HOME | DD
ephemeralDELUSiON — ++ APH:: it isn't funny
Published: 2010-12-02 04:37:32 +0000 UTC; Views: 5212; Favourites: 230; Downloads: 53
Redirect to original
Description
more stress crap!doodling~like I said, happy canada can only last for so long. :I
uploading because my mind was changed. :U
texture abuse again.
Time:: An hour...
Media:: Easy Paint Tool SAI.
Matthew Willaims (Canada) (C) Hidekaz Himaruya.
Related content
Comments: 95
* hugs canada *
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
i feel like if all the characters lost their marbles, Canada would be most dangerous 0_0
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Could I use this in an AMV? If so, I'll make sure to give you credits.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
What are you hehehe-ing about?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I need to see the whole convo to understand....
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
then look it up lol??
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Eh I'm lazy......
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
What is that supose to mean?!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
well it just means well lol.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Oh, ./////. Nevermind then.....
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I feel like this right now. I've snapped. Now I'm just waiting......But despite, I want to hug him and help him along with everything and myself.....
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
you will find a way along.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I've never wanted to hug my country so much before.
Being passive aggressive, I can definitely understand, you can only stay happy for so long before you need to kick someone's freakin' arse. Although...we don't go like...insane when we reach our snapping points...a little batshit crazy? Maybe... Matt's just really fun to push that little bit farther.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
But everyone does does have that "insane" snapping point.. no matter how you usually deal with stress, yes?
But sadly, he is fun to push that far.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Everyone has a snapping point where they finally let it all out, but we're not "berserkers".
We don't go on killing sprees unless we were already insane :/
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I'm passive aggressive myself, I know this quite well. I never stated that that was the case as a general statement.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Lol I know what you said, it just annoys me when people use that as his excuse when he snaps like that, mostly because they always go overboard with the PA traits D:
They give him every single one D:
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
... Bu I wasn't doing that..? Unless that was just meant for in general.
I love the snap!Can phenomena, and I tend to exemplify it in different manners, but atleast personally i don't apply that to my own headcanon.
As for everyone else... idk. it is also open to interpretation, so... it's really all up to them and what they want as a headcanon, even inaccurate.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I just meant in general why snappedCanada sometimes bugs me.
Although I love seeing other people's versions, it's often their reasoning that irks me when they bring the Passive Aggressive thing into it, I've met a few that actually thought that one day going on a killing spree is a legit part of the personality.
It's not that I hate it. Trust me on that.
I find that Snapped Canada is fun when people don't go overboard thinking it's realistic.
I can't say much though because my headcanon of Matthew is pretty...mellow for the most part.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
... i honestly don't know why people would associate PA with instant killing spree-- the only real relation i can see with that is how pent up emotional frustration after burying things may cause that, but that's not exactly PA specific. ... Although my headcanon of Matthew is pretty mellow myself, [minus intense curling and hockey matches, being put in situations that he finds himself uncomfortable, and the occasional arguments with Alfred and the like,] i find the concept of snapped Canada itself- as long as the facts with why is happens are straight- is fairly plausible, but as it is with any of the characters, tbh.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I have no idea why, but I have met people who think we are not capable of getting the anger out any other way. There's a reason it's often classified as "Covert Abuse", though. While that's not true for all of us, we do get the anger out in little spurts.
I find it plausible with most of them. In fact, I think Alfred would be pretty likely to "snap" at some point and go on a war related "killing spree".
But my headcanon of him is pretty complicated D:
My headcanon of Matthew is more naive and a little "too trusting" compared to other people's (but he still kicks arse in hockey and curling!). I find him easily arguing with Alfred, but unable to say no until he reaches his "snapping point" and goes on a rant.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Well... they should probably educate themselves a little. "OTL
Actually yes, Alfred is probably one of the most volatile out there.
