#she observes things in the world and interprets them scientifically but also in kind of a fairytale way | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

thosearentcrimes · 3 years

Text

In defense of "standpoint epistemology"

People like to denounce something called "standpoint epistemology". Now, in responding to this, I am faced with a dilemma. I could either interpret "standpoint epistemology" as being that which the people complaining about it are talking about, or I could interpret it as what the articles in which it was theorized described. What I will do is first present standpoint theory and standpoint epistemology as I understood them from its promoters. In particular, this essay will largely be a commentary on "Rethinking Standpoint Epistemology: What is 'Strong Objectivity?'" (1992) by Sandra Harding. First, I have to say that I do not find the text particularly satisfying. Most of its critiques are valid, but on the rare occasion that Harding implies any methodological changes, they seem infeasible or ineffective. Given that Harding is proposing a change of worldview and not directly a change in behavior, this is understandable, but it would still be nice to know what the actual implications of the change in worldview would be! All that said, I am prepared to defend the vast majority of the text.

According to Harding, standpoint epistemology is a response to the "sexist and androcentric results of scientific research". It is one of two responses she presents, the other of which she calls "feminist empiricism", which says that the biased results of prior scientific research were due to insufficient rigor, and that the underlying principles are fine. In contrast, standpoint epistemology, according to Harding, proposes a transformation of science and its mechanisms to more actively remove bias. Harding explicitly rejects relativism and essentialism, which are the positions most commonly attributed to her work. I am not sure why anyone would think she was lying, given that Harding clearly considers relativism and essentialism to be popular strands of feminist thought, and as such they are positions she could safely adopt publicly. Perhaps the jargon and the relative lack of concrete proposals have convinced people the idea is more radical than it really is.

Standpoint epistemology derives from standpoint theory, which is broadly the claim that the perspectives of people who are marginalized in society are, if anything, more relevant and accurate than those of dominant groups. Historically it draws from Marxism and the dialectic approach more generally (in particular, Hegel's Master/Slave dialectic), but the observation that marginalization compels people to understand their oppressor better than their oppressor understands themself (and as a corollary, that a life of privilege can be blinding, like how rich people do not know the prices of common household items) does not require dialectics at all. It is still however a rather controversial idea, with two major opponents. The first is that the view from the dominant position is more objective because it is less involved. This is blatantly false and silly. The more serious objection is that this theory obstructs the objective "view from nowhere". It is very important to ask - is there such a view? Is there knowledge that is not socially situated? The answer, according to Harding, is no. This is really the heart of the dispute between Harding and empiricism. It is rather difficult to prove the non-existence of "nowhere", especially on empiricist terms. If there is a "nowhere" to view reality from, then where? Of course, in reality, the view from nowhere is typically the view from above repackaged. Standpoint Epistemology can rightly be accused of self-contradiction, but at least it does so consciously.

This leads us into Harding's first methodological change, and the only one that is complete enough to be worth discussing separately. The idea is this: the lives and perspectives of marginalized people should be used as a starting point for the production of knowledge. This is as opposed to the only implied alternative of production of knowledge starting with the lives and interests of the dominant group. We might then imagine, from this, that Harding seeks to exclude men from philosophy in a mirror to the way women were historically excluded. This is however not the case. Harding believes it is desirable, and in fact very much necessary for men to also produce knowledge using the lives and perspectives of women as a base, and even names some philosophers, men and women alike, who she considers to have done important philosophy from women's perspectives in the past. Additionally, this quote from the article is extremely important here: "for standpoint theorists, reports of marginalized experience or lives, or phenomenologies of the 'lived world' of marginalized peoples, are not the answers to questions arising either inside or outside those lives, though they are necessary to asking the best questions". Clearly Harding and standpoint theorists in general are aware of the tendency that they are accused of promoting, and are just as opposed to it as the empiricists are.

Harding presents some interesting distinctions between the subject of knowledge under empiricism and under her reformed model of science. Harding alleges that it is a problem that science is presented as being disembodied, as being information existing outside of time or society, because the things science studies are embodied, exist at particular times and observed by particular societies. I'm not sure I agree here! Is it actually necessary for the object of knowledge and the subject of knowledge to be similar in kind? Surely that kind of distance has its advantages as well as its disadvantages. The next claim is more interesting. Empiricism supposedly has a tendency to consider knowledge to be generated by generated by particular individuals and not by societies or groups. This is a view that I think was significantly more prevalent last century, when the article was written, but it is still the implication behind much of the existing pop history of science and the way science is taught in schools. But why is this not correct? Harding makes the interesting point that she only considers her beliefs to be knowledge when they are socially validated. That is, while the beliefs may have been formulated by an individual such as Newton, it is a scientific community, over centuries, that transformed them into knowledge, and later restricted that knowledge to motion at non-relativistic speeds. The distinction between a belief that is true and will be turned into scientific knowledge and scientific knowledge itself is actually quite important, because it leaves the door open for true beliefs that do not, for whatever reason, become knowledge. However, the social methods by which beliefs become knowledge in science are acknowledged by empiricists and are in fact a core part of empiricist ideology. The whole point of peer review and scientific discourse is that knowledge is generated through social legitimation, so it seems a bit off to assert that the standpoint epistemological project is aware of this and the empiricist project is not. What I will say is that empiricists rarely embrace obvious conclusions of the fact that scientific knowledge is socially constructed, so I kind of understand why Harding feels the need to point it out.

