#and he's also a constant source of all those incredibly layered and intense expressions | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

thelawyerthatwaspromised · 5 years

Text

We Really Need to Talk About the Forehead Kiss Scene

Consider this another iteration of the Sansa and Jon “Would that be so terrible?” scene that I covered a little while back.

For a lot of people that believe that Jonsa will happen, the scene on the battlements in “The Winds of Winter”, the finale episode of the sixth season of Game of Thrones, is the starting point of that belief.

It’s unusually sweet, as Jon and Sansa scenes tend to be. It’s almost semi-unnecessary to the plot. It’s the last we see of Jon before it’s revealed that he is the son of Rhaegar Targaryen and Lyanna Stark, making this decidedly un-sibling like interaction with Sansa a bit less suspicious except upon rewatch. (Sidenote, imagine if this scene took place after we learned about R+L=J...)

But a lot of Jonsa skeptics (I’ll call them that though there are obviously varying degrees of this such as “venomous”) seem unable to understand why this particular scene feels so different from just about every single other scene on the show. To me, there are multiple factors that make this particular scene unique from any other on the show.

It’s an almost perfect example of a “romance setup” from multiple angles.

1.) It didn’t really advance the “plot”

For some reason, this scene was included among the 10 most crucial scenes of the series by HBO pre-season 7 buuuuut not a lot happened at face value.

Jon had just banished Melissandre for burning someone alive (inquisitive emoji) and was watching her leave on the battlements. He’s approached by Sansa. She says she’s sorry. He credits her for winning the battle. They say they need to trust each other. They leave. So why is a “recap of events” considered a crucial scene? Why was it on the show at all? Viewers wanted to know what Jon was going to do about Sansa arriving with the KotV and if they were going to have a conflict about it. Except that part took about 5 seconds. And the opposite happened.

Similar to the Littlefinger choke scene in season 7, this didn’t really directly affect the actions of the characters in any way. Even if a scene doesn’t advance “plot”, it’s meant to advance the “story”. What happens here between Jon and Sansa? It revealed something between the two of them that wasn’t revealed simply through the dialogue. It’s inclusion in the show at all should leave you wondering about its purpose, but the added layers of the length, framing, and use of reaction shots should make it fairly obvious that it’s a romantic scene.

2.) Both characters are pleasantly surprised by each other’s tenderness towards the other

I think to really grasp this scene, you have to get inside the heads of each character.

Normally, any surprise in Game of Thrones is a bad thing. The strange quality of the battlements scene is that it’s an inversion of the normal routine. We need to take a step back and evaluate the psychology of Jon and Sansa as they’re entering.

Jon has just banished the person who resurrected him. He’s just won a battle that he knows he should have lost. He’s clearly been quite introspective about Sansa and what she meant and her importance in winning the battle since he’s already preparing her chambers. Somehow, the tent scene is magnified in its intensity because this scene is its exact opposite and it’s where we last left off with Jon and Sansa.

Sansa pleaded with Jon to listen to her.

To be fair to Jon, it’s hard to understand what Sansa is saying but instead of trying to understand her more, he allows them to be dead locked and unable to finish their thoughts.

and it ends with Jon’s sad resignation that he desperately wants to win but he’s not sure if he can.

So this was the last time they spoke privately before the battle. Jon feels guilt for failing to listen. Sansa feels guilt for calling in Littlefinger, an option neither she nor Jon would have wanted.

Then - their relationship suddenly became stronger because of the weakness they revealed to each other. Instead of punishing each other, they forgive each other. Instead of gloating, Sansa reaches out and expresses to Jon that she never wanted it that way. Instead of holding it against Sansa, Jon reaches back and validates her importance in multiple ways.

The most rewarding part is how they each give wonderful gestures to each other in turn without being prompted.

He’s publicly affirmed her place as the Lady of Wintefell...

She objects but only because she thinks he should be seen as the head of the family...

Sansa tells him he should take it. Jon responds with a sad smile and says he’s not a Stark. And then Sansa gives Jon the most gentle but meaningful affirmation that he’s ever gotten on the show...

“You are to me.”

(I decided halfway through this to leave the text off the gifs because I want the focus on the micro expressions of the actors because...damn...)

What else could anyone say to Jon that would mean more to him at this point? His entire life has been marked by his non-Starkness. Sansa is working to undo the biggest source of his sadness without his ever asking for it.

