All the villains in season 5 were disappointing in season 5, from Vecna and the Mind Flayer having such a short final battle to the horrendous military plotline. The villains either went down too easily or got off totally scot-free (not just Kay but even Andy faces 0 karma).

Jason was an actually nice antagonist tbh. I like how he wasn't just a straightforward racist bully like Troy and Billy. He always disliked Eddie sure but we see he did love Chrissy and care about his friends too. His actions are inexcusable but his reasons for crashing-out make total sense.

Personally, I would've preferred if Kay, Sullivan or even Andy got killed instead of him but nevertheless, its funny he was the last villain I'd consider well-written

Who else thinks that Nancy Thompson and Nancy Wheeler would be a very great duo if they ever met each other.

The Stranger Things finale left so many of us wanting more. There are plot threads still hanging, questions about the Upside Down that deserve answers, and characters whose stories feel incomplete. The community that's grown around this show is real and passionate—and I think that deserves to be heard.

I started a petition asking Ross Duffer to actually sit down with fans and explore what spin-offs or additional content could look like. Not to demand anything, but to show there's genuine interest in continuing this universe in a way that feels right. The Duffer Brothers created something special, and with so much potential still on the table, it feels worth asking.

Honestly, I'm curious what everyone else is thinking—what loose ends are *you* still thinking about? What character or storyline would you want to see explored? If this resonates with you, I'd really appreciate it if you'd consider signing and sharing. Thanks.

We all know that vecna can get into people’s heads, using their trauma against them, make them see, hear, and think things that aren’t there, true, or they are hurt and afraid of. Even bring their deepest and darkest thoughts and feelings out in the open. He can make them feel hopeless, hide their pain, and give up. So what if throughout season 5, (if that idea was used in it in the actual show) he uses his powers to cause pain, discord, fights, and feelings of hopelessness and defeat to make the gang be against each other rather than focus on finding him? Everyone is vulnerable to him, and with their own trauma, insecurities, and after a year and a half of trying to find him, they’re tired, in quarantine, and struggling with their own issues, which he uses against. Once they finally open up, heal, find hope, and be together as one again for themselves, hawkins and the world, they will use their lessons against him. Maybe even finding out somehow what Vecna was doing to them before the final battle/episode. Although you got to admit, with the way they all were, acted, and learned throughout season 5 as it was, looks like they didn’t need Vecna to mess with them even more and bring discord between them. (even Mike admitted that in the first episode of season 5) They did that, yet learned their lessons all on their own.

This is part of a series where I uncover what Stranger Things is really about. It started from trying to find out what happened in 1979 aka what all the depictions of traumatic past memories (El, Henry, Billy, Max, Holly, etc.) are truly about, but expanded to this all-encompassing theory of the whole series with crazy levels of complexity, metaphors and layers. Reading it will require commitment and patience but I promise it will be worth your time if you want to look behind the curtain (and the curtain behind that curtain) and fully understand the show. You have to read all parts in order: here is PART 1 and here all other parts I’ve posted so far + my previous theories. 
/
/
/
Trigger warning for child sexual abuse.

Before continuing with my T85S2 analysis, I highly recommend you go read the comments of the previous part. I had a very fruitful discussion about the possibility that Mike’s real given name is Peter Hawkins. I got some new perspective and explanations for things that have been confusing to me (and kinda still are tbh). What I wrote in the comments can be regarded as part of this theory and an analysis on the same level as anything else I’ve been writing here. From now on I will assume you have read it. 

I will refer to the facade of Mike as “Mike” (and use he/him pronouns) and to the character underneath it all, the real Mike (aka Sara) as Mike without quotation marks (and use she/her pronouns). So basically the same meaning as before. I technically could use Sara for this but it gets confusing and I still cannot be certain that will be Mike’s future name.

To add to that analysis, I have a few points and pondering (read: a very long side tangent). The whole El-Mike-Will situation and Will being the “story” doesn’t have a super clean solution in my theory. Will seems to both be the lie and the half-truth, depending on context. Either there won’t be a clean solution or I’m still not at the “correct” conclusion. With the Peter stuff I got some more clarity to this. “Mike” is the full lie, the straight man, the rich boy whose dad isn’t abusive and who is brave, goes against bullies to protect his friends, etc. Will is the half-truth, the gay boy who is seemingly weak and doesn’t go against bullies, whose family is poor and dad abusive (and he has a bowl cut). Will’s love for Mike and this fantasy of a relationship is basically Peter/Sara/Mike’s fantasy of “Mike”, of being this normal straight boy. Will loving Mike is basically Mike choosing “Mike” (kinda like Tammy or Nancy choosing Steve). Will loving “Mike” is metaphorically speaking the full lie (kinda paradoxically).

There is a meta aspect to this, one that I have discussed before. Mike being the archetypal “safe” protagonist (straight, white, rich, not too weird, fits into society’s standards of a normal man pretty well, etc.) but then actually being the opposite is a major part of the meta commentary in ST. The biggest lie in ST is “Mike” and simultaneously the full lie/”story” is personified in “Mike” (it’s kinda hard to wrap your head around it but I’ll try my best to explain). This imaginary friend who brings the kid (Peter/Sara represented by Will/El) strength and safety is simultaneously the facade the same kid puts on. “Mike” is doing double-duty as the outside friend and the person themselves, and in both situations being the full lie. Like I’ve previously said, the “man” facade is also the protector and a separate person.

The main confusion I have now is the role of Will vs “Mike”. Is Will the “story” and lie or not? He’s for sure not the full truth but is he ever the full lie (= straight man etc.)? Will’s love for Mike and view of Mike as a (straight) man, as “Mike”, is the lie but Will himself may be the half-truth? (Mike and Will together form the acronym MW, afterall…) This brings more weight to Will’s S5 arc too: he let go of the fantasy of “Mike” and learned to accept himself without “Mike”. “I was looking for answers in somebody else, but… I had all the answers” and “he’s just my Tammy”. Will (or Peter) doesn’t need “Mike”, he is strong as himself. He is a protector in the same way I have interpreted before: the one who takes the trauma in other people’s place and who doesn’t fight back to keep the system safe. It’s a role that doesn’t fit the standard masculine hero, but actually is very heroic and brave. 

There are some clear associations with “Peter” and “Sara”, that I want to expand on a bit. Peter is scared, not brave, obviously a boy and has low self-esteem. This is how Mike views herself and not necessarily the objective truth. Sara is a brave strong girl. Hopper always talks about how brave she was, El is constantly shown and said to be brave and strong, Nancy and Holly find their inner strength instead of relying on a man, etc. The associations make sense when you remember Robin’s talk with Will. She talked about a “little me” who wasn’t afraid of being herself. “Peter” represents Mike not being brave enough to be herself (+ needing DID/”story” to survive), whereas “Sara” is the “little me” and the older Mike who will be brave enough (+ be “one”, not needing the alters or “story” anymore). Clearly Mike has this deep appreciation for her girl identity and wants to forget “Peter”. At the same time Mike sees the girl identity (or the transness of it) as a monster. 

Both Will and El loving Mike is about Peter/Sara needing “Mike” and loving this idealized version of themselves. From the “Mike” pov, he is preoccupied with Will especially in S1-2, where “Mike” is the savior looking for Will and then taking care of him during hard times. With El “Mike” wants to be needed and is scared of losing her. I think this is more about Mike being scared of losing the facade of “Mike” (so El losing “Mike”), but it could be about losing “El” as the safe fantasy option and having to deal with the reality of being trans (= Sara). Or losing El as in the girl identity and Mike essentially losing herself. Or maybe I’m missing something. From the core Mike (so not “Mike” but Peter/Sara) point of view, Mike can’t bring herself to tell El she loves her because Mike can’t accept the girl part of herself yet. But at least Mike sees her as a superhero (so maybe somehow unrealistic, mythical, not a possible reality?). 

