The Count has come. He sat down beside me, and said in his smoothest voice as he opened two letters:—
"The Szgany has given me these, of which, though I know not whence they come, I shall, of course, take care. See!"—he must have looked at it—"one is from you, and to my friend Peter Hawkins; the other"—here he caught sight of the strange symbols as he opened the envelope, and the dark look came into his face, and his eyes blazed wickedly—"the other is a vile thing, an outrage upon friendship and hospitality! It is not signed. Well! so it cannot matter to us." And he calmly held letter and envelope in the flame of the lamp till they were consumed. Then he went on:—
"The letter to Hawkins—that I shall, of course, send on, since it is yours. Your letters are sacred to me. Your pardon, my friend, that unknowingly I did break the seal. Will you not cover it again?" He held out the letter to me, and with a courteous bow handed me a clean envelope. I could only redirect it and hand it to him in silence.
This is Dracula at peak cruelty. He's got his smoothest voice, his best manners, his finest words about the friendship between them. He opens Jonathan's messages right in front of him, burns the letter right in front of him.
He could have let him think they got out, but he doesn't want Jonathan to keep harboring any hope. He also doesn't want him to think he can ask the people outside for help (which actually makes me believe they are more likely to try and help, which is why Dracula wants to prevent Jonathan seeking it from them). So he crushes both the hope for rescue from afar and help from nearby at once, by telling Jonathan that these letters were given to him, and of course by controlling what gets sent out.
He seems to have already opened and read the letter to Hawkins. But he waited to read the second letter until he is in front of Jonathan. The one to Hawkins has no important information, but it hints that the one to Mina does. If that letter was not in shorthand, Jonathan's life would almost certainly depend on how openly he had asked for help. Because that might have broken the facade of friendship. And by waiting until he was in front of him to read Jonathan's own words, Dracula ensured that it would be Jonathan who was 'responsible' for doing so. He engineered what he probably expected to be a high-stakes game, wherein he read the letter and depending on the contents either allowed Jonathan to try and come up with an excuse he could pretend to accept, or let everything end and attacked him.
The shorthand changes everything. It's infuriating, because Dracula cannot read or understand it. And he refuses to admit that or to allow Jonathan to lie to him about what it contains. So he threatens whoever would write such a thing, but seizes on the excuse of it not being signed to dispose of it without having to call off the game. And he is able to quickly pivot back to hurting Jonathan even more, by forcing him to watch the letter containing all his hopes burn away. (This could be another test as well. If he broke, if he lunged to save it...)
Then Dracula forces Jonathan to play along. It seems clear that he has been sitting in silence throughout this scene. Dracula makes him, if not talk, at least act. He has to be the one to redirect the new envelope. He has to physically hand it over to Dracula. His effort to get a message out was turned into a useless mockery in which he must participate.
And then Dracula locks him in the library and leaves him alone to stew for a while.
I do think that Dracula went off and burned the letter to Mr. Hawkins as well. If that went out it would potentially raise questions, at the very least about a letter to Mina that went missing, and also might screw up his carefully scheduled false timeline (as established in the dictated letters). There's no reason for him to actually send this letter. But by pretending he was going to, he was able to twist the knife a little harder, and get Jonathan to 'participate' again.
35 notes
·
View notes
Zevlor is set up to fail
*This is going to be a long one because I am going to jam snippets of lines from the game.*
I started a new run just to create a few save points around the interactions with Zevlro and Rugan. Something possessed me talk to everyone is the Grove.
In conclusion, most unfortunately, Zevlor is set up to fail in this game.
Note: I am only talking about the precious old man. None of this is to do with the cut content of corrupted Zevlor that I yet to dig them out from the dialogue files.
Let's take a look at the grown up tieflings.
These 3 are outside the Grove circle where the druids chant to the idol.