Jon’s gift to Sansa is recognition and it comes in two parts;

1) “You’re the Lady of Winterfell.” He was right there as Lyanna Mormont referred to her as a Lannister and a Bolton. He was right there as Lord Glover looked right into her eyes and told her that House Stark is dead. No. Jon is determined that those statements are to be corrected.

2) “We’re standing here because of you.” He’s not just “gifting” her the position and the lord’s chamber. She’s earned it in his eyes. Her place is meant to be elevated above his at this point. This is before he was crowned as king. He was content for her to be in charge until he was thrust into the position of command.

So what does Sansa do? He’s just basically said “you were right” and she has a chance to respond. Does she gloat? Does she say “well yes I suppose I am the last remaining Stark (that we know of) and so I should rule our house...I also command the loyalty of the Vale”? None of that, she apologizes to him. She’s still expecting his anger and disappointment and feels she deserves it.

And it makes sense. Leave aside that it was absolutely necessary for Sansa to bring in the KotV and ask yourself “when was the last time Sansa was ever actually rewarded or treated gently by someone she thought she wronged?” She’s existed in a constant state of punishment since Littlefinger betrayed Ned in the throne room in season 1. Misery is her expectation. Her expression as Jon approaches confirms this exactly.

Part is her actual guilt, and I’m sure part of it is an expectation based on her experiences...and to her pretty obvious surprise, Jon does the exact opposite.

HA. You’ll have to wait for the kiss gifs because I want to change gears now.

The entire last section was explaining why this scene was so unexpected given the context of the setup. Both characters had reasons to treat the other harshly. Jon for his stubbornness. Sansa for not telling Jon about the Vale. All the components were there to reinforce an ongoing feud between the two. These were the factors commonly cited by those oh-so-brilliant Starkbowl predictions leading up to season 7.

Yet despite that tension, we didn’t get a shouting match and glares and future plotting. We got a moment of clarity for once...and a whole new set of questions about these two. The beauty of their quiet moment together was in its simplicity - but also in the way that the writers indicated that there was so much more going on than we could have ever known.

Yet all of this information is packed into a scene that’s so quiet and slow. It’s in the romantic pacing.

3.) The Pacing

Jon and Sansa have had always had a distinct strangeness to their scenes in that they’re almost all completely different from any other. Their reunion was a moment of triumph for any Stark fans as they were the first two reunited since the pilot episode. Their fireside chat started incredibly sweet and ended with the heightened stakes of Sansa attempting to convince Jon to re-take Winterfell. The Pink Letter scene is the realization that their little oasis was about to meet the realities of a harsh world that still viewed both of them as threats.

The cloak scene where Sansa gifts Jon a Stark cloak after Jon takes keen interest in Sansa’s new dress is another moment where each took the initiative to validate the other without any prompting.

They argued twice, while at the encampment and in the tent before the battle, but each scene was unique as Sansa indirectly criticized Jon’s decisions to follow Davos considering Stannis’ ultimate failure, and Jon mostly tried to tune Sansa’s arguments out - while the tent scene is where those complaints came into a direct collision.

Then they met on the battlements and it was equally emotional but in a total reverse of tone.

Simply put, this scene was about “Jon & Sansa” as an entity and not about “Jon” having a talk with “Sansa”. It’s all in the pacing and it’s all in the framing.

We already know the setup. Now comes the payoff. Jon has already told Sansa they need to trust each other. That would be the “plot” purpose of the scene. As far as things happening that affect the story directly, it could have ended right there. “It’s ok Sansa. We’re a team now.” Or, alternatively, Jon could have kissed Sansa’s forehead and THEN said they need to trust each other and the tone could be viewed entirely differently. Instead, the show disposed of the “textual” purpose of the scene and continued right through with the “subtext” (which also continued into season 7) which is: what exactly is the nature of Jon and Sansa’s relationship?

It’s not just the forehead kiss. It’s not just the romantic back drop. It’s not just the setup. It’s not just the micro expression of the actors. It’s not just that the whole scene is relatively unnecessary. It’s all of that mixed together.

This is where the pacing comes into play. Let’s recap the scene to this point...

Sansa gets about 13 seconds of an entrance before Jon tells her he’s having the lord’s chamber prepared for her.

Sansa waits 3 seconds before answering “mother and father’s room?”