What is it that Harding actually proposes? It is to use the lives and perspectives of marginalized people as a starting point in the production of knowledge. The purpose of this is that "the subject of knowledge be placed on the same [...] plane as the objects of knowledge", that is, that we should consider the conditions under which a particular piece of knowledge was produced to be a component of that knowledge, and reported along with it, producing what Harding calls "Strong Objectivity". I think it can be useful to study the conditions under which ideas were created, and that this can provide productive avenues of critique. On the other hand, that is what History of Science and History of Ideas are already doing, so I'm not sure this point provides any methodological changes that would simultaneously be useful and not already be part of the revised empiricist model of knowledge production or easily imported into it. The last thing Harding proposes is for science to be integrated into democratic structures, but it is important to note that by this Harding means democracy in the sense that anarchists mean it, which is a notion too vague to constitute an actual methodological proposal. Harding devotes the last section of her article to explaining why it is the notion of objectivity that needs to be transformed, and not simply the scientific method, from what I gather her reason is mostly that it is the more intellectually coherent thing to do. If I were to propose my own methodological change in line with Harding's critique, it would be that scientists should attempt to identify communities that are relevant to their research, and then run their experiments and articles by sensitivity readers (which I understand is done in fiction writing), as a form of review complementary to peer review.

Harding's work is in some respects an unfortunate casualty of the march of history. She herself notes that her ideas will inevitably become obsolete over time, but I suspect that there are things she did not expect to happen as quickly as they did, that make the article less relevant now than it was when written. Her assumption that scientific knowledge production is necessarily the domain of the elite is somewhat dubious. Academia has become significantly more diverse and representative over the last three decades, and it has also become much less prestigious and well-paid (I do not think this is entirely a coincidence). It remains true that knowledge production is the domain of a particular non-representative subculture (in fact, the fact that they are involved in knowledge-production will itself make this culture non-representative in at least one way), but the only parts of that subculture that seem to be heavily integrated into the socioeconomic elite are people who were already prominent when the article was written. Additionally, empiricist science has had three decades to fortify itself against the critiques that were made of it, which it has done to at least some extent.

What have we learned? Well, first, that none of the people denouncing "standpoint epistemology" seem to know the first thing about it. This may be because there are people loudly promoting standpoint epistemology who don't know the first thing about it either. I have frequently encountered people who are clearly interacting with a large group of confidently ignorant people and then absorb their vocabulary while critiquing them. What I would suggest as a remedy is to ignore people who don't know what they're talking about. Second, we have learned that standpoint epistemology is probably not possible to do, and it is unclear if doing it would be worth the cost if it were. Lastly we have learned that critical studies are depressingly often simply studies of academic environments (reminiscent of psychology studies performed on a dozen white male college students). Why does Harding focus on scientific knowledge production, and not on knowledge production more generally? At the very least a mention of theories in media studies that are complementary to the account she provides would be appreciated. Or perhaps, even more ambitiously, any sort of reference to the real world rather than only endless discourse.

I would like to end by presenting an interesting open scientific problem that seems to be hard to grasp using empiricist methods, but might be more yielding to a standpoint approach. The article "Physician–patient racial concordance and disparities in birthing mortality for newborns" (2020) (sci-hub.do/10.1073/pnas.1913405117), an analysis of 1.8 million hospital births in Florida between 1992 and 2015, suggests that, while there is a generally higher rate of infant mortality for Black babies than for White babies, the rate of infant mortality for Black babies being delivered by White physicians is significantly higher than for Black babies being delivered by Black physicians (note that the infant mortality rate for White babies does not vary significantly with physician race). The authors of the study controlled for a number of possible confounding factors, and the only difference they reported was that specialized pediatric instruction reduced the size of the gap in outcomes but did not remove it entirely. Now, my own hypothesis to explain the data is that White doctors in Florida and likely the US more generally are doing racist, likely eugenicist, infanticide, and this hypothesis does not require the standpoint approach. But for people who want other explanations, I think approaching the issue with methods from standpoint epistemology might be productive.

#discourse #standpoint epistemology

23 notes · View notes

ahenvs3000 · 3 years

Text

In Conclusion...

I feel that it is easy to discuss my personal ethic when it comes to nature interpretation in a broad sense. For example, I want to protect, conserve, and teach without intruding on the natural world. When this course began in January, this “broad sense” of interpretation and personal ethics was effectively what I had thought nature interpretation consisted of. Thank goodness I decided to take this course as through the exploration of interpretation through, music, art, risk, education, science, and history, I now wholeheartedly believe and understand the depth of interpretation. Nature interpretation is not merely about the observation of nature and the translation of said observations to conservation. There are so many facets of interpretation that include introspective analysis to a pretty high degree. Conservation is an incredibly difficult and multifarious task, and, even as an environmental science student, I never quite understood the degree of self-reflection and in turn interpretation that is needed to succeed. An excellent example of this was presented in the unit that we covered on privilege. Dr. Hooykaas discussed in the unit overview that she had spent many years working as a backcountry guide and once lead a trip with “at-risk youth” in Northern Ontario. Dr. Hooykaas explained that while her passions for trip and nature, as well as the strength of overcoming challenges on the trip, may have been extremely enthusiastic to some, these four individuals did not react well to this environment. This unit and this anecdote help to illustrate our invisible backpacks and how privilege can help dictate our passion in some scenarios. However, I also believe that this anecdote proved that despite how passionate I am about conservation, that does not necessarily apply to those around me. This realization ultimately helped to shape my personal ethics as an interpreter. At this point I was forced to recognize the true magnitude of the task of conservation and most importantly how my personal ethics needed to change- they needed to be more inclusive. What does it mean to protect, conserve, and teach? Narrowing in on the details of these things will ultimately make my efforts more effective. Now that I have recognized that not everyone feels the same way with regard to nature and preservation, I can mould my efforts to recognize and acknowledge the backgrounds of others and what might drive them towards the ultimate goal of conservation in other ways. When I say “other ways” I mean individual efforts aside from what one might consider being conservation. This means recognizing that a lot of people do not want to plant trees or pick up garbage around their city. I have realized that we need novel strategies in order to really advance conservation- at least locally- and that means incentivizing a multitude of demographics. I learned these things through the intricacies of this course.

