I still like the art, it's cute
I feel like what you said is too much of a strong word ngl
it doesn't really matter, as long as the story is good. welp stillo Depends
I totally agree. They're not even hiding the wonky eye on that blonde guy ╥﹏╥
I think that Taeshin pretended to be Haewon, met Wujin under these circumstances, Wujin knows Haewon somehow from childhood or high school or something, and thought he was the same person and started a related with Taeshin thinking this, but found out quickly it was a lie. When he exposed Taeshin and wanted to know where the real Haewon was, Taeshin felt like he was losing everything and killed himself.
Or, we have a corrupt prosecutor and Taeshin got too close to some information and in order to protect Haewon and Wujin, he killed himself because he was being threatened.
Just speculating.
omg that’s a good theory but not too right and omg you’re gonna be shook and shaken I can’t wait for the manhwa to adapt it all I was crying reading it
Could you please spoil it for me I like spoilers they bring me comfort pls
A real shame that the first translation team didn't keep going with this. Their first 2 chapters were great
I banged this and I have to say that I do not like Agia. I normally love the psychologically hurt and "I need fixing" type, but not Agia. He's not terrible, but I do not like him for Ken. Not at all. I really want more Vercike and Ian. Agia, though, is a selfish and cruel man. So far, the vampire and Ian have shown far more caring towards Ken than anyone. I hope no one dies. Except Lorraine. That bitch deserves a painful death. And a bra.
this seems so loud and wrong agia isnt a bad person really, he just grew up with what lorriane told him and didn't know any different. and also vercike and ian did not show more caring for ken!! idk if we read the same thing but they are both weird and manipulative. vercike put a whole curse on ken and ian only had feelings for ken .. but he tried to turn ken in to vercike so he wouldn't be in a deep slumber for years? doesn't make sense. im my mind, im really hoping your confusing vercike and ian for agia and daniel. :)
No. Thats not what I said, nor what happened at all.
I do understand that Agia was manipulated and abused as a child. I get that. It warped him. Been there myself. I still don't like him. I didn't say be was a bad person at heart. I don't think he is. You can be selfish and cruel because of that selfishness and still be good at heart. Good people do bad things all the time. Just because he's good at heart doesn't mean that I can excuse his actions. Being abused is not an excuse for becoming an abuser. If you look at it objectively and from Ken's pov, Agia did save him, but he raped him over and over, isolated him and held him captive all for a prophecy that Ken doesn'treally care about. And he continues to do so. I also think they have zero chemistry with the way the author has written them. Thats just personal, though.
Now, Ian. I believe you're looking at Ian's motives all wrong. I don't think and I'm 99% sure that he didn't become Vercike's thrall because he wanted to. He hates vampires, he's said that over and over . What he loves as both his family and later, romantically is Ken. Everything he did was for Ken. He obviously got seriously hurt when they were separated as children. And he had to be saved twice via Vercike. He said so himself in this latest chapter. He probably was on the verge of death and he took Vercike up on his offer to live only for the sole purpose of finding and protecting Ken again. And him trying to get Ken to Vercike isn't by any means for him to come to harm. He just wants Ken by his side and everything was fine until Agia found him. Vercike didn't bite Ken to curse jim so that he would suffer. He said as much. He bit him to protect him from getting killed right away by the church, and in hopes that he would seek him out. He's always wanted Ken to come to him on his own and he wants Ken, himself and Agia to live together again. Thats what he said and he hasn't shown any motive otherwise. Its the other idiot vampires that keep trying to kill everyone. I have yet to see or read of Vercike giving anyone orders to bring Ken to him or bring Agia to him. Yes, Vercike tried to kill Agia, and succeeded time and again, but it was to prevent Ken from dying through the church's twisted view of the prophecy making Ken and Agia sacrifice themselves.
So, yes, we did read the same story. However, I was looking at it objectively and then personally. Personally, I don't like Agia. Objectively, I want them all to be happy. And objectively, neither Vercike nor Ian have hurt Ken in any manner.
i apologize but i am not reading allat .. seems like you got a little butt hurt because i probably didnt understand where u were coming from and wrote your own story. and obviously ian didn't become vercike's thrall because he wanted to , i never said that. yes ken doesn't give one fuck about the prophecy nor does he have to do it, but with all that rape and being isolated he still found a way to fall in love with agia yes i get ur point on that and it doesn't make sense at all! i think i believe where youre coming from but it just seems like you worded it wrong at first or i got the wrong message out of it.