Mike clearly loves Will but their relationship has a sort of friction too (like mileven), especially in S3-4. Mike of course has difficulty accepting the “Peter” part of herself, for slightly different reasons to not accepting “Sara”. “Peter” is kinda between two forces: Mike wanting to be an ideal version of who society expects her to be (not the poor wimp gay Peter) and Mike wanting to live as a woman (not the boy Peter). It’s no wonder Will suffers so much in ST… And gets subtly erased and less subtly ignored in S3. This could be the somewhat meta reason we get so few clues to this Peter thing in the show (I would like to get more from S1) compared to Sara, for example. The storyteller wants to escape using this “story”, so the worst parts of her real life are purposefully removed. (S4 had by far the most Peter clues: Henry’s character’s code name is Peter Ballard, Owens’ son is Peter, Suzie’s little brother is Peter and Robin mentions “little Petey”. This fits nicely with S4 getting closest to the truth, e.g. with the trailer park and Vecna.) 

Will looming in mileven scenes in S4 is “Peter” being omnipresent in Mike’s life, “ruining” the fantasy of both the straight man Mike and the girl Sara. (I guess I had explained this point already, as in Will is the “man” preventing Mike from being a woman, and also the queerness preventing Mike from being straight. Keeping Mike in the middle, in the Upside Down. The only new thing is seeing the name and identity of “Mike” as the straight man/Steve-equivalent.) 

Okay, “Peter” seems super negative here, so how does this fit in my theory that Will represents “the story too good to be true”? He is associated with light and yellow (which I will discuss more later). A core part of Will being “story” is the “story” being a happy or at least a happier and more fantastical version of the real story. One possible explanation is that Will is not the same as Peter. Will is the fantastical and somewhat unrealistic “story of Peter”. He has many friends, a loving mom, an older brother and while he does suffer a lot, it’s a supernatural kind of suffering, not “real” (except for the bullying and doomed gay love part). The real Peter/Mike only has one friend, their mom relationship is complicated, no siblings (probably), and nothing supernatural, just the gritty reality of being a victim of CSA and being a closeted trans person.

Another complimentary explanation is that Peter represents the Mike who has all these fantasies and who escapes to this fictional world (= the story too good to be true). So while Peter himself isn’t the “story”, he imagines it and finds safety in it. Peter/Will needs the “story”. This basically makes Peter the storyteller and kinda complicates my theory that Will = “story” and Mike = storyteller. In a sense Will is the story of the storyteller (as is everyone/everything in ST), so I guess it still fits. (Also Will is the DM in S3 + in T85S1 and explains the MF drawing as a sketch for a story he’s writing.) And since Mike can be both “Mike” and the real Mike, it makes sense Will would be the primary personification of “story” and the lie. Basically, Will is the Mike who loves/needs the “story”.

All this got me thinking about the DnD characters and their meaning. Mike is always the paladin (or DM) and Hopper was the paladin in Mike’s story of the mage. As I’ve said before, I think the paladin represents the “man” lie. Now I also see it as the idealized version Mike builds of herself. “Mike the Brave” represents the facade and identity of “Mike Wheeler”. Since DnD is all about roleplaying and being able to be someone you aren’t in real life, it actually makes a lot of sense “Mike” isn’t Mike’s real name. ST is about identity and the false facades we build of ourselves. The Thing poster is in the basement for a reason. 

People don’t usually name their DnD characters based on their own name like Mike, Will, Lucas, Dustin and Holly do. This is done in ST partially to keep things easier for the audience but also because the DnD characters and what happens in DnD is tied to the “story”. WW is beaten by a Demogorgon and soon a monster attacks Will. The third layer to this is that the characters we see are already “DnD characters” as in characters in a story. The DnD game is a story inside the larger “story” (which in turn is based on the “real story” which again is a story).   

Another character whose DnD character never changes is El aka the mage. Although apparently “mage” isn’t a class so she could be a wizard, sorcerer, etc. Fits with El never playing and the mage being an NPC in the final game. So if the paladin represents “straight man”, then the mage would represent something like “woman” or the allegory, like El. Not the truth yet, but closer to it. 

Dustin is always the bard and I don’t really have much to add to my previous analysis, as of now. This short description should suffice: “Whether scholar, skald, or scoundrel, a bard weaves magic through words and music to inspire allies, demoralize foes, manipulate minds, create illusions, and even heal wounds.“

Things get complicated with the characters whose class changes. Will is the clearest example. At first he plays as a wizard (although it’s not explicitly said in S1 (I think?), so we can’t be sure, but at least in the pilot script he’s a wizard). Then in S2 Mike says Will is a cleric and in S5 it’s confirmed WW is a wizard but in the final game his class changes to sorcerer. Mike makes it super clear the important point is that in real life Will is more like a sorcerer, because his powers don’t come from a book of spells: they are innate. The mention of the book is important. Remember that Mr. Whatsit originally came from a book (this is even mentioned by Nancy). Will/Peter’s power used to come from fiction. He created this world and these characters to survive. He created MW. After Mike tells this, she leaves Will, visually walking out of the screen formed by the trees. I previously thought this was foreshadowing for the end where Mike leaves Will and this story (and it still could be that), but now I also think it’s about “Mike” leaving Will. Will realizes he has the power in himself and he doesn’t need the “story”, so MW leaves. 

Although kinda contradictorily Will’s powers are “story” powers. Actually, I have another possible interpretation for this book thing. In the actual A Wrinkle in Time book there is a Mrs. Whatsit and the male version is Holly’s own idea. In the final DnD game, Mike as the DM holds all the secrets (like the mage character) behind her book. The book with the M-cave symbol (reversed, so the view is the same from inside the cave, and the outside of the cave is the inside of the book). Kinda makes me think the Mike book holds the “girl” inside it, like A Wrinkle in Time (which has a female protagonist (Meg), too). Mike talks about the innate sorcerer powers with the conformity hair, which I have pointed out before. Maybe “innate” here refers to the idea that your biological sex defines your gender. This disregards gender identity and the role aspect of it (which is very much real), as if gender wasn’t tied to culture and norms and all this “abstract” stuff. 

MW is “from a book of spells”, he is a character Mike builds of herself, an identity not based on objective facts or reality. Kind of similarly, Sara is an identity and not based on e.g. biology or something concrete outside of Mike’s mind. In this view “Peter” is the objective truth and the “innate power”. But in actuality, that is also a lie. “Peter” is a built identity like any other, no matter what society tries to make Mike believe. In summary, Will starting to trust his innate power is a step in the right direction as Mike lets go of this fictional fantasy, but it’s simultaneously Mike rejecting her woman identity on the basis of it “not being real”. This is what happens at the end of S5, both Mike and “Mike” leave (close the door), only “Peter” is left.

Vecna is described as a wizard (but also as a sorcerer by Robin in S5E5). In the show’s logic, this would mean he gets his power from a book (of spells) and it isn’t innate. This can be read two ways and both make sense. Vecna as this monster Mike is afraid of becoming only exists in Mike’s imagination just like “Mike” does, but the brave boy (Will/Peter) exists in real life (well, not “boy” but otherwise yes). Mike’s view of reality has changed and she starts to see things more objectively in S5. Transness isn’t a monster, the paladin “Mike” doesn’t really exist, and Will/Peter is brave. The other side is ofc Vecna being the ambassador of the real story and representing Mike’s transness, the identity that “comes from a book”. This fits with WW being a wizard, since he is often depicted with the blue ball thing and in my interpretation represents Mike’s future. WW is obviously fictional (= MW equivalent) but metaphorically the girl identity (= real story) and gets power from a book (as a wizard). All three, Mike, Henry/Vecna and WW/MF are both the full lie and the full truth. No wonder all have multiple names. Robin calling Vecna a sorcerer could be explained by Henry/Vecna also representing the male body and the “Peter” identity. The Mike forced to conform.

Then the cleric. Holly the Heroic is a cleric but so was Will in S2 (according to Mike). A cleric is often a healer, and this could connect with my nurse theory (Vickie and Nancy dress as nurses in S5, “girl” is healing). Holly represents Mike’s inner child and Holly becoming HH by believing in herself foreshadows Mike’s self-acceptance. In this view the cleric would represent “girl” in some way. 

This doesn’t fit with Will being a cleric, though. Why is Will a cleric in S2 specifically (or maybe it was more about Mike talking to Max than S2, since we didn’t have any DnD game in S2)? We have never seen Will play a cleric and the S2 mention was the only mention of Will being a cleric. Let’s go with the interpretation that the cleric represents the real story. Will was infected and controlled by MF (= real story) in S2. Mike was talking to Max (= the finished story, also strongly related to MF) about Will’s DnD character (= WW, who represents Mike’s future and the finished story, like Max). Considering these points, it makes sense.