In terms of beliefs, I would say that I believe in adaptation. I believe that as a species we are going to be forced to adapt to any kind of environmental catastrophe/ implication that is thrown our way. As discussed in section one of the textbook, this can also apply to human health and wellness. According to (Crocq, 2017), it wasn't until the 1980s that the diagnosis of General Anxiety Disorder was added to the Diagnostic Statistical Manual of Disorders. This means that anxiety and related disorders are novel and the treatments, while abundant, have varying results- I say this also speaking from experience. Thus, in chapter one of the textbook by (Beck, et al. 2018), it is interesting but not surprising to read that many aspects of nature interpretation play a massive role in “promoting the health of visitors to outdoor recreation”. The way I understood this was almost exclusively through the channel of mental health although physical most certainly applies as well. As a species, we have attempted to adapt to the increasing burden of mental illness through immersion in nature. Through science and technology, we have learned that an increase in sunlight leads to an increase in serotonin, or even more simply; the observation of a cute animal in nature stimulates the release of several “happy hormones.” The overall conclusion here is that I believe that our ability to thrive as a species is intertwined with our connections to the natural world.

Finally, I would like to discuss what I think my responsibilities are as an interpreter. In connection to my personal ethics, I also believe that individually I have a duty to give to the earth in the same way that she has provided for me. In terms of nature interpretation, I would conclude that this means that I will never cease to be a student. I vow to move through life with an open mind, constantly absorbing knowledge of the earth and of nature through peers, music, art, science, technology, and nature itself. As previously mentioned I think that this course has made me a lot more aware of the network of interpretation. I have found that walking to a local park and observing while being a lovely method of hands-on nature interpretation, is not the only way. I feel that I am more intently aware of the different ways that I can interpret nature in my life as a direct result of this course. The approach that is most suitable for me is scientific education. Most of the environmental science courses I’ve taken have driven my interest in nature interpretation. I feel that if I continue to pursue environmental education that I will further my passion for nature and thus will continue to translate my knowledge and enthusiasm to others.

My question to you is:

Do you think that those who are not willing to learn can still be part of a conservation initiative? Do you think that they can still interpret nature?

References:

Beck, L., Cable, T. T., & Knudson, D. M. (2019). Interpreting cultural and natural heritage: For a better world. Urbana: Sagamore Publishing.

The history of generalized anxiety disorder as a diagnostic category. (2017). Generalized Anxiety Disorders, 19(2), 107-116. doi:10.31887/dcns.2017.19.2/macrocq

1 note · View note

tawakkull · 4 years

Text

Spirituality in islam: Wujud (Finding and Existence).Part1

Wujud (finding and existence) is not what is meant in Qur'anic statements like the following: They assuredly find that God is One Who truly returns the repentance of His servants with acceptance and extra reward, and All-Compassionate (especially toward His believing servants) (4:64); He will find God All-Forgiving, All Compassionate (especially towards His servants who seek forgiveness for their evils and sins) (4:110); and In the end he will find God and meet with Him, and He will pay him his account in full (24:39). These are, respectively, more concerned with how those who have sinned or lapsed somewhat into deviations on the way, beg God for forgiveness, and how the unbelievers will find God or how God will treat them. Rather, finding and existence denote the finding of Him with His truth beyond all concepts of modality, as referred to in, O son of Adam, seek Me that you may find Me, and some allegorical sayings of the Prophet, upon him be peace and blessings. When travelers to the Truth attain this rank of finding, they feel and achieve a state of melting away in the presence of the manifestations of His “Face,” with nothing being left behind except that state and the pleasure it gives. One who starts with this belief and advances toward knowledge and love of God is called “an initiate.” Such initiates continue their journey by understanding the language of His signs in the outer and in their inner world and by feeling that their witnessing of Him is that of “a seeking one.” Finally, when they have reached the ultimate point where they have found the truth in their consciousness according to the capacity of that consciousness, beyond all concepts of time, space and matter, each becomes the “one who has found.” The beginning of this journey demands belief and perfect resolution, and its continuance requires being driven and led, and reaching the end according to the capacity of each, melting away and total annihilation in the face of the rays of the Realm of the Holy Presence. This final point in no way denotes incarnation or union (with God) or God’s taking on a corporeal body or His being transformed into another being. It only denotes the state and pleasure of feeling as a drop in relation to the ocean and as a particle in relation to the sun. Abu'l Hasan al-Nuri expresses the state of those who have reached this point vividly: “I have been going to and fro between finding and losing for twenty years. When I enjoy meeting with my Lord Whose Essence is unknown, I lose my heart; and when I feel my existence in heart, I then suffer a loss of Him.”

Certainly, it is not possible for those who are still at the beginning of the way to feel the state described by al-Nuri. For this state, which is frequently felt and frequently disappears, resembles the state of a diver who feels the water when diving into it, and lets the water pull him or her deeper, and who feels only the water when he or she becomes “lost” in the depths. If such a feeling that appears on the way to reaching the truth of something is based on the knowing of the heart or consciousness, it is the culture of consciousness or cognizance in consciousness. If it is of the kind obtained with vision or insight, then it is sight. If travelers are in constant pursuit of increasing research, analysis, and synthesis, then the result is spiritual discovery and vision. Finally if they see everything annihilated in God, then their state is annihilation in God and subsistence with God, and they feel no need whatsoever for anybody else save Him.

At the beginning or in the first stage of the journey, travelers are saved from all doubts and hesitations and attain in their consciousness such a degree of knowledge of God that they no longer need deductive or inductive reasoning in the name of “finding,” even though they sometimes refer to things and events when expressing the truth. Based on a knowledge that comes directly from the Divine Presence to aid finding, they rise to the horizon of knowledge of God they inwardly experience, and this knowing is above the kind of knowledge acquired by rational arguments and the observation of His “material” witnesses in the universe.