And I understand, so is mine. Although I don't think of him as truly too trusting... I think he forces himself into many situations that require trust, and while he goes through with them, he always has this sinking feeling somewhere deep in the pit of his stomach. And yes, that's true, he is bad at saying no. xD;
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Yes, yes they should.
I think of him as a little too trusting (the first time around, I don't see him giving second chances to too many people) because while Canada's shed their fair share of blood, we're really something of an innocent. We only fought in wars were we were following someone. We haven't experienced guilt on the same levels that America, Britain, France, Germany, and many other countries have. And the only real threat of foreign invasion that we have is the US. And I don't think they plan on doing it again.
We never really had to be afraid to trust someone. We had no reason to be.
Like I said, I don't see him giving second chances too easily, though.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
/sigh.
Yes, I do agree with that. Canada's quite... spoilt in that way... at least in terms of guilt on an international level. However, solely in a human perspective... I simply think that centuries of built up neglect would have caused a huge blow to Matthew's trust. Meaning, being told that sugar plantations were worth much more than he would ever be, followed by being ceded to his "worst enemy" at the time by the one he relied on most would basically cause that trust level to dissipate. This however I believe is more of a "Matthew" emotion than a "Canada" one, simply because I believe their experienced memories stay in the mind as they would a human's, and are not necessarily kept in the minds of the citizens [thus affecting "Canada's" personality.] We trusted France to protect us, and cession happened. We trusted America, and America tried to dominate us [however, now a days it is in less subtle matters]. We trusted England, and he brought us into wars [especially the Great Wars] that wracked this country psychologically. [The reason why North America has some of the the highest PTSD rates in the world, after South East Asia.] Second chances I see him struggling to give, yes. But I think there are definitely instances where we trusted those considered "closest" to us and were let down terribly, as we were not used to the prospects of what the consequences could be. But that's just my opinion. xD
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Well in terms of the countries, Canada's not really neglected by America or Britain. France, yes. There was a span of 150 years where they had no contact with us at all -they tried to sell us, gave us up and insulted us, then didn't speak to us again until WWI.
I know in the canon, he's kind of ignored, but my headcanon of him is more "realistic" when it comes to relationship with those three.
America actually never tried to dominate us in 1812. It's a common misconception that they were trying to annex us -they were only trying to get Britain's attention. And what better way to do that, than attack their colony? It's like when a kid picks on their brother to get the parent's attention. Now a days, I still wouldn't say they're trying to "dominate" us. They try to buy our stuff, and we sell it to them. Not the most brilliant move on our part sometimes.
It's not so much that Britain brought us into wars, but a lot of the time, we followed them even if they would have made us anyway. Not many people know this, but part of the reason we stayed with Britain so long is because we wanted to (not that we didn't have our own reasons, we liked what we got out of it). We weren't in a rush to become independent like America was.
I think he would trust Alfred and Arthur today, simply because he always had. They let him down, yes, but they were still there and it's not like they were trying to hurt him in particular. I think he'd know that.
I've based my headcanon around the actual canon, and the real relationships between the countries. A lot of people are like "wtf?" but it fits to me.
I think I just like taking his personality where not many people do -I do the same thing with Alfred.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Oh, we aren't neglected by America, I know that much. But Britain... I don't mean neglect with intent, more like... "You are self sufficient enough, I don't need to check up on you all the time." Which, despite being with good intent [possibly], it still can cause feelings of spite since some people just want the interaction, and feel like they're being duped even if they know better. And I wasn't talking about 1812 per se, but life in general. The general manifest destiny for example, a unified North America was not out of the question even if annexing us wasn't priority at all, and westward expansion was the intent of the US when they fully well knew we were attempting the same thing... [Rupert's Land and the NWT were British possessions after all], but they were just so much more intent on it, it was sort of frightening. Also, in today's world, the history of America buying out Canadian companies, of America dragging us along on escapades such as Afghanistan, our dollars being so reliant on theirs for quite the while and the like-- are all sorts of things that I consider a form of a subtle domination, even if America is not attempting to directly dominate us, but I do suppose that's, again, a matter of opinion of what one considers domination. xD
As for the wars... Seven Years War, Boer War, WWI-- they were all wars we sort of... had to participate in. We hadn't enough say to say no to our colonizer. WWII, yes we came in a week later, but foreign relations would have been disastrous if we didn't follow in. The only reason we even wanted to be in WWII after the horrific revelation of 1918 was the prospect of being able to recover the economy... otherwise, Canada just really didn't want to be there. Vietnam is basically the first time we stood up with our intent, and not actually minding the risk of damaged relations, as we prioritized our own wishes before relations.