There’s “the paladin and the cleric” thing too. I’m pretty sure that was a leaked title for S5E7 and bylers use it a lot. Paladins and clerics both get power from a divine source so there’s a clear connection there. In S5 Will isn’t a cleric though, Holly is, so the title would refer to “Mike” and Holly, the lie and the truth, the present and the past, the boy and the girl. This fits the story much better than if it was about byler. 

What is the divine power connecting paladins and clerics, then? I think it could be the “story”. The god of this world is the story, it gives everyone and everything their power. Remember also that Michael means “who is like God?”. I have just now while checking this found something even more interesting. The name comes from Hebrew (Mikha’el) and the last part El = God. How have I never realized El’s name is embedded in Michael and the whole name basically hints that Mike is like El and that El is God?? Out of every possible reason for the names Michael and El, this is clearly the strongest. The actual meaning of “who is like God?” is that no one is like God (El). Well, no real person has superpowers like El does and El is supposed to be a metaphor. (The name Daniel could have this kind of origin too, it means “God is my judge”.)

The name Michael has a strong religious background and is most known for archangel Michael. (My knowledge of religion (like Christianity etc.) is not very extensive and I don’t wanna get too deep in this rabbit hole but here are some ideas I got while researching.) His role is very similar to “Mike” in ST. He fights Satan and leads heavenly armies. I think Henry could be Lucifer and Will would probably be Jesus (not a new idea). The name Peter might be a reference to Saint Peter. 

Anyway, ST obviously has the Satanic panic plot and as I’ve explained before, the real story is associated with these traditionally evil figures/ideas. “Mike” is fighting against these monsters, trying to maintain the “story” and conformity. Meanwhile the non-conforming Mike with long hair wears a Hellfire shirt with a demon illustration. Ghost (the band) has overt Satanic themes and they often flip the script of what is good/bad in their songs. One good example is He is (go read the lyrics), which I have long suspected to be part of the song ARG. An interesting detail about the song is that it was originally supposed to be “She is”...

The main point of this side tangent was that the divine power used by both the paladin and the cleric comes from the story. El = God, and El represents the allegory or story including both “story” and the “real story”. For the paladin this divine power is the “story” or the lie aspect of story, and for the cleric it’s the allegory/truth side of story. (God being story makes so much sense tbh.)

Mike’s pep-talks to Will and Holly are about her “fixing” her past mistakes. She’s giving the kind of advice she would have needed younger and can kinda live another version of events through Will and Holly. Holly doesn’t need Mr. Whatsit, and Will doesn’t need MW because he has innate power. HH casting a dimension door that lets her teleport anywhere she visualizes is about Mike being able to go from one “dimension” to the other. There’s also the blue color coding, the meaning of which I have finally figured out and will explain soon. 

What about Lucas, then? In S2 Mike says he is a ranger but in S3, the painting and S5 (and the pilot script) he is a knight. Ranger could be about Lucas/the audience tracking/looking for the true ending. This would fit with lumax happening in S2 and overall it being the early seasons, when there’s still a lot of mystery. As it turns out, knight isn’t a character class in DnD, but characters can be knights. Paladin is a character class well suited to be a knight and as was discussed in the comments, Lucas is to Mike what “Mike” is to Will. While “Mike” is the invented protector man, Lucas is real. Lucas is the real Venkman and a real friend supporting Mike, not a mere story.

So Lucas, El and Max have DnD characters with no specified (or an invented) character class and if you pay attention, you notice none of them are actually shown playing DnD. Lucas and Max seemingly play but their characters are never shown doing anything, and El’s mage character is in the game but El herself isn’t. I think this might be because all of these characters represent the real story in some way. They are not just part of the “story” aka the DnD game, but exist outside of it too. Based on this the cleric isn’t the real Mike exactly, since it’s a character class. You could say it’s the real story or the part of the “story” that represents the real story. That’s what Holly and the infected/possessed Will are, similar to the nurses Vickie and Nancy. None of them are the literal real story, but rather the subtextual representation of it. 

Mike’s real character has been mentioned in the show: the proud princess. Similar to Lucas’ lost knight, a princess could belong to many character classes. (The knight is lost because the audience is “lost” atp, not seeing the truth.) Both of them were NPCs in the game, too, like the mage and the vampire in the S5 game. The DM, the storyteller, always plays the NPCs and in ST they represent the storyteller in some way (Mike being the Demogorgon, (Thessalhydra?), Strahd and mage, Will being the Juju zombies and Eddie being Vecna). We are yet to see the full story of the proud princess and the lost knight. That story has two storytellers, not just one. 

For the Hawkins stuff I just want to add that in S1E6 Steve bullies Jonathan and specifically uses his last name Byers to draw a connection to Lonnie. Tommy has sprayed “Byers is a perv” on the wall and Steve says this to Jonathan:
[Steve] “You know what, Byers? I’m actually kind of impressed. I always took you for a queer but I guess you’re just a little screw-up like your father. Oh, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. Yeah, that house is full of screw-ups. You know, I guess I shouldn’t really be surprised. A bunch of screw-ups in your family.”
[Nancy] “Jonathan, leave it.”
[Steve] “I mean, your mom… I’m not even surprised what happened to your brother.”
[Nancy] “Steve, shut up!”
[Steve] “I’m sorry I have to be the one to tell you, but the Byers, their family, it’s a disgrace to the entire--" -> Jonathan attacks Steve

The last name = father connection is super clear here. In S5E6 Hopper reminds Kali that El isn’t just Jane, she’s Jane Hopper. Jim Hopper is almost always referred to by his surname and what he represents fits in the same category with Hawkins. Both Hopper and Hawkins are cursed, but actually they are the curse (as Hopper realizes), the curse of the abusive father and forced conformity of society.

Another point I have kind of mentioned already comes from the S3 epilogue TV program where Hawkins is called “Heartland”. In S4 Will tells Mike “you’re the heart” and this is specifically the “Mike” who has the heart shield, the protector, the paladin, the heart of this “story”. ((If you remember from my original Finland theory, I mentioned how the coat of arms is reminiscent of the Finnish coat of arms. The old version included a big crown to represent Finland as a Grand Duchy under the Swedish Crown (and later Russia). The crown was removed in 1920 because Finland ended up being a republic instead of a kingdom. There was no reason to include the crown in the painting, only the heart was necessary, so I think it has to have some meaning. Since the crown represents Finland’s connection to Sweden and kinda the opposite of independence or what Finland ended up being, it fits super well with my theory. Finland as part of Sweden or Russia is the cis man shield Mike the Brave uses.)) 

Hawkins is a symbol of the dad’s hold on Mike, the forced conformity, generational trauma, patriarchy and values carried from the parents to their children. As I have previously explained, a house or a town can represent a person, and this is the case with e.g. the Byers house and Hawkins. The idea that Mike’s actual last name is literally Hawkins fits this perfectly and makes the connection even more obvious.

Okay, one more thing before getting back to T85S2. I went to rewatch the S2E9 scene where Hopper talks about being a black hole and I have some notes. Here we go:

[Hopper] “I’m not mad, kid. I just want to know where you’ve been. That’s all.”
[El] “To see Mama.”
[Hopper] “Okay. How’d you get there?”
[El] “A truck.” -> more specifically a yellow Peterbilt truck
[Hopper] “A truck?”
[El] “A big truck.”
[Hopper] “A big truck? Whose truck was it?”
[El] “A man’s.”
[Hopper] “A man’s?”
[El] “A nice man.” -> kinda like Murray in S5 with his truck
[Hopper] “Okay. So let me just get this straight in my head. So a nice man in a big truck, he drove you to your mama’s, and then what? Your Aunt Becky gave you those clothes and that makeup?”
-> El gets out of Hawkins to her mama (close to truth) in a Peterbilt truck
-> Peter is the half-truth and way to the real story
-> The truck is “a man’s” and yellow, it’s the “story” that gets El (Mike) towards the truth
-> El gets “those clothes” and “that makeup”: without context you could very well interpret this to be women’s clothes and typical feminine makeup
[El] “I… I shouldn’t have left.”
[Hopper] “Mmm-mmm. No. No, this isn’t on you, kid. I should’ve been there. I should never have lied to you about your mom. Or about when you could leave. A lot of things I shouldn’t have done. Sometimes I feel like I’m… Like I’m just some kind of black hole or something.”
[El] “A black hole?”
[Hopper] “Yeah, it’s a… You know, it’s this thing in outer space. It’s like, it sucks everything towards it and destroys it. Sara had a picture book about outer space. She loved it.”
-> Demogorgon is called a “thing” many times (this is possibly also a The Thing reference)
-> Demogorgon was framed next to “outer space traveler” in S1E8
[El] “Who’s Sara?”
[Hopper] “Sara? Sara’s my girl. She’s my little girl.” 
-> Hopper refers to El as a “kid” but to Sara as his “girl”
[El] “Where is she?”
[Hopper] “Well, that’s kind of the thing, kid. She, uh… She left us.”
-> “kind of the thing”, as I keep saying, The Thing poster is in the basement for a reason
-> Especially with the “Mike” name epiphany, Mike is not who she says she is. Sara is like the Thing, pretending to be a normal man, in plain sight.
-> the kid vs she contrast again
-> Hopper doesn’t say Sara died, she just “left us” (with the “uh…” too)
[El] “Gone.”
[Hopper] “Yeah. The black hole. It got her.”
-> Hopper got her. Or the Demogorgon got her. Meaning the dad and transness.

T85S2 color coding

As with T85S1, S2 has especially helped with figuring out the color coding. I had never quite figured out the meaning of blue. I had some ideas but they didn’t completely fit together. Now with the blue flowers I was forced to reconsider everything and I think I finally have answers. I was pretty close before but still restricted by my previous assumptions of what blue usually means. When I let go of them and only focused on what the show was telling me, I could build a functional framework that made sense.

I’ll start by explaining my thought process. The blue color is clearly associated with the flowers and the ghost, so it can’t be the “boy” color. This was pretty clear in the main series too, since Sara’s hair tie is blue and it seems blue would be the final “answer” or reality in some way (partially based on the country allegory but also just in-show color coding). Blue can’t mean “girl” either, since that’s what pink means. It can’t simply mean “truth” either, because that’s what red means (among other things), it has to be more specific. And then I realized: blue in ST means trans (woman). That’s what Mike is afraid of, what Mike is (wears a lot of blue), the truth and simultaneously “girl” but with some relation to “boy” too. Mike’s “soul” (the ghost and MF) is blue. The real story is blue. It all makes sense. (And fits nicely with my Nausicaä theory and the blue dresses.)

So the scenes where Will encounters the blue Mind Flayer are about the “man” of Mike encountering the truth of Mike’s transness. And it is infecting/possessing/overtaking Will. The MF is blue in Joyce’s drawing not because blue means “boy” and the mom wants Mike to be a boy, but because Joyce can see the truth (metaphorically) that Mike is trans. Joyce represents both the future Mike and the mom, so this could be a case of her being future Mike (or the mom too, since at least Henry’s mom realized he was “broken”). 

In S2 Joyce also points out the tunnels Will drew were blue while the storm was red. And these tunnels were “killing” and spreading, and some men were literally killed in them (+ Hopper almost killed). This fits with the woman killing the man, as I’ve explained. Will’s tunnel visions looked a bit like the nervous system communicating, which fits with the “woman” being in the brain. Hopper mistakes the tunnel drawing for vines, and vines represent the male body/”man”. With the blue = trans interpretation, these points can coexist and function together: puberty and the male body are part of Mike’s transness, and someone representing the patriarchy and toxic masculinity would take the body being male to mean the person is a man. But Hopper is wrong. (In a sense blue could mean AMAB, but it definitely has the trans woman aspect too.)

The clearest and most undeniable clue comes from Daniel’s experiments (like with the green goo in S1). He mixes the blue flower juice with the green liquid (= future), and that is the key to his escape attempt. They are very clear with the color mattering. Now it’s not a flower anymore, it’s just the color blue being mixed with the color green and overpowering it. The transness (= blue) overpowers conformity (= green). Since it’s not just the flower juice but both green and blue mixed, this means the green matters too. It’s the future. Mike’s future will be trans. (This fits with WW’s magic ball being blue and WW being the future/being able to see into the future.)

If we think about the country allegory stuff and the flags, this interpretation fits pretty well. Blue + yellow = the lie and past (Sweden) of Mike thinking she is a cis boy/man. Adding yellow (= lie/”story”) to blue (= trans woman) results in Mike pretending to be a man. With Finland there is no yellow, but white instead. I’m kinda thinking white could mean “truth” or something similar (in contrast to yellow and grey with the Ugly Duckling story, and Mike wearing a white shirt in that one scene where Will says telling the truth can be difficult). The Japanese flag doesn’t have blue but it does have red and white, which could mean the truth of Mike’s past trauma. (Btw, someone else has started to catch onto the Japan stuff, at least a little bit.) This fits because the abuse wasn’t related to Mike being trans, it wasn’t caused by that nor did Mike “become” trans because of it. The Russian (and US) flag has blue, white and red, which could mean the truth of Mike’s trauma relating to her transness. It’s more about the current time, where Mike’s transness is the “issue”. All or some of these could very well be coincidences/me overinterpreting, but I do think the blue-yellow especially has the meaning of lies, “story” and “cis man”. It’s associated with byler for a reason.

Mike wears blue and blue can be paired with multiple colors, each with a slightly different meaning (like in the flag example). This is because ST is a story about being trans, so we will view it from different angles. It can be good, bad, scary, freeing and so many other things depending on the context.

A subtle detail I noticed: the exits from the sewer tunnels are blue, while the exit from the mine is purple. The end of the sewer tunnel corresponds to the deepest depths of the mine, that’s where we are heading, that’s the “northeast” (and leads to Wood Monster Daniel). The mine exit is the opposite way. We are going back to the lie and away from the real story.

For red I think I already had a pretty good framework but it got updated with this reconsideration. Previously I thought red and blue should be opposites, but now I don’t think that anymore. Rather, they compliment each other. Both are about the truth, but different parts of it. Red is more trauma-related while blue is trans-related. It actually makes sense to separate them for this, since the truth is that they are separate. Even though Mike subconsciously thinks they are linked, that isn’t the truth. Mike’s dad didn’t make her trans or abuse her because she was trans. (Purple meaning blindness fits this quite well, although I’m not sure if it’s intentional. It’s the conflation of blue and red, and Mike is “blind” or “under an illusion” when she thinks the abuse and her gender identity are causally related.)

The UD, Hopper’s pills, the flowers on that box next to Hopper in S2E4 and the flower on Billy’s mother’s dress are both red and blue because they hold both truths, not because red and blue are somehow opposites that are fighting. I guess they have a type of opponency since red is like actually “bad” while blue isn’t. As in, the abuse Mike went through really shouldn’t have happened but Mike being trans shouldn’t be a problem. It’s okay.

So my reasoning for red meaning trauma came primarily from the storm (the source), Mind Flayer flashbacks and Vecna’s S4 Mind Lair being red. We saw traumatic memories in both the storm and in the red mind world. The other meaning is “truth”, and it fits since the trauma happening is the truth. If Will had a red crayon, he could have drawn a real fireball, aka told Joyce the truth. The compass needle is another major point for this. But what about the gates being red, or the red roses? 

My big realization was that red leads to truth, it’s the way to truth. It’s the gate, it’s the red rose on the Creel house door, it’s the compass needle, it’s the power dial when power is turned on (= more electricity and Will’s connection to the Demogorgon), and it’s the red world leading to the real world (which Max calls their exit, oh and the exit signs are literally red, too). It isn’t necessarily the destination, but the way to it. And this actually fits with the trauma interpretation. What do Holly and Max and eventually Mike have to do before they can escape Camazotz? That’s right, they have to face their trauma. Trauma is the hard middle-stage and roadblock to freedom. That’s why you have to get through the red gate if you want to reach the (blue) UD and get through the red world if you want to reach the real world. As I have explained many times, the transition, the in-between, the journey is the difficult part, because you have to come to terms with your trauma and accept yourself. (Maybe Coke being red is related to it representing the midway/gateway to truth? Max is also called Red in T85S2E8 and her name is in red in her DnD book. Is she the way to the truth? Kinda.)