In the second stage, travelers reach the point where they feel and have the vision of the Eternally Existent One, which is in effect knowing Him with a knowledge based on spiritual observation of Him, without restricting Him with such considerations as body, substance, matter, time and space.

In the third stage, which marks almost the end point of the journey, travelers are in a state of experiencing the Truly Existent One without seeing any other existents save Him, and they attain annihilation in Him in their world of feelings.

This systematization of the journey is based on the assertion that spiritual knowledge of God is higher in value than the knowledge acquired through scientific or rational arguments, and that the spiritual vision of God is above the spiritual knowledge of Him, and that finding Him in self-annihilation in Him is more valuable than the spiritual vision of Him. However, this needs to be revised according to those who see the vision beyond finding.

In fact, all of existence is nothing more than a shadow or a manifestation of the Names and Attributes of the Unique One, the Eternally-Besought-of-All. Travelers favored with the knowledge of the truth behind things and events sometimes go into a state where they experience only His absolute Existence to such a degree that they become completely lost in It and all other existent beings disappear from their sight. Although this is a state experienced spiritually, it is sometimes reduced to a mere philosophical view or to a matter of speculation, in imitation of others who have experienced this state spiritually, and it can be confused with several other approaches, such as the Unity of the Witnessed, Monism, and Pantheism. Although a discussion of these approaches and their substantial difference from the Unity of Being is not among the topics which will be discussed in The Emerald Hills of the Heart, it would be useful to note some of the important points, as this is a matter open to misunderstanding and misrepresentation.

Existence is related to being and/or identity, nature and the existent beings themselves, and is unquestionably manifest. This is a view shared by numerous Muslim thinkers, as well as by many modern philosophers. However, existence is different from the existent beings, identity, and nature. Identity and nature must be conceived of before existence. For example, we can conceive of an amount of water with its identity and nature, even if it does not exist here. Its existence is additional and accidental to its being or identity. Something cannot exist without its essential qualities being combined with certain accidental elements. As regards our example, different states and qualities of water are additional to its essential being or identity. Although the essential identity always remains as it was, without any changes, accidental and additional qualities can be replaced with similar others. Water, while remaining as water in essence, can change into ice or vapor.

Just as a physical substance like water has an essential identity and nature, metaphysical beings have also an essential identity and nature. However, in saying this, we should not confuse the Being Whose Existence is Essential and Absolutely Necessary with contingent beings. Muslim thinkers have accepted the Absolutely Necessary Existence as the Being Who is Absolutely and Uniquely Self-Existent, and have also agreed that His Being is absolutely free from requiring a nature or a form or a composition; need is essential to all other beings whose existence is contingent and created. The Self-Existent One is free from such accidental qualities. It is not permissible to associate the Necessarily Existent One with a different, additional nature or existence. We cannot even conceive of nor mention such a possibility with regard to Him; it would be supposing the inconceivable to be conceivable to explain the question.

It is He Who is discerned in the universe. All things, each individually and all as a whole, are signs of His Existence. Things and events run in a gurgling flow and clearly point to Him at every juncture of their being. In one respect, the universe and humanity are the of the continuity of this flow, and human consciousness is that which hears, views, and reviews it.

From this perspective, all existence (creation) comes from Him and continuously flows like a river with uninterrupted manifestations. Because of the order, coherence, and speed of this flow, we cannot discern the interruptions in our nature or in the lives of things. Since the “film” of things and events is projected extremely swiftly and the very thin lines between the frames on the film strip cannot be discerned, we cannot feel the alternation of coming into existence and disappearing. Like separate pictures on a film being projected on a screen, things and events are projected on the screen of existence, one after the other, but we cannot discern the lines separating the frames.

They come and go, one after the other, with the only Unique One remaining;

That which comes, goes, and that which goes does not come back again: this is a mystery.

Those who cannot penetrate this mystery spend their lives like an insensate person, who cannot see, hear, or feel anything. While others who have familiarity with this mystery sometimes refer to vision or to witnessing when observing the creation, they sometimes mention only the absolute Existence in interpreting their observation, or they sometimes utter some words that are apparently incompatible with the rules of the Shari'a that suggest union and incarnation. They do this because of their inability to find words that express their vision and discovery. It will even sometimes happen that there appears a person who is stuck in monism and who commits great sins by seeing the absolute Existence as if it were a permeating spirit that manifested itself as the creation. It is possible that the universe may be viewed as an image or a shadow, as it is a reflection of the Light of the absolute Existence, and that things and events, including humanity, can be seen as being unstable, transitory images. However, this does not by any means imply that the universe is He. The truth is that it is He Who eternally exists without anything else eternally existing with Him. He willed the objects or identities in His eternal Knowledge to be clothed in an external, sensible existence in accordance with the measures He determined for them. This happened along with or within time and space; in other words, time and space began or appeared together with His bringing forth the objects or identities existing in His Knowledge into external existence. He observes the manifestations of His Existence that are indescribable and beyond-all-concept with the eyes of others-the creatures He has created. He favors everything with the rank of being a polished mirror to Him.

He has done all this with the single command “Be!” and with this command He has clothed the archetypes in external existence and displayed them in different forms. As He has done all this with a single command, He can destroy everything in a moment with another single command.

He said “Be!” once and the whole universe was;

If He says, “Do not exist any longer!” everything will immediately be destroyed.