And yes, we stayed with Britain for so long because we had a good bargain, of course. I do think he'd trust Arthur and Alfred, yes, but I just think when it comes to new situations, their previous actions- the seed the three of them planted- make it hard to not have a feeling he buries away when faced with new trust situations with other... "foreigners"? Not with Alfred and Arthur, but with people he doesn't know as well. On a personal level, that is. Not on a political relation level. But yes, he would know they weren't trying to hurt him in particular... but it still hurts.
I love to follow actual canon as well-- but my interpretations of how actual canon would affect a human are very... eccentric. xD
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
With my headcanon, Arthur would have "babied" Matthew after losing Alfred (contrary to where people often have Arthur abusing him after) and then when he became a British dominion, Arthur got that "You're self sufficient, you'll be fine without me" mentality. Causing Matthew to go "Okay, I'm independent...so...what now?" Where he feels like he's being ignored, Arthur and the others see him as just not needing them.
That's just my take on the "ignored" thing.
I just don't think America's really intending to "dominate" us. I don't think that was ever really the intention, although, what happens and what the intention is, are often two totally different things.
Especially with America, but Canada's still a relatively young country and we've only been able to make our own choices outside of our country for a short time. We can still be easily persuaded to do something, although, we don't tend to follow through in the quite way they want us to now.
The relationship between America and Canada really is like an older/younger brother relationship. America's the older one, and just kind of drags us along for the ride while taking advantage of us, and we have a hard time saying no because we don't want them to hate us.
With the Seven Years War and all those, we were part of them, but they weren't "our" wars. They were Britain's.
I didn't say we wanted to go into WWII, but we didn't really have a choice either way. It wasn't just Britain wanting us to, and while we were still following them into it, we just couldn't afford to say "no".
It would still hurt him, but he'd know they hadn't meant it. And sometimes, that makes a huge difference -even though it does hurt.
I do think that when it comes to those two, he'd be a little hesitant to follow them, but that he'd be more than happy to go along with them at times, even though something bad is obviously going to happen (judging by his and America's game of "catch" where what was going to happen was pretty much inevitable).
I still think that when it comes to those outside of America and Britain, that he'd be a little too willing to help them out.
I find my interpretations are very different from the usual ones. Like I said, I see Arthur kind of babying him after he lost Alfred, with a "Well, I still have you" mentality, instead of the abuse and neglect that's usually written and drawn.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
See, yes, that's exactly what I meant by Arthur's "you're fine without me" thing. xD Arthur, [when of course in his proper mind], I believe would totally baby him. But then would go off again, with Matthew being like "... Why did you not contact me for the past 7 months?" and feel neglected. Which would be Matthew's perception of being neglected... not that he necessarily was, but he may perceive it as such, which makes it neglect to him. o3o ;;;
And I said that it wasn't the intent for America to dominate us. But just as the older brother dominates the younger brother without intent, the same just happens between the two boys. And regardless of intent, it is the action that counts in the end. And younger brothers, from my knowledge, may not actually take well to that sort of domination, always being hidden form the limelight. But that depends on the younger brother.