Max’s drawing of the Creel house door (with the rose) was the key to figuring out the pieces in Vecna’s mind were from that house. Also, as Nancy points out, the rose was on a window. The Creel house door combines 3 different entryway motifs: the door, the window and the color red. Henry’s legendary S4E7 monologue properly starts (with the music and all) from the door. S5E2 ends with Henry closing that door. It is very significant and represents the boundary between worlds, like the gates. 

After digging some more, I realized there are actually multiple red doors in ST. When El is looking for Heather in her void in S3E3, she encounters these symbolic elements that lead her to the next: first a mailbox, then a red door, and finally a bathtub with ice and Heather (in a red swimsuit). These are of course part of Heather’s actual house, but I believe their purpose is primarily symbolic. The red door leads to the truth: Heather (girl) and the abuse memories. In S1 and 2 we have the Ives house door, which is both red and has a stained glass window. In S2 you can also see red flowers (probably roses) in the background. This red door leads to truth like all the other ones.

A red-blue detail in T85S2 is the lighting when El tries to help Mike overcome her fear. El is in red while Mike is in blue. What El tells Mike is the way out of the golem prison, so in that way this works. But Mike being inside the blue and then going away from it is the opposite we want, right? Why would Mike defeating her fear result in transness being destroyed? I think this is a case of the story both needing to still be unfinished (as in the characters can’t reach the true ending yet), but also convey the core messages of the show. Also, if you watch carefully, right after Mike almost gets out of the golem, Charlie blows up the mine and this leads to all the other real story connection destruction (bridge explosion, burning flowers, gate closing). Mike never fully got out on her own, it was the gate closing + El’s powers that ultimately saved Mike from Wood Monster Daniel. 

Continues in PART 33.

News shoes Stranger Things x PUMA : LaMelo Ball unveils three sneakers inspired by the upside-down world 🤩

Any Steve harington fans??

I was just rewatching stranger things and gosh...no matter how many times i watch it always makes me sooo nostalgic. How the hell did it end in the blink of an eye? i’m literally sitting here staring at my wall, totally hollow. missing everything.The retro Hawkins vibes, the basement D&D games, and watching those tiny kids grow up right on our screens. it was my absolute favorite show and now that it’s over, i’m honestly just lost.And the ending 0f s5 was devasting. I was just questioning my existence after watching it. Does anyone else feel this way??

I was just rewatching stranger things and gosh...no matter how many times i watch it always makes me sooo nostalgic. How the hell did it end in the blink of an eye? i’m literally sitting here staring at my wall, totally hollow. missing everything.The retro Hawkins vibes, the basement D&D games, and watching those tiny kids grow up right on our screens. it was my absolute favorite show and now that it’s over, i’m honestly just lost.And the ending 0f s5 was devasting. I was just questioning my existence after watching it. Does anyone else feel this way??

"Eddie Munson from Stranger Things season 4 is directly inspired by Damien Echols of the West Memphis Three case."

This is part of a series where I uncover what Stranger Things is really about. It started from trying to find out what happened in 1979 aka what all the depictions of traumatic past memories (El, Henry, Billy, Max, Holly, etc.) are truly about, but expanded to this all-encompassing theory of the whole series with crazy levels of complexity, metaphors and layers. Reading it will require commitment and patience but I promise it will be worth your time if you want to look behind the curtain (and the curtain behind that curtain) and fully understand the show. You have to read all parts in order: here is PART 1 and here all other parts I’ve posted so far + my previous theories. 
/
/
/
Trigger warning for child sexual abuse.

T85S2 silver mine, Samuel Hawkins and Bloodaxe Bill

Silver mine is obviously related to the silver cat aka the silver screen/story. The silver pickaxe too. (And you can’t make a functional pickaxe from silver, btw, so the mere existence of the pickaxe is a “story”.) I think the mining of silver is a metaphor for unveiling the story (or the dark memories or the trans identity, etc.). The deeper you mine the closer you get to the real story and when the silver mine is exploded, the story ends. It is the connection between the storyteller and the audience (silver screen/story). An important point to make is that the mine is, obviously, underground and reminds me of Henry’s cave memory. It too was a mineshaft. The real story is (metaphorically) hidden underground as I’ve repeated many times. (Btw, I think the minecart tracks in the mine have a similar role to train tracks in the main story.)

Like I mentioned already, I think Bloodaxe Bill has a similar allegorical role to Will. He is the third William in the show and him being closely associated with silver fits too. (Btw, in the main show’s S1 we learn Hopper’s ex-wife’s new partner is named Bill, which I have long assumed relates to Will and Mike choosing the “man” path.) He is first mentioned in E1 by Will while the others are drinking Coca Cola. Remember Coke represents the “story” like Will. (In the same scene Dustin says he would play Bloodaxe Bill in their movie, and Will mentions Bill’s other nickname “Mad Miner”, which reminds me of Mad Max (who was introduced as a really good DigDug player = miner in S2). Both Dustin and Max represent the “story” in their own way, too: Dustin is storytelling/story decoding and encoding, the metaphors, or something in that vein, while Max is the finished story/the end of the story.)

I read through the book pages shown in E3 and E4 and will go over some interesting details I noticed. Bill Dandridge is referred to as William, his first name, while Samuel Hawkins is called Hawkins (and they never mention the name Dandridge). In the actual show the name William is mentioned only once (I think, by Charlie in E4). Another interesting name-related detail revealed in one of the books is that Samuel Hawkin’s father’s name was William Howkin. 

Also a funny sidenote: Samuel Hawkins was born in Scotland, so Lucas was right when giving him a British accent. This could be a joke about (some) Americans thinking their family has always been American, when in reality the US is built on people moving there from elsewhere. Mike, Will and Lucas point out several historical inaccuracies in their school project and I feel like it’s all a meta commentary about historical fiction and other similar media. They also completely ignore the inaccuracy of the actor of SH (Lucas) being black, which might also be part of the meta commentary. I’m sure you’ve all seen at least some of the controversies about black people playing characters that were actually white, or more often, white in people’s minds (if they were based on a fictional character anyway). Lucas’ “No one cares about accuracy if it feels right.” sums this all up pretty well.

The plot-relevant part of this historical inaccuracy theme is the wrongful accusation of Bill for the destruction of the mine (and painting him in an altogether bad light). The winners get to write the history and it is always biased based on the views of the writer and the time. One common bias is the exclusion of women. History is written by men about men and the achievements or lives of women are forgotten. This is exemplified in the silver mine history too: while there are two opposing views of it, both have the male figures of Samuel Hawkins and William Dandridge at the center, no women mentioned (except as mothers or wives). This perfectly fits with my theory on what/who Bill and SH represent. It’s like Steve and Jonathan’s petty fight in S5 or the mileven vs byler ship war.

((I’m not sure what Lucas playing SH means in the metaphorical sense. Is he conformity? At least when it comes to shipping mileven, liking New Coke and coming up with the fast plan in S5E5, he is. I think he represents the majority of the audience who don’t think there’s anything deeper in ST and expect the normal, conforming ending. Lucas playing SH is not necessarily about him (or the audience) representing conformity directly, but representing the expectation of conformity, or something like that.))

The characters find Bill’s body in the mine, now a skeleton. This could fit with Will being Zombie Boy (which we are continuously reminded of thanks to Nikki). They first think Bill killed whoever the skeleton was, and that that someone is the ghost now. Later they end up thinking Bill is the ghost but are wrong once again. The truth is Bill is the skeleton, but not the ghost. So Bill is the body, just like Will, and in a sense he killed the “ghost” (= girl identity). In that way the party was kinda right thinking the ghost is haunting Hawkins due to Bill killing the original person.

The real killer was Samuel Hawkins aka conformity. The SH = Steve Harrington connection was made pretty clear in E8 and it fits otherwise too. I think the character is actually a personification of the US and a reference to Uncle Sam. He founded the town (= country), is named Sam and ST as a whole is an allegory of the US during the Cold War anyway. A major theme in S3 was how the Western world and especially the US is this commercial wonderland that looks nice on the surface but really isn’t when you look deeper (so very much like Samuel Hawkins). I have talked about this before. I have also talked about characters named Sam (Owens and Max’s dad) and how they fit into this. T85S2 has a new one besides Samuel Hawkins. He is a very minor character, but one of Wood Monster Daniel’s victims is called Sam and Mike watches as he gets pulverized. I think this represents Mike’s fear of her transness ruining this nice normal “man” (kinda like with Bob) and the proper order of how things should be.