Since the universe did not exist eternally along with Him and since it was brought into existence by His peerless, inimitable creation, and since it continues to exist by His Sustaining, then its existence is relative and dependent and can be viewed as being essentially non-existent. Everything owes its existence and subsistence to Him absolutely. The Eternally Existent One willed that His perfections be observed in innumerable mirrors and so created existence as a shadow of the shadow of His Knowledge and Existence; this has included us as a part of creation. Our identities as “I,” “you”, and “he” or “she” had not been thoroughly distinguished with respect to our existence in His Knowledge. Destiny or His “Pre-Determination” identified us as individuals, and His Power clothed us in our “ego,” thus distinguishing and bringing us into external, sensible existence as complete individuals with different natures particular to each one of us. As He has manifested on us all His Attributes, He has entrusted us with a restricted will-power. He has also endowed us with different potentials which we can develop or realize as abilities. He has determined goals for us according to our abilities and endowed us with inclinations to realize those goals and has given us the ability to make use of or direct these inclinations. Thus, in addition to His Attributes of Knowledge and Existence, which He has manifested on us, He has also honored us with the manifestations of His other Attributes. So what behoves us is to willingly resign ourselves to this great, Divinely-willed honor and act accordingly.

Those who attain the horizon of viewing existence in a certain spiritual state regard their existence as essentially non-existent in the face of the essential, absolute, eternal, and everlasting Knowledge and Self-Existence of God. This means the non-acceptance of a transient shadow in the face of an Eternally Self-Existent One. Feeling that the whole of existence is as a single unit is different from that the whole of sensed existence is essentially identical with the absolute Existence. Divine truths are never the same as relative truths. Although the Divine Names and Attributes, such as God (Allah), the All-Merciful (al-Rahman), and the All-Providing (al-Razzaq) seem to point to a single truth concerning the Being called by or described by these, they are different both from the perspective of the concept to which each points and the impression that each causes to rise in minds. For this reason, one who has true, substantial knowledge of God considers the relation between the Truly Existent One and other beings whose existence is relative and dependent in proper terms, and observes the true criteria in thinking, while those who are in a certain state of experience and spritiual pleasure may lapse into confusion.

In the realm of the relative truths-the facts related to creation-there are manifestations with different names or titles, such as living and non-living, and in the living realm, there are the animals, humankind, angels, and jinn and Satan. All the existing beings that are called by such collective names can be traced back to a unity that arises from a stage or rank in the process of creation, which we call “the first determination” or “the Pure Realm of Divine Dominion” or the “Truth belonging to Ahmad” (the name of the Prophet before his coming to the world). The overall Divine manifestation in this stage is viewed as His overall manifestation over the whole of creation with all His Names (Tajalli Wahidiya), though some prefer to call it Tajalli Ahadiya. This manifestation caused the archetypes in God’s Knowledge to develop and, with the concentration of the manifestations of certain Divine Names while others remained subordinate-the manifestation which we usually call Tajalli Ahadiya-the archetypes were individualized.

One with a true knowledge of God and a true vision of the truth behind the appearances can discern the relative truth and its relation with the Divine truth and God’s absolute Oneness and His overall manifestation over the whole of creation with all His Names at the same instant. They do not lapse into confusion. Even though they feel that everything goes back and ends in an essential unity, they can see each individual being in its particular nature and therefore can distinguish between the absolute, necessary and essential Existence and the relative one. This does not cause them either to ignore the gifts coming from spiritual vision and discoveries or to remain indifferent to the acquisitions of feelings and sound reasoning. Those who have set up their royal tents on this horizon express their perceptions in their true nature and with a true distinction between those things that are absolute, essential and original and those that are relative and dependent. They conclude that although there is an absolute, essential truth, its manifestations as sensible existence are numerous. They never lose their bearings or true direction and therefore do not fall into deviancy.

In addition, the Existence of the Truth has usually been viewed from two perspectives. Looking from one perspective, the Attributes are ignored and therefore the differences among them or their manifestations are not considered. Those who view the Existence of the Truth from this perspective are people of state and vision, who concentrate only on the Divine Being Himself. Some view this perspective as that of the Pure Being, but leading scholars of Sufism give to it such designations as Uniqueness, the Pure Divine Realm, the Realm with No Determination, and the Unknown Identity. Those who have acquired this perspective, which is also a rank from where the Divine Being can be viewed, experience this state each according to his or her capacity. Looking from the other perspective, the Divine Being is considered with all His Attributes in the differences of their particular characteristics and manifestations. This perspective, which is also a rank, is designated as the Oneness, the Pure Realm of Divine Dominion, the First Determination, or the Truth of Muhammad.

God’s being the One or Oneness, which denotes, in connection with His relation to the creation, His overall manifestation of all His Names throughout the universe, has an inward and outer aspect. We can call the former His being the Deity or Divinity and the latter His being the Lord or Lordship. Although these two aspects are two faces or aspects of a single truth, there is a slight difference between them which initiates can discern, according to their personal experiences during the journey. For this reason, initiates of varying states, perceptions, and pleasures can interpret the states differently. For example, some initiates tend to do away with their carnal selves and egotism, freeing themselves from the considerations of their relative, self-existence, which they regard as an obstacle to feeling the All-Holy Existence with all their hearts. They are rooted in annihilation in God and absorbed in subsistence with God, sipping peace and contentment from the pure water of His company. Others have melted away in the face of the rays that come from the All-Holy Existence to the extent that they are unaware of their own relative existence and their surroundings. More than this, they regard the ability to discern the relative existence of others than the Absolute One as a dream and the attribution of existence to others than Him as covert polytheism.

It is natural that those who have different perceptions and feelings should voice these and interpret the issue of existence differently. Some may suggest pantheism in their styles, some monism, some may assert the Unity of Being, while still some others clearly adopt the Unity of the Witnessed.

Now let us see how the theologians and the scholars of Sufism themselves view the matter:

1 note · View note

racefortheironthrone · 5 years

Text

Thoughts on House of X #4

Over the halfway mark!

