probably too late to post this but here
did this lil art trend for funsies
Forgot to post it here π
more....18th century cuba? π¨πΊ π
yes sir π«‘
I commissioned @ashafox for a picture of Alfred with his hair grown out, because it's always been my personal headcanon that it curls like Matthew's. They presented me with this Absolutely Beautiful piece of art:
(Very much recommend viewing their artwork and a commission of your own.)
Um π₯Ίππ hey there syrupyyy π₯Ίπ₯Ί is it okay to um... π³ to like Aph England π₯Ίππ everyone else says no π₯Ίπ₯Ί ππ so Iβd like your opinion π₯Ίπ₯Ίπ’ what do I do π₯Ίπ₯Ίπ₯Ίπ’π’
Seeing as I am the legal creator of Hetalia, I feel like I'm probably the most qualified person to answer this question. England, as a character, is incredibly complex and hard to define, and it's extremely common for people to misrepresent him. He's just a complicated character, so it's only natural that there's some discourse over whether or not he's a "good" character; On one hand, he's done extremely morally reprehensible things throughout the entirety of his history. On the other hand, the reasons he had for doing these things often stem from his deep-rooted self-hatred and harsh desire to be acknowledged as a capable person by his peers. Or, in the humanverse, he's a character thats shown to want to fit in, but has a hard time articulating his emotions and often ends up hurting others due to him mishandling his temper. He's a person that was never taught to express himself in a healthy way (or at all, in some cases), which brings us to the question: At what point should he be given the benefit of the doubt? If someone is initially deprived of the resources and love that they need to grow, how much leeway should they be given when they're given the chance to be better?
I guess the tl;dr is: is it okay to like aph england, despite his glaring flaws and issues? My answer:
I keep my embarrassing little thoughts in the tags where they belong
188 posts