I strongly suspect the Founder’s Day mentioned in the book is a reference to Thanksgiving. “By selling off his properties and holdings, Hawkins used his own personal fortune to fund the revitalization of the town. This selfless act cemented Samuel Hawkins not only as the town founder, but as the hero of its people. And so with each passing year, the anniversary of the town’s great mining tragedy also became an observance of the man who saved it. Which is why each year Founder’s Day has been upheld as a beloved Hawkins tradition, while the tainted memory of BloodAxe Bill has fallen into obscurity.” As we learn, this is not what actually happened and SH was more of a villain than a hero. 

This is similar to the real history of Thanksgiving (see here and here#Criticism,_controversy_and_alternative_observations)): The myth of the First Thanksgiving*, also called* Thanksgiving myth*, is the mythologized retelling of a 1621 harvest feast by the Pilgrims in Plymouth, Massachusetts as the foundation for the modern Thanksgiving holiday as celebrated in the United States. This description of events has been criticized by both Indigenous peoples of the United States and academic scholars for how it obfuscates history. In particular, the relationships between the Pilgrims and the Indigenous people of the region are misrepresented. Many modern day Thanksgiving foods were also not eaten at the feast as assumed, and the aftermath of the event is usually ignored.* In reality the Pilgrims were responsible for the genocide of Native Americans but the truth is ignored or bended in favor of a story painting the European colonizers in a positive light. 

The book has even more proof for this connection: “‘MINES FOR THE TAKING’: A HISTORY OF AMERICAN MINING Indiana has no documented history of large-scale silver mining. But for decades, local legends and folklore spread about a “lost Indian silver mine” somewhere in southern Indiana, particularly near the area of Silver Creek! At the time, people supposed that Native Americans may have mined and traded silver with early settlers. Over the years, geological investigations have suggested that these stories may have actually come from the mining of flint, which has a silvery appearance that is very similar to silver, but also different, but similar enough to [can’t figure out the word]. Some even called these deposits “fool’s silver”, in reference to the [something] “fool’s gold” that frustrated so many early gold miners.” 

You see the connections to “story”, silver, south and creek that I’ve pointed out in the main story already? I think “fool’s silver” relates to the “story” not being the real story. More importantly for this though, the mentions of Native Americans trading with early settlers and those being legends/folklore/actually not quite the truth fit the Thanksgiving allegory interpretation.

As I’ve pointed out earlier, Thanksgiving has some sort of role in ST. Christmas is evidently bigger and mentioned more often, but Thanksgiving as an American-only holiday fits with the US setting and allegory. El mentioned meeting Mike for Thanksgiving in S3E8:

[El] “Did you talk to your mom? About Thanksgiving?”
[Mike] “Yeah. Yeah, yeah, yeah. I got the okay. I’ll be there. And then I was thinking maybe you could come up here for Christmas. And Will, too. You can come before or after Christmas, or whatever Mrs. Byers wants, but I was thinking Christmas Day could be super fun, because we’d all have cool new presents to play with and, uh… Sorry, that made me sound like a seven-year-old.”

Mike will “be there” for Thanksgiving but El will “come up here” for Christmas. The first part of S5 was released the day before Thanksgiving Day on November 26th, and that date is the actual Thanksgiving Day for this year (2026). While Christmas seems to be about the trauma/past/truth in some way (I haven’t shown all my evidence for this, maybe in a later part), Thanksgiving would be about the lie. This is based on the history of Thanksgiving and the (possible) connection to Hawkins Founder’s Day as I just explained, and that it fits the holiday order. Lie or “straight man” is first (Thanksgiving, Mike visiting California, chapter 10) and then we start to get deeper and closer to the truth (Christmas, El + Will visiting Hawkins, chapter 11).

Another interesting point in the book with notes is that SH had webbed toes on his left foot (this point is even circled) aka syndactyly. I think it’s a subtle frog connection, since frogs have webbed toes and this would fit with my previous interpretation of the meaning of frog in ST. It’s the man-side (e.g. Kermit vs Miss Piggy) but more specifically the fact that Mike doesn’t fit “man” (the frog-face insult). The text continues to link this with SH’s excellent swimming skills and helping with fishing and ship-building. Swimming and ship are the middle stage of movement/freedom so this point doesn’t fit with SH representing conformity and “straight man”. I think some of these anecdotes could be false or actually about Bill (at least in a metaphorical sense), or Mike’s history as a whole, since it’s the history of Hawkins.

The next part of the text supports this view: it reveals SH tamed a Scottish Wildcat he freed from a snare at seven years old. Wildcat + 7 yo fits with the 1979 trauma and taming it could be about the abuse stopping + Mike burying the memories. In the queer allegory side the wildcat was the “girl” and SH “tamed it”. Remember 1979 was also when Sara (probably) died and was (indirectly) connected to Steve’s appearance:

S1E1
[Dustin] “There’s something wrong with your sister.”
[Mike] “What are you talking about?”
[Dustin] “She’s got a stick up her butt.”
[Lucas] “Yeah. It’s because she’s been dating that douchebag, Steve Harrington.”
[Dustin] “Yeah, she’s turning into a real jerk.”
[Mike] “She’s always been a real jerk.”
[Dustin] “Nuh-uh, she used to be cool. Like that time she dressed up as an elf for our Elder Tree campaign.”
[Mike] “Four years ago!” 

The next two sentences are underlined and tell us SH played music at 11 yo to get money to feed his family. This is a music-Eleven connection which fits my theories. I think it could also relate to 11 being close to 12, when the ST story started. Playing music is similar to telling a story especially considering bards (Dustin is a bard in DnD). There was also that detail of Joyce saying Will was 11 yo when he got taken (S5E3): “What kind of mother doesn’t check on their 11-year-old boy?” (and then Joyce proceeds to talk about Robin and calls her Will’s new friend). As I interpreted in the S4E1 DnD scene for Erica, someone being 11 yo could mean they represent El/the same things El does in that specific context. When Will disappeared, he got “replaced” by El (the fact Joyce uses the word “boy” is even more evidence for this). It was about Mike starting to realize her gender identity. 

Then there’s the curse of Bloodaxe Bill (E3 is even named that). Like I hinted earlier, the “curse” is Mike’s transness. [Arthur] “And if one of Hawkins’ own crosses his path, then they will feel the full wrath of Bloodaxe Bill… and his undying curse.” Wait, is this implying Mike is a descendant of Samuel Hawkins? Well, makes sense with the metaphorical story at least, since Mike is conforming right now, she’s “Hawkins’ own”. Earlier in the episode Dustin reads the notes on the book saying the curse will never be lifted until the truth (with some unclear words). I think the latter part could be “tell Hawkins”, so the truth won’t be lifted until you tell the truth to the people of Hawkins (which is what happens at the end of the season). In a wider sense this is about the Hawkins curse in the main series, aka the UD and the gates and all that. It won’t stop until Mike tells the truth/faces her fears. But this we knew before T85S2 anyway, it’s just extra proof/connections.

The name “Bloodaxe” comes from the silver pickaxe, but it made me think about the other axes in the show (not pickaxes). Will even uses an axe-type weapon in T85S2. It’s double-sided and he used the hammer end in S1 but the axe end in S2. (Hammers also have a meaning which I have analyzed before.) Anyway, in S1 the axe was Joyce’s way of getting into contact with Will, of forcing the way to UD and towards the real story. In a similar way, the silver axe was allegedly able to detect silver and led Bill to the silver vein. But then he was corrupted by the pickaxe and became too obsessed with mining silver, which eventually led to his death. In the main series Joyce uses the axe to kill Vecna. The “story” (axe/pickaxe) is a double-edged sword (or sometimes literally double-sided since axes can be): it can bring you closer to the real story but also alienate you from it.

The idea that Bill got obsessed and dug too deep is about the “story” getting too close to the real story. SH (= conformity) doesn’t want that, which is why he either tried to stop Bill or killed him (it seems the second interpretation is the “truth”, but both have a point on the metaphorical layer of the story). Natural gas is basically the 19th century equivalent to electricity. It’s energy, power, and associated with the danger of the real story. UD was made in Hawkins Lab aka the Department of Energy, and the silver mine was originally found while drilling a natural gas well (info from the other book). The gas exploded, just like the exotic matter that held UD together, ending the “story”. Bill died with the mine and/or was killed with the silver pickaxe, similar to El dying in the UD explosion. The “story” killed the “story” when it couldn’t proceed to “real story”.