SORRY I ACTUALLY BARELY READ THIS AT ALL. i do understand this and it made me realize a couple more things. i see youre looking at it from another point now. thank you for this.
Oh sure. Sorry my reply was so long. :)
Chef's kiss analysis! Loved it^^
I know the author says that their friends say their tattoos don't mean anything, but most people get tattoos because they mean something or because they're a fan of something. The only time people get tattoos that don't mean anything is if they're drunk, lost a bet or already became addicted to getting tats and is filling up space. But what bothers me most is the placement of the ones drawn. They make no sense and even an artist would try and convince their canvas to switch placement if it doesn't suit. . . Anyway. This is an olay manga. I can kind see where it's going. Jo is just a blip for Ian to realize how much Scarface means to him. I doubt he'll end up with Jo.
It’s really not that deep. Just imagine the characters care if it bothers you so much.
I do. It's just annoying, thats all.
Because I draw tattoos for people on the side
Yeah it also took me a minute to get over the whole “tattoos don’t mean anything” bit
Do you have tattoos?
Cause 90% of my tattoos have no meaning other then I thought they were cool, and I was not drunk, did not lose a bet, and none are filler. I'm not alone either.
I'm not saying it's not possible, only that its not the commonality unless people are addicted to getting tattoos (which is a thing). And, no, I do not have tattoos. I'm afraid of needles, although that fear has lessened considerably due to medical issues. I would have become a tattooist if not for that fact. However, like I stated, I do draw tattoo desigsn as a side business. Every request I've had has had a meaning behind it, save a few,, and I've had too many to count. I wouldnt have too much problem with the tattoos themselves if the placement wasn't so odd on the characters. Most artists would discourage certain placements for certain tattoos for legibility, fit and wear.
But really, I was just venting. It's not that big a deal. Just bothered me. Like an itch I can't scratch.
But what I'm saying is you don't have data to back up your statement. Your lived experience does not equal everyone else's.
People get tattoos for all sorts of reasons, meaningful or not. And I hate that you said someone must be drunk to get a tattoo without meaning. That's not true, and is frankly rude and judgmental to both tatoo-ees and tattoo artists.
And if we're going to use experience as facts, then my social media is absolutely littered with people talking about how patchwork tattoos are "in" and the characters here look exactly like that.
I didn't say that was the only reason. I gave 3 reasons, in fact,behich are the reasons I've come across. And also 12 years of experience drawing tattoos for others (because I'm not inking the tatt myself, I have them fill out a questionnaire) is enough "data" to back up my findings.
Also, trends change like the weather. Patchwork may been in now, but it hasn't been for the past decade, so my experience is not based on trends that are so new that it still smells like baby powder.
Maybe the people who seek me out are mainly those who want something with meaning (not necessarily deep meaning, but some sort of attachment to the imagery), but that is my experience. You can't fault my knowledge and experience when I don't choose my clients. We can disagree, and I'm not saying your wrong or your friends are wrong, I'm saying we have different experiences with the culture. You might be seeing only one side and so might I. Both have cultivated our understanding of the culture and reasoning behind it. Like growing up in the same state, but one is from the north and one from the south. Both are going to have very drastic views of the state, regardless of whether it has the same name. It is what it is.
Well your other 2 reasons sucked too but I was too lazy to list them lol.
Also sure, patchwork wasn't in before but it is now and Wet Sand is being written now. I didn't say anything about the longevity.
You are totally backtracking now by saying "attachment to the imagery" lol, that is literally why anyone gets a tattoo.
But anyways, uncle, this convo has drained my social battery.
Uncle?? I'm a woman, thank you. And I wasn't backtracking at all. When I explain something to a stranger, I tend to use more formal language. Don't mistake that for defensiveness of trying to cover up something. My thoughts and experiences don't change and didn't change on the subject because of what you said. We can agree to disagree based on our experiences. And by your own admission, saying that attachment to imagery is the reason people get tattoos contradicts everything you're arguing. Attachment means it's not random. It holds some meaning. It may be spur of the moment due to tattoo addiction, but everyone gets a tattoo based on some sort of attachment. They're never just wholly random. That is the issue I take with these tattoos.
No the tattoos actually has meaning but she doesn't want the readers to dig in much to find any clues.
They both are so broken. Too bad therapists don't seem like a thing in this realm. They need one