Jon waits about 3 seconds before he says he’s not a Stark.

Sansa answers “you are to me” almost immediately.

Jon has roughly a 5 second reaction shot.

There’s about a 5 second pause after Jon gives Sansa credit for winning the battle before Sansa starts apologizing.

Sansa says sorry and Jon waits about 6 seconds before he even starts walking over to her.

There’s about 3 seconds between Jon saying they have enemies and him reaching up to kiss her.

Jon gets roughly 3 seconds to kiss Sansa and about 4 seconds of gazing at her (and her gazing at him). They make this moment last.

Then they transition into a micro expression that juuuuust says everything.

The second Jon closes his lips, he looks down and abruptly starts to walk away. But his mood has immediately turned almost melancholy or sort of a confusion. It’s not normal to kiss someone tenderly and then just turn around and leave. Even if it were entirely platonic. There’s something left unsaid...especially since the camera focuses on the post-kiss for almost 6 seconds altogether before Jon starts to leave. Viewers aren’t the only ones left a bit bewildered.

Sansa’s reaction tells the same story.

She stands in the same position, almost frozen. She’s internally probably as confused as Jon. She came to Jon to apologize (remember, she approached him) - which I’m assuming she would have been dreading. She got her apology, and he delivered his form of “there’s nothing to forgive” which would normally signal that her part here is over. Yet he initiates physical affection for her when positive physical affection is something that’s a very complicated subject for her.

And it stuns her. As he begins to leave, we see her expressing that she doesn’t want the moment to end.

It’s ridiculously beautiful. Sansa finding a reason for Jon to get one last look, right after he had turned away in sort of Byronic melancholy, only to have her call him back again is extremely romantic given what we know about both of these characters.

The immediacy of Jon’s response in turning back towards her and the utter-seriousness of his look again makes the end of this scene a twist of its own.

“Winter is here.” That phrase is of course a play off of “Winter is coming” the words of House Stark and the ominous warning of fear and looming destruction echoed throughout the entirety of the series. Those words should mean “fear”; real “fear”. (also take note of her deliberately deep breath as her eyes scan Jon again..)

And how do they react to this potentially terrifying threat? By being adorable again!?!?

Well of course they do. Because winter is here and they are home. Think about this. Being together (moments after entering a scene which they both began reluctantly) is enough to make them smile sweetly as they acknowledge the coming storm.

And the end really cements Jon’s view of Sansa as a noble lady.

And the pure joy Sansa feels as the scene concludes.

To wrap up...the scene didn’t have to happen in the first place. The setup made you wonder if there was going to be fracture. It was tender. It was warm. It’s pacing made you sit and take notice. It didn’t waste any time - it took its time.

We were meant to see not just the displays of forgiveness and validation by Jon and Sansa towards each other. We were meant to see them expecting the worst and getting something beautiful instead. We were meant to see them wrestling with the confusion of where the scene was heading. We were meant to see them completely comfortable in each other’s presence in this very moment - and we were meant to see a very subtle but also very unsubtle indication that the direction of their relationship is causing (and must cause) them inner conflict before it can truly provide them fulfillment.

They weren’t a royal couple in this scene but I’m fully confident that after the finale season has concluded, this scene will be the one everyone can point to and say “this is where Jon and Sansa ending as king and queen truly became possible.”

#jonsa #jon x sansa #king and queen in the north #jonsa is endgame #tltwp meta

828 notes · View notes

irenedonati · 4 years

Text

Why Wanlov the Kubolor's "Swim" is the most relevant piece of content we have experienced in Ghana in a while and why we should talk about it.

Wanlov The Kubolor, Ghanaian rapper, songwriter, producer, video maker, and performance artists recently released a new video and a song called “Swim."

I don't want to spend too much time talking about who decided, for instance, to report the content on Instagram because their susceptible soul was insulted by the nudity portrayed in the video. Can we blame people for not understanding? Or should we blame a system that keeps brainwashing people through religion and politics so they do their dirty job for them of silencing any voice that sounds too loud?

I realized that we shouldn't draw more attention to ignorance: as Eckhart Tolle says — “Whatever you fight, you strengthen, and what you resist, persists.” So I am not going to spend time strengthening ignorance; I will spend time on what deserves attention, strength, and power.

youtube

I have admired Wanlov's work for many years, way before we connected in real life, and now I am able to understand him more as well as explore his energy. I consider him a friend and an ally in the fight for human rights, especially LGBTQ and women’s rights.