Look At What They’ve Done Infographic:

Suprisingly for an issue that, in retrospect is the climax of the standard superheroics part of House of X, this issue starts with an infographic, which turns out to be one of the more controversial in HoX/PoX.

Foreshadowing what’s going to come at the end of the issue, the tone is already different from the pseudo-academic objectivity of earlier infographics, although the term “mutant erasure” evokes the activist-inspired, post-cultural turn work of critical race/gender/sexuality studies, which is something of a stepping-stone.

By contrast, describing Wanda Maximoff as both “the pretender” (does this mean “not-really-a-mutant” or “not-really-Magneto’s-daughter” or both?) and as associated with the Avengers is incredibly politically pointed, which speak to a particular kind of mutant nationalist identity that bears a good deal of grievance towards even benevolent human institutions.

Similarly, the term “human-on-mutant violence” is way too evocative of real world debates over racism and police violence to be accidental on the author’s point. It’s a depressing thought, but the 616 probably sees a lot of “what about mutant-on-mutant violence?” derailings, maybe as many as creep up in threads about HoX/Pox here...

So let’s get at the controversy: can Bolivar Trask be blamed for the Genoshan genocide? Contrary to a few voices in the fandom, I would argue strongly for the affirmative. As we see from his initial appearance, Trask created the Sentinels entirely out of racial paranoia/hatred; moreover, Sentinels have no purpose other than A. destroying all mutants and B. subjugating the human race along the way. Cassandra Nova’s actions on Genosha absolutely followed the Trask playbook of both father and son, and indeed relied on Larry Trask’s assistance to carry it out, making it a Trask affair from beginning to end.

On a final meta note, this infographic really speaks to the outsized impact that Morrison’s New X-Men and Bendis’ House of M had on the X-line for the last 15-20 years.

Observation-Analysis-Invocation-Connection:

But before we get to the punching, we get one burst of Hickman’s fascination with singularities and transhumanism, where for the first time we really get an example of how the Krakoan biological approach is going to work, showing us a surprisingly complicated biomachine:

Trinity (who runs the Secondary/External Systems part of Krakoa) uses her technopathy to gather intelligence from human mechanical systems: the Aracibo Arecibo Observatory in Puerto Rico, “re-tasked SETI radio telescopes," both of which are real things, and the “Dyson solar observatory,” which isn’t.

Beast (who runs the Overwatch/Data Analysis part of Krakoa) uses Krakoan biocomputers and his own scientific genius to “extrapolate that data into an actionable forecast,” to deal with the delay caused by the immense distances between Krakoa and Sol’s Forge.

Professor X and Cerebro handle the direct Connection between Krakoa and the away team, while the Cuckoos link Trinity, Beast, Storm into a psychic link with Xavier, which means all of the parts of the system work seamlessly even as Storm handles the Invocation of visually representing Jean Grey’s thoughts.

If you step back and think about it, this is an astonishing technological feat: with minimal reliance on machine technology, Krakoa has established a NASA “KASA Mission Control” that can send data across half a solar system almost(?) instantly.

That’s before we even get to the whole secondary purpose of the system, which is to allow Professor X and the Five to resurrect an up-to-date version of anyone who dies on the mission, which is one hell of a life-rope.

Thematically, we see a really sharp distinction between biological and mechanical transhumanism/singularity: “KASA Mission Control” is described in biological terms, “function[ing] as a singular organism,” and also in religious terms, with “eight of us acting as one” explicitly labelled as “Communion.” And yet...the eight people involved retain their separate personalities and identities and no separate, artificial intelligence is created.

Should We Fear the Worst?

And across five hundred million miles, all Krakoa gets is bad news. Archangel and Husk, the redshirt’s redshirts on this mission, are dead before they do anything; Nightcrawler has some level of “internal injury,” and Wolverine almost had his arm blown off.

Incidentally, page 7 is where something of a problem crops up with Jean Grey’s characterization. As people have noted, Jean Grey starts off in the passive communications role (indeed, she’s even reliant on Monet to do that job) and doesn’t really improve from there. With the added context of her wearing her Silver Age miniskirt costume, it’s all a bit sus, especially if you’ve been reading a much more self-possessed, confident, and all-around more powerful version of Jean Grey in X-Men: Red. For a while, many of us were thinking that Jean is a younger backup, but that seems to have been Jossed by the resurrection ceremony in House of X #5.

Better characterization abounds for the men: following their conversation from the previous issue, Cyclops and Wolverine have different perspectives about the question of whether to continue on with the mission (another key element of the special ops/espionage thriller genre). Cyclops emphasizes pushing on to make Warren and Paige’s sacrifice meaningful, Logan agrees but rather because of the existential stakes of the mission. There’s an interesting parallel there between Xavier and Magneto and means vs. ends.

Following the catastrophe, Nightcrawler successfully inserts the struje team, while “Jean and Monet will stay to maintain our connection with Krakoa;”we know know that part was crucial in more than one way, but it is a continuation of some troubling gender dynamics.

Meanwhile, despite being “technically...just an observer” (and doesn’t that ring of all kinds of Cold War proxy wars), Omega Sentinel takes action to prompt Dr. Gregor into retaliation, similarly playing to the nationalistic theme of “if you don’t, he will have died for nothing.”

Orchis’ retaliation doesn’t go so well, as we see Wolverine carving his way through an AIM securtiy team and Nightcrawler bloodlessly tying up two scientists (note the further emphasis on differing personalities and values; whoever these X-Men might be, they’re not mindless followers) towards popping two of the four constraint collars.