And yes, they were Britain's wars, which to me... actually makes it even worse, for the fact that Canada was just there because he had to be. Which is think is more of a cause to create a less stable relationship for the fact that there was no reason for him to be there in the first place... it's just a sort of selfishness on England's behalf, putting him there. :/
As for going along with them, I agree entirely. And helping the others out is one thing-- he would jump for that-- but other situations requiring trust are different, you know? Like unless whatever was asked of him was put under the guise of "helping"... I think he'd be hesitant. Like, the difference between accepting a dare versus helping someone with their homework-- he'd shy away from the first one, and jump at the second... even though both situations require trust, as both situations he could be played.
I honestly have not read that much abuse and neglect between the two, so that's the first I've heard of that. o3o
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Exactly, I think more or less Matthew would feel "neglected" because with Arthur babying him, he just wouldn't be used to being by himself like that, when Arthur hadn't meant anything bad by leaving him alone. Quite the opposite, really.
There's not much more I can say on Alfred "dominating" him, it is the action that counts in the end. I don't think Matthew would get too worked up about the little things until they escalate into a big wad of little things, though. It's just a mix of Alfred being his brother, and Alfred being America.
Now, they were Britain's wars so it seems unfair that he'd be stuck in the middle, but...some of them were because of him, or for him. Like the Seven Years War (which America actually started) and 1812. They were more Britain's wars, but they were over him. I'm not too sure about the others though, but I'm working on it. As Matthew, I see him being there because while he had to be, Canada was always loyal to Britain for the most part. I see him being there just to stand by Arthur. It comes down to the parental relationship at times (I see Arthur being more of a parent than a brother).
I don't think he'd do something like a dare, unless it was just him and Alfred hanging out. And even then, he'd probably be pretty picky about accepting it, but no matter your personality, sometimes you just can't resist the bait of an older sibling.
If it was "helping" I can see him being all for it. Although, if the trust is abused, I don't think he'd be unable to trust them again if it wasn't Alfred or Arthur -but he's just used to them.
I spend a lot of time on FF.Net, and I have found so many stories where Arthur abuses Matthew because he looks just like Alfred and Alfred has left. Which...doesn't make any sense, because in real life, when America gained it's independence, Britain was upset, but they were like "Well we still have Canada!" *coddle coddle*. I don't see Arthur being abusive. To me, he seems like the type who would try to hide being upset from Matthew, and make things seem as normal as he can.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
/nodnods.
Oh, I'd don't think he'd get worked up either useless it became a big wad of little things... but I think, well, there's quite a many little things in his wad sometimes. xD
Well, for one, the Boer War had nothing to do with Canada-- it was all Netherlands and Britain in South Africa, he just pulled Canada along for the ride. And even if the Seven Years' War and 1812 were "for" Canada... they needn't have been started in the first place, you know? He was a star of the show, but as a pawn, not a player. But yes. He was loyal to Britain in anycase, because at some points... Britain seemed like the only person Canada really had, so I don't think he'd prefer to lose him no matter how he felt.
I don't think he'd do something like a dare either, but it was just an example... such as in a situation where he had no other option. If the trust was abused... I think it would just take him a while.
And yeah, although it doesn't make sense as for the interaction between Canada and England... I can see where they may do that for Matthew and Arthur, for it all depends on how one interprets Arthur, since... well, he is very easy to interpret in a large range of ways. xD
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Well, the Seven Years War was started by the US for Britain against France, Britain fought it to win Canada. It kind of needed to be done, otherwise we still wouldn't be independent today (judging by the fact that most of France's colonies still aren't and their colonization style was very different), and Matthew would be frozen as maybe about 14 years old for ...a very long time. The war of 1812 was fought by America towards Britain, using Canada as a tool. It wasn't Britain using Canada then. In the end of the war of 1812, the burning of the Whitehouse was Britain saying "That's enough, America. Leave your brother alone."
I don't imagine Matthew being a player in the Seven Years War, nor 1812. I imagine him still being rather young then. Canada may have fought it, but they were still part of Britain then.