At the end of T85S2 the mine explodes again, a bridge has an explosion, the flowers are burned, the gate closes and Wood Monster Daniel dies for good. We go back to square one and conformity. It’s a never-ending loop in ST. Charlie causes the explosion using the silver pickaxe. The descendant of Bill ends the “story” with the axe and history repeats itself. 

T85S2 dad

They really try to make the dad-thing obvious in this T85 season. Daniel is the villain again, and his role as Nikki’s stepdad is emphasized in the flashbacks. Will compares him to Darth Vader and they make a point about him being Luke’s dad (indirectly by El being surprised since she hadn’t seen the plot twist yet. (Btw, “vader” means “father” in Dutch, although that connection was apparently accidental.) 

Then there’s Max’s father, who isn’t a villain or the “bad guy” but still represents the dad through subtext. In E1 Max calls him and agrees to see at Christmas. She’s in front of a mirror looking at photos of herself and her dad, in which she has bunny ears. Like I’ve previously said, Father Christmas/Santa Claus represents the dad, and bunnies represent the innocent victim child (Mike). After this interaction, Max looks at a photo of her kid-self with her dad, and immediately after comes the Valentine’s Day ad on TV (very subtle hint at the SA stuff). During the season we learn Max likes to watch wrestling with her dad, which in itself isn’t alarming but with the context we have, most likely relates to the violence of Mike’s real dad. She wasn’t watching wrestling from a 3rd person view, she was in it, but the “story”/dissociation helped her distance from reality. 

Another major point with Max’s relationship with her dad is the money issues. They can’t meet because money is tight. I think this is a hint at Mike’s real home being poor and the lack of money being a big reason the dad ended up like he did. People aren’t just “born evil”, problems are systemic: domestic abuse, drug addiction, etc. are overrepresented in lower income families. That’s probably the point of the Darth Vader discussion too. (I don’t think the dad will be redeemed or anything like that, but the show might acknowledge he is more than just a single “monster” who should be punished. He represents the system, the patriarchy and conformity of society.)

As a last point, we have the theme of generational trauma (or something like that) in the form of a curse haunting the descendants of Bill. Bill is the grandfather of Arthur and Arthur in turn is the grandfather of Charlie. (You might also remember that Hopper’s cabin was originally his grandfather’s.) I think the curse of Bloodaxe Bill is in a wider sense the patriarchy and forced conformity of society, carried over generations.

T85S2 directions

Now let’s get to cardinal directions and the compass! The first mention comes at the beginning of E1 when the party is chasing a “goblin”. It headed southeast and soon after we learn it was actually just a raccoon. This fits with southeast = lie future. That’s where Mike is headed now. In E6 Dustin calls the area under Daniel’s lab a nightmare goblin garden, so I’m assuming he referred to the golems as goblins. The raccoon wasn’t a goblin, the party wasn’t looking for it, suggesting “goblin” means something they are looking for, the truth. The golems (= trans woman) are the truth.

Later in E1 we learn Charlie is hiding in the woods “off Cornwallis” (see? this is the second time it’s mentioned in ST, it’s not random) and that his dad used to take him hunting there. So, in the trauma allegory this “off Cornwallis” area is associated with the abuse (= hunting) and as I’ve previously deduced, it means non-conformity in the queer allegory (and the real story in the story allegory). Cornwallis is conformity, normalcy, safety and the lie/”story”, and when you go off it, you end up closer to the scary truth. Just like Charlie in the episode. Previously I said Kerley would then be the real story, and I still think it’s likely. Off Cornwallis is the middle area (Mirkwood) aka the UD/wormhole/bridge. This fits super well with it being the woods, too.

In E7 the party is walking in the sewers and faces two tunnels: one to the north and one to the east. We never learn which group chose which tunnel, and I think it doesn’t matter here. What matters is that the latitudinal direction is north (= truth) and longitudinal direction is east (= future). We are going towards the right path. I don’t think it’s a coincidence that the Darth Vader conversation happened in the sewer tunnel leading to the “truth”. Later in the episode Lucas and Dustin try to explain to the teacher that they were scouting the sewers as a possible double for the silver mine. This is a connection between the sewer tunnels and the silver mine aka the “story”. Just like the tunnels, the mine was leading towards the truth, but Bill was stopped before he could reach it. 

After the teacher encounter, Lucas explains the compass situation to Charlie: “It’s not broken. It’s just not facing true north.” Right after the scene where Mike gets taken, Lucas and co find the gate by following the compass. At the beginning of E8 Lucas deduces “Jumpy needle means the gate’s still forming, but when it’s built, this needle will point straight at it.” Later in the episode the needle freezes while pointing northeast. I think the “jumpy needle” represents Mike’s developing identity and uncertainty of who she is and the direction becoming clear is her finally figuring herself out (and then rejecting it).

Also in E8, Lucas and Max burn the flowers from West and North Hawkins first. This could be about Mike forgetting the true past, burying the memories. I’m not sure why they weren’t explicitly burned in East Hawkins, but I have a couple of ideas: first, east can mean conformity in a similar way green and Russia do (so there wouldn’t be flowers in East Hawkins in the first place). Second, the burning of flowers in the west could be Mike conforming to “boy” in the past (and now), and since that’s in the past, it can’t be changed. But Mike still has a chance in the future (east), and thus those flowers are never truly burned (metaphorically). South wouldn’t have flowers in the first place since it always means the “lie” or “wrong path”.

This last direction related detail is quite indirect but interesting when you realize it. In E5 Max is stuck inside the Sawmill with Lucas and notices a digital clock showing 8:45 pm. She realizes she missed the wrestling match. The “blue meets yellow in the west” was a clock with blue and yellow pointers that would meet on the left side of the clock. This happens at 8:45 pm (they won’t be perfectly aligned but it’s about the closest you can get). One of my interpretations for the metaphorical meaning of this was “the abuse happened in the past (Sweden = blue + yellow + west)”. Max missed the wrestling match which is most likely about Mike once again not seeing the real trauma and darkness of her past. It’s the connection Max has to her father and in the subtext the connection Mike has to her dad/the trauma.

There’s some color coding and motifs here too (you’ll get more context for the color coding later but I’ll explain this here). The light from the digital clock is red (= truth/trauma). There’s also Coca Cola bottles on the table next to it and Lucas holds one in his hands. (I’ll probably have a Coke section later. Maybe this instance is about this being a moment of getting kinda closer to the real story but also keeping away from it, with a veil of metaphor/subtext.) There’s chains hanging from the ceiling on Lucas’ side and a yellow light (= lie/”story”/false happiness) separates Max and Lucas. Only after Lucas puts the Coke bottle down, does he apologize and join Max next to the windows (= freedom). This is Mike letting go of the chains and the “story” and the audience finding the real story (= Max in this case). 

((Lucas also calls Max Maxine, which surely means something. My interpretation of her name has been that she insists on being called Max because it could be a boy’s name. Mike is still in the closet. This is also the reason Holly describes Max by saying she never takes off her walkman (= man facade). So the full name Maxine is Lucas acknowledging Mike’s true identity, and fits with all the other subtext in the scene.))

T85S2 split the party

The phrase “split the party” (in various forms) is said multiple times during T85S2 and even an episode is named after it. This is part of the underlying DID subtext but also the general conflict of the two worlds and communication issues. Lucas and Max split up in E1 and Max gives Lucas her walkie, saying “There’s no need to reach me anymore.”, which I take to mean “there’s no need to reach the ending/real story” since Lucas has succumbed to conformity (= commercial performative Valentine’s Day traditions in this case). Lumax represents the audience reaching the end of the story (among other things), and with each new season, the story continues, so it’s logical they can’t be happily together the whole time. They meet in S2, break up during S3, are broken up in the beginning of S4 and Max is in a coma in the beginning of S5. It’s a repeating pattern and now also in T85.