Then here we go Arabella's parents
From these people, I kind of see they are not exactly the typical "beg for help" sort of refugee. Some of them think "(their) lives are at stake, why are the druids being ridiculous". Arabella's mother, Komira is right to be angry and frustrated given her daughter is young. However, she also describes it as "precious ritual". It seems the reason (however bad it is, the druids actually have one) is lost to the tieflings. To an extent, I can understand that. They are civilians from Elturel. Even life isn't perfect for tieflings there, it's not all that bad. They live in/around a city and have a life there. The make their own family and are protected by the Riders.
Other than this, the rest of the camp is "we should just run". I think this one sums it up perfectly. This bunch really is not fighters. Zevlor isn't lying or exaggerating. Even if they have a strong body, their minds have no fight in it.
And the kids, by the Hells, they are even worse. These ones are the ones training with Wyll.
They already are the "better" ones. They are too young to understand what "hoard of goblins" and "monster along the road" mean. The best thing the camp can do is give the kids something to do and hope they will be able to put up a fight when they are in some desperate situation. The rest of the kids? I figure they are most likely under Mol.
I think Mol practically takes care of the rest of the kids. She groups them together and put them under her authority. However, she is still too young to the true meaning of "monsters". From the way she behaves, I think she's not a total stranger to death. She genuinely cares about the kids who are with her, but she send one to the harpy's nest regardless. I doubt if she will send the kid if she knows that will kill him. Alas, kid is sent to the harpies and would be dead if player didn't show up.
[Here comes the end bit! We are almost there!]
So this is the mission Zevlor set himself on. With less than a fraction of the men he used to command, his mission is to take these civilians to Baldur's Gate. He doesn't have enough fighters that's for sure. I am sure he must have started with more of his fellow tiefling ex-Riders. Some of them must have died protecting these bunch.
Here is the snippet of his memory imprint dialogue in the Mindflayer Colony:
In its horror, the Blood War unites you. Tiefling, dwarf and elf alike huddle behind the shields of your paladin order, waiting for salvation. But when it comes... disunity. The returned city casts your people out, the devils who dragged them down to hell. In the end, it is not your paladin oath that is broken: it is your faith itself.
Zevlor is in such a shit situation. His faith is broken, but he is all the leadership and hope these bunch got, civilian and Riders alike. They are supposed to be Hellriders for life. All of them are lost when their home and the place they belong were stripped off them. Zevlor needs to do his job without showing how he feel the lost just like the others. He also needs to actually pull it through. These people entrust him their lives. If people die, it's his fault. He is their beacon of hope and idol to take all the blame at the same time.
In BG3 the game, there are goblins and Shadow Curse along the way. The mission itself is hopeless. He is set up to fail, given how the game is set up. So when Zevlor inevitably fails, he failes hard publicly as well, his own people just turn on him.
LET ME LOVE MY PRECIOUS OLD MAN JBADSFBIULADUI FERAL DOT GIF
33 notes
·
View notes
The content that I'm bringing next ✨
I thought I could give you a hint of the content I'm preparing in order to bring it during this week and next month! I'm taking my time to create it all, so that's why it's not gonna be posted right away, but I hope you'll like to read everything as I share it! 💖
I'll start with some regular posts and then I'll focus on my writing 🥰
-Get to know me. I mentioned a while back that I thought it'd be fine to share a little bit of myself with you so you can get to know me a bit better, and I'm currently working on this one and trying to think of as many things as possible so as to make it, you know... interesting? 😅 I don't really know how to describe it, but in any case, it's in the works!