Unfortunately, this is followed up by a couple pages of more Jean Grey being awfully Damselly: yes, she’s holding open the connection, but she’s coded as way more helpless and indecisive than Monet (who gets to go out like a badass defending the shuttle), and the line “I dunno what to say, Marvel Girl. Try harder” really sums it all up. So far, this is reading a lot more like Stan Lee’s Jean Grey (but not Jack Kirby’s) than Chris Claremont’s.

With the tension ratcheting ever-higher, we see Cyclops succeeding at his mission, while Mystique...doesn’t and then gets promptly blown out an airlock. The “habitat” connection and the odd business with her getting “turned around” despite having the plans for the base in her head like everyone else is highly suspicious (it might suggest the use of a Krakoa flower, but no one’s ever suggested what her motivation would be for doing so), but it’ll have to go on the list of plot threads that weren’t resolved in House of X.

In a development that really ought to be troubling to more people, Dr. Gregor throws away whatever moral compunctions she has about waking up a potentially violently insane A.I because “I don’t let them stop us. No matter what,” a potentially existential downside to Omega’s strategy.

Do Whatever It Takes:

Having reached the “darkest moment” in the story diagram, Professor X orders his students to “do whatever it takes” to prevent Mother Mold from coming on line. This prompts Cyclops to give the order to Nightcrawler and Wolverine to jump out into unprotected space to sever the last constraint collar. All in all, we’re following the traditional beats of the special ops/espionage genre pretty closely, down to the team leader’s moral anguish moment.

Appropriately, we then get a quiet moment where Kurt and Logan contemplate whether or what will be “waiting for us on the other side.” Even knowing what we know now about the resurrection system, there’s still a good deal of weight to this moment, because in a way this Kurt and this Logan are going to die and whether they’re the same Kurt and Logan who will be reborn is a matter I’ll take up in Powers of X #5 along with the difficult topic of the philosophy of identity. (I’m going to leave aside the question of them having gone to literal Heaven and Hell in the past, because my Doylist position is that those story threads were probably a bad idea and my Watsonian No Prize is that you can’t remember the afterlife once returned to earth.)

Surprisingly, things get only more metaphysically weird when the two teleport outside and Wolverine starts chopping his way through the last arm. Mother Mold wakes up and immdiately starts talking about Greek mythology. Mother Mold’s interpretation of the Titanomachy is a little choppy (as we might expect from an insane A.I): on the one hand, if humanity are the Olympian gods as the creator of the Sentinels and the mutants are the Titans because of “their spoiled lineage” (this doesn’t quite work, because the Titans preceded the Olympians), then the Sentinels being “Man” makes sense. And as someone who’s written his share of college papers about omniscience/predestination/free will in Greek myth and drama, there’s a plausible anti-theist position whereby human beings might “judge and find you both wanting.” (Although that language is too Book of Daniel for the Greeks.) On the other hand, if the Sentinels are man, them having “stolen your fire” doesn’t work either - humanity was given fire by the Titan Prometheus - unless the argument is that Wolverine is Prometheus because he yeets Mother Mold into the sun?

Regardless, it’s a very ominous note for Mother Mold to go out on, because the consistent anti-human/Olympian tone suggests this insane A.I might hate humans way more than it hates mutants.

With the day seemingly saved, we transition into the Rogue One scenario where Cyclops is murdered by a vengeful Dr. Gregor and Jean is torn apart by Sentinel drones.

As gruesome as all of this is, I think it does play a very important role in explaining a good deal of Charles Xavier’s change of mind with regard to human-mutant harmony and assimilation. While this incident didn’t prompt any of the decisions that he’s made along the way - this mission is happening post-Xavier’s announcement and a day before the U.N vote, making it quite late in the X^1 timeline - I think it does a good job of showing us the kind of thought patterns that have led Xavier to this conclusion. In addition to everything he’s seen from Moira’s past nine lives, which only lend a greater sense of urgency and the fear of inevitability, Xavier himself has experienced the deaths of “our children” over and over again as the founder of the X-Men, and clearly both the direct trauma (keep in mind, he’s hooked into the minds of all of his X-Men as they die) and the pain he feels at humanity’s apathy/atrocity fatigue, goes a long way to explaining why he’ll make the decision that integration and assimilation are no longer viable options.

For all the crap that people sometime sling at Hickman over his use of charts, I will say that the way that “NO MORE” weaponizes them by extra-textually demonstrating the breakdown of the facade of calm objectivity is incredibly effective.

#xmen #xmen meta #house of x #hoxpox

17 notes · View notes

argho-majumder · 4 years

Text

Inside of a dog: Book review

SUMMARY

“It is when language stops that we connect most fully”

Alexandra Herowitz, explains that the non-linguistic silence of a dog is the most enduring trait about them. In short, this book is devoted to understand a dog’s perspective of the world: what it’s like to be able to smell not only food but emotions, or even the passage of time? what’s it’s like to use your mouth as a hand? or experience life from two feet off the ground, gazing at human’s ankles and knees?

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

A psychologist with a PhD in cognitive science, Alexandra Horowitz has studied behaviour in humans and animals and Inside of a Dog is the result of her studies of numerous canines. Herowitz began her career observing rhinos and bonobos, which are apparently much more respectable subjects for a young graduate. Then she took a camera to her local park to film other people's dogs and, sitting through hours of footage, realised that she was watching "a complex dance requiring mutual cooperation, split-second communications and assessments of each other's abilities and desires. The slightest turn of a head or the point of a nose now seemed directed, meaningful."

REVIEW AND EVALUATION

The heart of Herowitz's work is an empathetic quest to experience the world from a dog's perspective. In every chapter she has cited examples of her own dog, Pumpernickel, which illustrates the beautiful relationship of a dog and his owner. Professionally she is wary of anthropomorphising animals, that is, attributing human characteristics or behaviour on them; this is the most intriguing aspect of the book.