I feel Wanlov’s work is becoming more profound and even more fascinating. I recently had some long conversations about him with a friend who is a performance artist. We started tracking analogies that helped me explore the beauty of Wanlov's work and message.

After days of research, thinking, and re-writing from different angles, I realized that we could compare Wanlov’s work to many performance artists who used their bodies to make political statements. I am not comparing to validate. Wanlov doesn't need validation. It is however quite interesting to realize that artists from very different backgrounds and circumstances have ended up using a similar form of expression for related messages or fights. Again, I am not comparing to validate but to show how far from mental freedom those who keep finding offense in a meaningful artistic expression are.

Even though it's an unusual type of performance I watch "Swim" and I think "SOMETIMES DOING SOMETHING POETIC CAN BECOME POLITICAL AND SOMETIMES DOING SOMETHING POLITICAL CAN BECOME POETIC," which is text from the inspiring work of Belgian artist Francis Alÿs and is a poignant description of "Swim".

"A compulsive wanderer, Francis Alÿs is known for his in-depth projects in a wide range of media including documentary film, painting, photography, performance, and video. Many of his works involve intense observation and recording of the social, cultural, and economic conditions of particular places, usually conceived during walks through urban areas".

Even though it's an entirely different performance, "Swim" is something poetic that can become political. It's also indeed political and still incredibly poetic: the statement of swimming naked in an ocean of plastic in a country that is very good at having politicians taking selfies with celebrities, but can't seem to solve fundamental issues like the filth on our streets and shores; to the tone of the voice pronouncing the lyrics; to the music.

I could stop here and you would already have enough to think about.

But I want to go deeper because Francis Alÿs performances are not directly comparable to Wanlov’s, if not by intention. Pushing an ice block through the streets of Mexico City until it melts might look extremely different from swimming naked in plastic or walking barefoot everywhere around the world, but is it that different?

Is Wanlov's use of his naked body different from Ana Mendieta's use of her nude body?

Ana Mendieta is a celebrated Cuban-born artist who used her body as a statement for her entire career. Body Art is an expression that has always forced "the audiences to partake in oftentimes violent, jarring, shocking, or unimaginable experience, asking its viewers to consider the role they were playing in the dark and uncomfortable spaces between innocent bystander and culpable voyeur."

Ana Mendieta started using her body to make statements about the political abuse of bodies of women and about rape. She used her naked body in contact with water, earth, and other natural elements (including blood) to express her pain and her rage and to denounce sexual abuse/violence.

Is it that different from what Wanlov keeps doing in the fight for women’s rights and gay rights?

The reason why we are disturbed or moved by naked bodies in a non-sexy or non-pornographic state is that they represent the vulnerability of human nature. And we don't want to be vulnerable because vulnerability is considered a "feminine or gay issue:" Naked men are supposed to send dick pics or show their sexual power ( the wrong way ).

Wanlov is swimming naked in a polluted ocean. Wanlov is making his body look more feminine with clothes and makeup to dissolve gender roles. Wanlov is not afraid to show his naked body in a non-sexual way. People will whisper: "He must be gay," or comment on social media “Stop being gay.”

Is he so different from artists like Ana Mendieta swimming naked in her "Ocean Bird" performance? And is Mendieta applying male facial hair on her face different from Wanlov using makeup and jewelry and clothes to deconstruct gender?

Untitled (Facial Hair Transplant), Ana Mendieta, 1972 Source: Galerie Lelong

Wanlov: backstage “Mr. Casanova” 2020 - Shooting in Madrid w/Alvar Alonso

The "vagina has always expanded opportunities to unravel the feminine mystique and multiple voices as a loud and reverberating denouncement of the traditional male gaze." But this was 20, 30, 40, 50 years ago when this work could simply not be produced by a man.

We have now learned that the intrinsic definition of gender is an issue. So can’t a man use his body to make a similar statement and, at the same time, help to protect the over-sexualization of female bodies, which is an unintentional consequence of some expressions of the feminist movement?

Can a vulnerable male body be leveling the playing field and help to break gender barriers? I have no doubt that Wanlov’s body is carrying a feminist message.