-A masterpost. Just like the first one, I also mentioned that I'd like to create one at last, as I've posted a few stories and two headcanon posts already, and I want you guys to find them as easily as possible whenever you'd like to. This is gonna take a bit longer, because Tumblr's search tool doesn't work very well 😬 But I'll manage! 💪
-My pending asks. This is a bit embarrassing... I've had some asks waiting for a reply for months now and I'm so sorry that I've kept you waiting for so long 😅 Here's a promise: as soon as I've posted at least one of my pending fics (more about this below), I'll start gradually and slowly answering all the asks that I have left. I wanna give each and every one of you the proper replies you deserve, which is why I warned that I'd take some time, but that's one thing. Taking forever is very different and I'm truly so sorry 😅
-May and June calendars. Don't know if you've seen some of my calendar posts, but I happen to have two Nintendo calendars for this year and I've been showing them since January (here's the February one since I can't find the others lol), but sometimes I simply forget to share the one for the new month and it gets delayed... Shame on me again 😅 I intend to show May this week since it's technically still May, and I'll make sure to not let many days of June pass before I show the ones corresponding to that month 🥰
-Tons of reblogs! I've already started doing this actually, as I've been tagged in a lot of amazing content, and even if I'm slow, I wanna see everything and leave proper feedback when I have the chance 🥰 Thank you again to those of you who tagged me! And for your patience as well 🫂💖💖
And now... let's talk about...
✨📝 MY WRITING 📝✨
-My Kitsune/Tanooki story. This one is coming soon, and when I say soon, I mean this week! 😁 I would've liked to post it mid May, but life wouldn't let me, but hey, better late than never! 🥰 I'm now in the process of editing and I intend to start translating tomorrow, and that usually doesn't take long, so you can expect this one at the end of the week 👀 Hope you'll like it! 💖
-Anything for him: Chapter 3. As I've mentioned a few times, this last chapter is long overdue and I'm ashamed that I'm taking SO long to finish it as I know very well what's going to happen! 😅 Still, once my Kitsune/Tanooki fic is up, this is the next thing I intend to fully work on, and even though I'm not sure to give a specific date, I would like to post it in June at last. Wish me luck in achieving this! 🤞🤞🤞
-Post-nightmare cuddles fic. Okay, it's been a few months already, but... anyone remember this writing prompt? I happened to receive a couple of suggestions in my inbox, and even though I wrote and posted the first one back in March, I wasn't able to finish the second one as I wasn't in the mood for angst when I first tried. But that's changed! 🤩 I'm CRAVING to write some angst, so this is gonna be the third thing on my writing list, and, again, I'd like to post it in June. I'll let you know if I succeed! 🤞🤞🤞
Also, if you're curious, you can read the other prompt here 👇
-And last but not least... did anyone say...
... an AU? 🤔
Yyyyyyes! That's right! 😁 I've recently started working on my very first AU and I am SO happy 🤩 I'm really SO excited about this one! I don't know yet how long it'll take until I'm ready to start posting it, but this is the thing that I mentioned yesterday that I keep getting new ideas for almost every single day 🤩
I'm not gonna say yet what it's based on, as I want it to be a surprise when I finally start sharing it with you guys, but it contains EVERYTHING that I love and that many of you love as well, so... I believe you'll like this one when it's ready 🤭 Maybe when I work a bit more on it and see a release date coming closer I'll go and tell you what it's about, but for now... I'll just keep working on it and enjoying every single word that I'm writing 😁
I really hope you'll like all of this once I start sharing it! As you see, I'm a big fan of making lists 😂 That's the way I usually organize everything that I have to do every day and such, and I thought that maybe sharing this, I'll have it a bit easier to focus and really bring all of it to this blog, even if I'm slow. Still, just know that I'm truly enjoying the process of creating not only the written fics (and the AU 🤭), but also the posts that I wanna bring soon 🥰
If you read everything, thank you! I know I tend to talk a lot lol, so I really appreciate it! Love you so much! 💖💖💖
23 notes
·
View notes
In one of your last posts you mentioned you were studying the civil war in Vandée. Have you ever seen the rather new movie "Vaincre ou Mourir" on the topic? If yes, what do you think of it? I was very curious to give it a try, hoping it's not the usual demonisation of the revolutionary government. Not that I expect it to be portrayed positively in a movie focused on the Vendéean insurgents pov, of course...
Thanks a lot for your question! It’s the first one I've ever received, and I’m really excited to dive into it. (I might have gone a bit overboard, so grab a coffee or a drink before you tackle this beast… TLDR at the bottom…)
I watched "Vaincre ou Mourir" a couple of months ago. Before I dive into my thoughts, the man himself would like a word:
All jokes aside, have you ever been to one of those medieval theme parks where they offer a "realistic" medieval show with dinner? As a kid, every summer, my parents took me to a jousting show at an Italian theme park. We'd watch two knights fight each other for an hour while being “medieval” and munching on chicken legs without any cutlery.