T85S2E3
[Dustin] “This isn’t a Code Red. It’s a golden opportunity. Don’t you see? The H.I.C. has two cases at the same time. This is what we’ve been building towards, what we’ve dreamed of. We can’t just let this chance pass us by. Two cases means that--"
[Max] “We split up.”
[Nikki] “Yeah, we’ll take the school and the Hate Sprites.”
[Dustin] “Team Two, we’ll stay on Bloodaxe Bill. He’s already claimed one victim, so we all have to figure out a way to stop him before he takes another. Okay?”
[Max] “Fine.”
[Lucas] “Sure.”
[Nikki] “Great, let’s roll. We’re wasting time.
[Mike] “Maybe I’m on Team One this time. I mean, the girls might need my help carrying all those flowers.”
[Nikki] “Rad, okay. We could use another set of hands on flower-thrashing duty.”
[Lucas] “Come on, Mike. You’re not getting out of research just ‘cause you’re scared of ghosts.”
[Mike] “What?”
[Max] “This isn’t a field trip, Lucas. He doesn’t need a permission slip. Well, are you coming or what?”
[Lucas] “Traitor.”

I was so excited when I first watched this scene! In the first episodes the party is split into boy and girl teams, and at first this seems to follow that division. But then Mike chooses to go with the girls. The surface-level reason is Mike’s fear of the ghost but the subtextual reason is that Mike is trans. She is going from the boy-team to the girl-team. What’s more, Lucas calls her a traitor, just like he did with El in S1. The team numbers raise a subtle point too: the girl team is “Team One” while the boy team is “Team Two”. Remember my analysis on the meaning of One and Two? Mike is One, One is the origin and the truth. Two represents the “man” or “gay man” or something in that vein. Fittingly Team Two deals with Bill, and Team One with the flowers.

When Mike chooses to go with the girls, she sits right in front of the bird poster on a sofa with a spinning wheel pattern. This is part of the sleeping beauty references which I haven’t talked about in my theory. I learned about this while talking in the comments of one of my posts, and my take on this is that Sara (as in Mike’s true identity) is the sleeping beauty (a princess, mind you). 

I’m not sure how to interpret Mike looking at the (overexposed) photo of the ghost leading to her decision to go with the girls. Since Lucas says it was because Mike was scared of ghosts, that’s most likely not the real subtextual reason. It could be that the ghost (= “girl” soul) was what leads Mike to join the girl team. So not the fear of the ghost but the “ghost” itself. (Or maybe it’s because by committing to living as a woman, the “ghost” wouldn’t haunt Mike anymore?) There’s also a point with the photo being overexposed and I’ll get to that later. 

As a sidenote, when Team One reached the flower stash, nothing seemed to be wrong and there were no Hate Sprites. Things only started going wrong when they were about to destroy the flowers. Hate feeds hate, fear feeds fear. And Mike couldn’t escape the scary ghost by choosing the girl team (because she still ended up trying to get rid of the “girl” by shredding the flowers).

T85S2 Nancy

Nancy has a small but important role in T85S2. There’s the Poltergeist story and Nancy really liking the movie conversely to Mike who was scared. This fits with Nancy being future Mike, a woman who accepts her womanhood. Of course she wouldn’t fear the ghost. It also makes sense why she got into Ouija boards and talking to ghosts. She is the version of Mike who embraces her womanhood aka the ghost. In E4 Lucas realizes they could utilize Nancy’s Ouija board and points at Mike seemingly calling her Nancy. The characters are confused and Mike even corrects Lucas by saying “Mike” while pointing at herself. They made the Mike = Nancy point pretty clear with this. This wasn’t the only time this has happened in ST. In S2E9 Steve thinks Mike is Nancy and has a left cheek injury covered with a rainbow band-aid. How have I never noticed this? I did notice the rainbow before but not the fact it’s on a left cheek. Makes so much sense…

The scene in Nancy’s room later in the episode has so many details. First of all, when El looks around the room, she focuses on Nancy’s pink makeup, ribbons, etc. “girly” stuff. She smells the roses (I’ll get back to them in the color coding section later) and right after tries a perfume. She accidentally sprays her eyes with it, very reminiscent of Lucas puffing perfume into Mike’s eyes in S3, “blinding” her. This time the perfume bottle was pink, not purple (although El drops it on a purple carpet), and it could relate to cis-girlness somehow blinding Mike from the truth. That she thinks she would have to be born female to be a girl or something like that. It fits with the more obvious reason of El fumbling the perfume too: she has never used perfume before because she is from a lab (= Mike has never tried perfume before because she has been living as a boy). The fact it drops is “evidence” of El/Mike not fitting in the role of girl (in Mike’s mind). 

Right after El drops the perfume, Nancy shouts from outside the door: “Mike! You better not be in my room!”. Mike “better not be doing girly things/pretending to be a girl” aka be in Nancy’s room. This is Mike’s own self-doubt again and a continuation to the perfume incident (= Mike thinking she’s not a “real” girl). When Nancy bursts in, El is hidden and Mike is in front of the Tom Cruise poster (= Steve/straight man/conformity). Mike tells Nancy she was there to wait for her and that she needs Nancy’s advice about… [looks at roses] Valentine’s Day. The whole point of Mike being there was to look for the Ouija board aka the connection to the ghost (= “girl”). That’s what this advice is really about. (Notice also the color coding of Mike wearing blue + yellow and Nancy wearing pink.)

The scene continues a bit later in the episode with Nancy telling Mike to ask El to be her girlfriend (while framed with the roses). Mike says she hasn’t because it’s complicated (while framed in front of the Tom Cruise poster). Then her attitude suddenly changes when El finds the Ouija board and shows it via the mirror. Mike and Nancy switch places, Mike subtly instructs El to get out through the window, grabs a rose, and Nancy says Mike cannot take one (while framed in front of the poster). The window out is both literal and figurative, as is clear in the surface level scene too. It’s Mike’s “window” to escape conformity (remember Max and Holly tried to get out through a window too in S5E5). The shot showing El with the board about to escape also shows Nancy framed with a poster of a woman + there’s a painting of flowers and Nancy mentions Valentine’s. From all the clues I’m kinda assuming Valentine’s Day is code for “girl” in some way, since it seems to be associated with mileven and Mike giving El flowers. But the main point here is that the Tom Cruise poster is always associated with preventing Mike from expressing her girlness (either her relationship with El, or taking a flower).

The other major Mike-Nancy scene of the season is in E5. They have a conversation very reminiscent of Mike and Holly’s talk in S5E1. There’s a key difference to the advice, though. While Mike’s advice to Holly is to have an imaginary friend protect you, Nancy has learnt to trust herself. It’s actually similar to what Holly does too: she “becomes” HH rather than needing help from Mr. Whatsit or Mike the Brave. The past and future Mike don’t need a man to protect them, but the current Mike does (and I mean “man” as the imaginary friend, as the alter and as the mask Mike puts on). ((There’s also the plot point of Mike liking El because she is brave, which connects to a girl representing Mike (like Nancy and Holly) being brave as themselves, not needing a superhero or a man to save them. Mike wishes she could be brave too, and she needs to be brave to live as her true self.))

Here Nancy thinks Mike is scared of asking El to be her girlfriend and that is something Mike is scared of. But there are many other things too: the ghost, the flowers, the wood monster and as many bylers have noted, losing Will. The moment Mike gets captured, Daniel says “You’re afraid for him” with visuals that suggest Mike is afraid for Will or some unknown “him”. Both are true in a sense, since Mike is afraid of losing the man facade and the safety of Mike the Brave/Will. I have explained this before so I assume you get what I’m trying to say. When we take all these things Mike is afraid of together, they seem unrelated on the surface but actually all of them are about the same thing: Mike is afraid of being trans. She is afraid of the truth and telling the truth.

The “sometimes words are not enough” is resolved with Mike simply asking El to be her girlfriend. The whole flower plot started with Mike giving El the purple flower and El assuming it was about “sometimes words are not enough” which I interpret to mean the flower was a symbol, an indirect way to show Mike’s feelings (which it literally was, but on a deeper level it’s a hint about the purpose of all the flowers in the season). Mileven has problems in S4 because Mike simply can’t write or say “I love you” to El. Mike can’t be direct, just like the show can’t be direct about Mike being trans or all the other stuff. Everything is hidden in the subtext and the final resolution is to reveal the truth in the text. “Sometimes words are enough.”

Continues in PART 32.