We are recently learning that a body is no more the expression of gender. Trans women and men have taught us that you can be born in a body and not be what that body supposedly represents. In this scenario, Wanlov's sexual life and orientation shouldn’t be the subject of the conversation.

Still, somebody always tries to make it the only part of the conversation so that we don't focus on the critical message.

I am even more keen to believe that Wanlov's work is genius and authentic because of his spontaneity and because, like many true artists, he does it because he feels it, not consciously thinking of all the layers that I am now deconstructing.

"Swim" is offending people because it's telling us in a raw and familiar way that we are bystanders and voyeurs in the destruction of the Ghanaian shores, nature, forests, and with them, the people, the cultures and the dignity of many human beings.

And so it's easy for people just to dumb him down as the weird guy who walks barefoot and without underwear and showed his penis on TV, so they convince themselves that he's not a great artist, but just a controversial lunatic. I find it funny (non-literal please) that we still think we have to use the adjective “controversial” to define artists. All artists should endeavor to be controversial enough to spark a conversation. Or should music artistes simply be “yes” people?

What about being barefoot as an artistic expression? Being barefoot, besides being part of almost all traditional cultures (definitely apart from the Inupiats), is a symbol of innocence and pure energetic exchange with the earth. There's a reason why saints, gurus, and spiritual leaders are usually portrayed barefoot.

And let’s not forget the children as well. I think Wanlov's inner child vibrates very high.

The same people who are offended by nudity will never understand that walking barefoot is not an action supposed to make them laugh. In a recent conversation with Wanlov, he randomly said something that almost blew me away and sparkled the idea of Wanlov being a Synesthetic artist.

Could it be that his walking barefoot and continuously experiencing the world with an uncovered part of his body is transferred in his art in a synesthetic way?

Are his music, poetry, performances result of sensations that travel through the constant contact of his skin with the earth?

Is he a sort of superhuman because he's been able to feel and experience the world in ways that we ordinary human beings cannot?

But being myself a believer of energy exchange with the Universe, I find an act of extreme courage the ability to allow yourself to feel so much, especially in a world where desensitization and detachment are a new way of surviving. Preservation at a maximum level is what is guiding individuals who hide behind ridiculous concepts of self-care and self-expression to justify any selfish and stupid act.

Is this form of body art telling us that our level of detaching ourselves from the Universe is indeed creating monsters and destroying human interconnections?

Is he so different from artists like Regina Jose Galindo and her work "Quien puede Borrar las huellas," in which she walks barefoot whit his feet soaking in blood to criticize Guatemalan violence coming from the misconception of morality and gender?

youtube

Why is Wanlov's use of his body barefoot with makeup and female clothes and jewelry not awarded and glorified as the Galindo one at art Biennales, as the men who uses his body to criticize the abuse on women and members of the LGBTQ community in Ghana? Is it because he's not a woman? Is it because he's not gay? So he has to be considered funny or weird or crazy?

And I could write for another day if we decided to start talking about his music, his lyrics, and his music videos.

Because Wanlov comedy is Monty Python's deep. I hardly laugh for more than a couple of seconds, and, after a couple of seconds, I squeeze my face, and I think "sheeeit that was deep."

If I have to draw another parallelism, imagine Dave Chapelle barefoot, in a skirt, with makeup and jewelry sending low blows to politicians, religious leaders, foolish humans, and useless institutions.

And using Pidgin English to dignify a language that could unify the African population, being at the same time hilarious but extremely serious.

My point: you have not seen anyone like this. And that’s why the way this Ghanaian artist is underestimated is highly disturbing.

I wish we lived in a world where people had the chance to be more receptive to something different and not classified in categories created to make us feel comfortable.

Being attacked for saying truths people don't like to confront and not conforming to what I’m expected to say as a woman in the presence of men and “bosses" has cost me professionally and emotionally. I feel slightly deformed by the systematic punishment put in place via a very subtle system of oppression perpetrated equally by men and women. I had gone into hiding because I felt my courage and vocals chords shrink. So when I see a fellow human being with the courage to keep their voice loud and stay principled no matter what, I can't avoid feeling deep admiration, gratitude, and love.

Thank you Emmanuel Owusu Bonsu aka Wanlov the Kubolor. We need more people like you in the world, and we need more people in the world to know about you.

( Thank you, Guildor Gallo, for the conversation that inspired my words. http://guildor.com/ )

2 notes · View notes