That's pretty much how I felt watching this movie: it’s flashy and fun but doesn’t have much going on underneath. It makes more sense when you discover that the film was funded by Puy le Feu, a large historical theme park in Vendée.
The context
And this is the thing: despite the Canal+ distribution, most of the production is local. The Vendée itself is often defined as a memory space (1), which can lead to a community feeling a special connection to their past. This is often reflected in local traditions, commemorations, and even political leanings. I remember watching an interview from the bicentenary where some locals said they don’t celebrate the 14th of July as a matter of principle—200 years later!
It’s also worth noting that the Vendée has a history of conservative and right-leaning political preferences, and Canal+ is also a right-leaning media outlet.
The Experts
Is it a documentary? Is it a fictional film? It's hard to say in the first few minutes.
The movie attempts to project historical accuracy by introducing four experts right at the start. If a film opens with such a direct appeal to authority, I tend to scrutinise who these experts are. So, who are they?
Reynald Secher: a historian who has been a massive proponent of the Vandean genocide theory. He is very anti-Republican, and his research methodologies are rather sketchy…
Nicolas Delahaye: I don’t know much about him, but I see he publishes primarily regionally in a Vendean publishing house. That doesn’t necessarily mean he’s particularly biased, but it does mean his audience is very limited to people with specific views.
Anne Rolland-Boulestreau: a historian at the Université Catholique de l’Ouest specialising in the Vendée counter-revolution. Her articles in the Annales Historiques de la Révolution Française seem unbiased and well-researched. I own one of her books but haven't read it yet, so I can't speak to her longer-form content.
Armand Bernand: if you google de la Rochejaquelein, you will find this guy everywhere. He owns a publishing house, loves the Château de la Durbelière (2), and wrote a series of books set there. He clearly has a historical crush on M. Henri. I think he cosplayed him during some re-enactments and wrote a book about Henri’s brother Auguste.
It’s worth mentioning they either hail from Vendée or work exclusively within the region. This is my bias speaking because I’ve pretty much read all his work, but if you make a movie about the Vendee and can’t get Jean-Clément Martin to say something on camera about it, you should probably not feature any experts…
The Story
After an awkward three minutes of experts telling us how important the revolution was and introducing Charette, we get to the actual movie, which opens with a pile of bodies, burnings, a hanged person, and an awkward first-person voiceover of Charette saying that they made the Vendee into an inferno. This will be a theme for the next hour or so.
If I were to describe this film in two words, "tragedy porn" would fit. What occurred in Vendée was horrific, and its rightly violent portrayal should help viewers understand and appreciate the human and historical impact. However, the film often prioritises shock value over explaining the underlying reasons.
Charette is, by all accounts, a very compelling subject. The guy was a libertine with bucket-loads of courage and style who had a woman as an aide de camp in 1793! Despite spending 1.5 hours with him, narrated from his perspective, I would be hard-pressed to tell you what he’s actually fighting for. Is it honour? Is it revenge? Is it stubbornness? Your guess is as good as mine!
There is absolutely no character growth whatsoever. The film presents as a sequence of battles and shocking scenes narrated by a somewhat detached Charette. Remember what I said about the medieval show? This shock-value approach might work for a short performance during dinner but falls flat when stretched across an entire film.
Despite the weak script, the actors are quite good. Nothing Oscar-worthy, but they can act. The guy that plays Charette does a very good job and is quite charismatic.
The Historical Accuracy
On the whole, I can’t see glaring historical errors. It is fairly historically accurate with some minor issues. This is obviously not an exhaustive list, but there are things I noticed and jotted down:
The main one is the bizarre theory that Charette agreed to the peace of 1795 because he was promised that Louis XVII would be handed to him. This has absolutely no credible historical basis whatsoever. It’s a myth that has been propagated for over 200 years.