It's hard for me to explain, but I hope you get what I mean.
Arthur's easily interpreted a lot of ways, but...he's a "tsundere" character, not an evil one. Meaning, he pretends he doesn't care when he actually does. To me, he seems to be someone who's quite fond of children. Maybe not so much in his younger years, as he looked like he felt a little awkard at first with BabyAmerica, but I can't see him abusing Mattie
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I know that it was needed to be done for future prospects, but the Seven Years War wasn't fought specifically for Canada itself... more for the borders of French and British land in the New World [whichof course incuded modern day America] that just exploded into trying to take all that they could attack. Then Britain could piss off France by taking and profiting from in his own manner to solve his debt and in succession make France weaker. I feel like in my personal headcanon Mattie would feel somewhat pissed that he was just taken for the sake of being taken, and nothing really... well, more. Seeing as Britain would have gladly taken Guadeloupe or any of the others, really. But Britain had enough sugar, so it really didn't matter, although they were kind of hurting financially too, but whatever. That's just more my opinion on his feelings. xD
And yes, 1812 was America using Canada as leeway to Britain for their issues... I just felt it was more the fact that everyone just felt like they could use Mattie as their battlegrounds simply because he was there, which is not Britain's fault in particular, but just in general would cause negative feelings in him regarding everyone involved, you know?
And no, I don't imagine him as a player either; I did say I saw him as a pawn... but I still think that at the time he'd hold a bit of resentment due to the fact that he really held no acocuntability for anything that did go down.
I do get what you mean entirely though, so no worries.
And yes... I cannot really see the abuse either, just varying times where he lacks good judgement, but not abuse. D: But it's up to everyone's own opinion, so. =3=;;
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
The Seven Years War was more or less fought because neither side wanted the other to have that land. Although, France saw it as useless by the time the end of the war came around, Britain saw it as a chance to keep expanding.
Britain could have taken any other French colony, and fairly easily at that. And the other colonies were quite honestly, much better off. But I think translated onto Arthur, that would be him wanting the land for the sake of having Matthew. I tend to separate their personal feelings from their countries wants and needs at times, though.
Matthew was, unfortunately, the middle ground -literally. And I think that in any family, there's that one child that is. Matthew just happened to be theirs.
I think that while he would have been upset and felt like he was being used, he would have understood why things were happening the way they were the older he got. As a kid, he probably would have been a lot more resentful and likely to blame Arthur for everything, or even blame himself for a bit of it, but as he got older, I think he'd understand that it wasn't exactly his or Arthur's fault.
I think like any parental figure, Arthur would have had his good moments, and then...his bad moments. I mean, when he got Alfred, he was still fairly young -looking at him, I don't think he was quite an adult yet. When he got Matthew, I think he would have still been fairly young, and Matthew was only his second colony. He's going to screw up, but I don't think he would have been any less loving towards him than he was Alfred
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Yes yes, and I too tend to separate their personal selves from their nation's volition as well... but to me, translated to Arthur, I always saw it more as Arthur trying to spite Francis by taking one of his [seemingly] more beloved "child" figures//colonies [in the western mindset it would seem he was better liked, who knows who was really most beloved or if Francis really loved all his colonies equally, as it could also be a reflection of how Britain did favour America for some time, then reflected that feeling on to Matthew as he was Alfred's brother]... but that is totally just personal opinion, so I guess that is where a difference lies.
The older he got, I'm sure he would come to logical understanding as to why things went as they did, of course... but sometimes, atleast knowing from personal experience, even digging up old experiences and feelings you've already dismissed, if they are harsh enough to you they may still sting irrationally.
Arthur looked barely an adult himself, yes. And no, I don't think his love would be any less... but I feel he would have expressed it differently due to Matthew's personality type, which may have lead to some misunderstandings too.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Awww, I am so glad you think so. <3
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
He really does need hugs! QAQ;;; Hugs make you less crazy. =3=
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
| Next =>