I’m pretty sure Charette didn’t sign the treaty of La Jaunaye. In fact, as far as I remember, no one from the insurgent side signed it.
While not a historical inaccuracy per se, it's a missed opportunity that the film often portrays Charette as the sole leader of the Vendean army. Though he mentions being one chief among many, this aspect is quickly glossed over. His historical relationship with the Catholic and Royal Army and its leaders was complex and would have been interesting to explore further. It's a shame the film likely didn't have the budget to delve into this, as it could have also demonstrated that Vendée wasn't a monolith.
The depiction of the republican army as well-equipped is somewhat exaggerated. If they were as well-appointed as shown, Carnot and Prieur (Cote D’or) would be out of a job, and Saint-Just wouldn't have needed to requisition shoes for the army.
Lastly, the film underexplains the context of why the counter-revolution started. In my opinion, it manipulatively emphasises the king's execution more than warranted, suggesting it triggered the popular uprising when it really did not. The conflict in Vendée began as a peasant revolt, where the local population was far more concerned with religious issues than royal politics. Most Vendean peasants likely couldn't name the king—they probably knew he was a Louis since there had been a Louis on the throne for 200 years, but that's about it. Their concerns were local: when parish priests who had taken the civic oath replaced their traditional priests, and the Levée en masse was decreed, forcing them to fight random Germans 600 km away for a regime threatening their way of life, they rebelled.
Is the movie anti-Republican propaganda?
To wrap up, is the film anti-Republican? Frankly, I don’t believe it is overtly so. It adopts a somewhat clichéd stance: the revolution's ideals were noble, but things eventually went too far. While I have plenty of thoughts on this—which I'll keep to myself for now—I wouldn’t say this perspective is inherently anti-Republican.
Charette is depicted as initially supportive of the revolution, which is accurate for many aristocrats, especially the minor nobility. The portrayal of Republican soldiers is balanced, with General Jean-Pierre Travot sometimes appearing more honourable than Charette. As the main character, Charette is shown as lazy, indecisive, and sometimes brutal, so the film does not attempt to heroise him. The princes, especially Artois, are also depicted negatively. So, the film isn’t overtly royalist.
Is there a specific stance against the Government (aka the CSP)? I don’t recall them being mentioned, which, again, is accurate since most Vendeeans, including the nobility, were not deeply involved in Parisian politics.
That being said, Carrier and Turreau are portrayed very negatively, and rightfully so. Republican generals are also shown as less likely to spare the "brigands" when captured, which aligns with historical accounts. The movie leans heavily on shock value, featuring hard-to-watch scenes of executions, guillotines, and drownings. Unfortunately, even the staunchest republican historians would be hard-pressed to find the evidence to call those scenes revisionists.
Beyond that, the only thing that stood out to me about the Republicans is that they made Kleber look about 60 years old.
In conclusion, is this the most accurate film ever? Certainly not. Is it counter-revolutionary propaganda? I genuinely don’t think so, and if someone claims otherwise, they’re likely being disingenuous.
TLDR:
Watched the movie "Vaincre ou Mourir," which felt like a medieval theme park show—entertaining but lacking depth, probably due to its funding by an actual historical theme park. Despite its attempt to appear historically accurate with expert interviews, the film fails to deeply explore its characters or the complexities of the Vendée region's history. While it doesn't contain major historical inaccuracies, it oversimplifies the causes and events of the Vendée uprising, focusing more on visual shock than factual explanation. Not outright anti-Republican or counter-revolutionary, but doesn't offer new insights into anything. Overall, flashy but not as informative as it could be.
Notes
A memory space is defined as a location (physical or otherwise) where memories, histories, and narratives are preserved, shared, and understood within a society or culture. Things like museums, monuments, rituals, stories and in this case a region can be memory spaces
Château de la Durbelière was the home of La Rochejaquelein
PS: Thank you again for your question! I had a lot of fun answering it.
20 notes
·
View notes