She takes the reader on a beautiful ride to understand the world through the dog’s sensory organs. Not only the exceptionally sensitive olfactory system but also the uniqueness of the vomeronasal organ that can detect fear, anxiety or sadness attains special

mention. Imagine how he must feel when he goes out on a walk, assaulted by all the smells around him because he can not only establish what those smells are, he can also smell a time line – where a paw print came before another, where one smell has been overlaid by another. To see the world through the dog’s eyes from two feet off the ground is one hell of an experience . As for dogs’ ability to respond to language, it has more to do with the “prosody” of our utterances than the words themselves. Herowitz also discusses about the evolutionary history of dogs, claiming their descent from wolves. “Dogs do not form true packs,” she writes. “They scavenge or hunt small prey individually or in parallel,” rather than cooperatively, as wolves do. Herowitz reminds us of one obvious but easily forgotten difference between our perspective and a dog's: they are much closer to the ground. Dogs , unlike wolves are keen observers and can interpret human behaviours: They take their cues from their owners, following our wishes and learning how to use us to get what they want.

Most interestingly, Herowitz describes how dogs also learn to confirm our prejudices about other people. Dog owners often claim that their pet is a good judge of character; in fact, when their dog greets a stranger with a wagging tail or raised hackles, he will be mimicking his owner's own unconscious signals, which he has gleaned through body language and smells.

In crisp, clear prose, she draws on her research in the field of dog cognition to give readers a sense of a dog’s perceptual and cognitive abilities—and paints a picture of what the canine experience is like. Horowitz’s own scientific journey, and the insights she uncovered, allowed her to understand her dog better and appreciate her more.

The tone of the book at times is perplexing: an almost insistence on the value of dogs, as if they’d long been neglected by world opinion. But then Herowitz will drop in some lovely observation, some unlikely study, some odd detail that causes one’s dog-loving heart to flutter with astonishment and gratitude.

Although I have never had the opportunity to pet a dog at home, but I am a keen observer of their behaviour. Being a dog person , I thoroughly enjoyed the book and the way Herowitz contradicted the habit of anthropomorphism on them.

On a scale of 10, I would give this book a 7. I would recommend it to anyone and everyone who considers them a dog person.

LEARNINGS FROM THE BOOK

This book has got a lot of things to deliver to the readers. The reader can gather an impressive amount of information on the biology of dogs — their sensory abilities, their behaviour — and on the psychology of dogs — their cognition.

I gained an insight of the efforts made to study animal cognition.It was also interesting to know how the relationship between dog and man evolved. The primary learning is that to be able to understand their world through their eyes and not by anthropomorphising them.

Although this book certainly isn't a training manual, Herowitz offers all kinds of useful advice for dog owners. Such as “Let your dog dawdle and sniff”, she suggests, rather than yanking him on a speedy jog around the park”.” Don't bathe him too often; he'd much rather smell of himself than shampoo”. She neatly dismisses several of the simplistic theories that are often trotted out by trainers.

To be able to get into the mind of the dog and have a glimpse at the dog’s point of view have changed my perception on that furry pile of doggies.

#nshm #maractivities

1 note · View note

davetheshady · 5 years

Note

🌟 how about chapter 4 of waiting for the bus in the rain 🌟 and only partially because i showed up to yell about the last few paragraphs when it first dropped. also just because i love Julie content and it's the very middle of that fic

::blows dust off inbox:: So! Now that I’ve back from traveling through three countries and recovered from trying to leave most of my arm skin in one of them (PUBLIC SERVICE ANNOUNCEMENT: don’t go so fast you flip over on the Alpine Slide, particularly if you’re in the actual Alps) here’s some DVD commentary on Chapter 4 of Waiting for the Bus in the Rain! It’s chock full of my stylistic hallmarks, i.e. way longer than I expected.

(Note to my sister: THIS IS FULL OF SPOILERS. GO READ MY STORY FIRST YOU LOSER)

There’s a Sheriff’s Secret Police officer outside Julie’s window. Considering she’s in her office on the second floor, this is fairly impressive. But when they scream and scrabble against the glass after accidentally kicking over their ladder for the third time, Julie’s had enough.

Even when they’re not under suspicion of using the scientific method, Julie has to deal with WAY more (attempted) surveillance than Carlos ever does. This is partially because she doesn’t have amazing hair, but also because Cecil doesn’t narrate large chunks of her life over the radio that the SSP can copy down and submit as a report.

vulnerabilities include fire and cold iron

and according to the literature high velocity cheese wedges but i’ve never seen anyone test that

My hand to God. Probably my number one complaint about fantasy as a genre is that everyone takes stuff from Celtic mythology so seriously when half of it is just. Completely bonkers.

Originally, most of the relevant exposition about fairies was provided by a different character entirely: Carlos-f’s misplaced smartphone, an AI who Julie called Hex (yes, like in Discworld, hell yeah science wizards) because she refused to give Julie her name. Hex provided such ringtones as “Dark Horse” and “Double Rainbow” and would occasionally get distracted by lists of numbers. Hmm…

I changed it back because 1) it was a detour and this chapter was long enough already, 2) Julie and Carlos’ friendship is one of the main throughlines and having them talk to each other was better for the story, and 3) him texting during the middle of a battle is hilarious. But as far as I’m concerned, Hex is still canon.

Andre yawns on the other end of the line and asks, “What time is it?”

“Quit whining, it’s only—” Julie looks at the clock.

Shit.

“—3:00 AM,” she finishes defiantly, because she still has her pride. Embarrassment pricks at her like flying embers settling on bare skin, because now Andre knows she was so out of it she didn’t even bother to try keeping track of the time, and he’s going to think she couldn’t sleep because of feelings, which is both correct and incorrect, because she wasn’t even trying to sleep since distracting herself by going over the minutiae of their data while the Sheriff’s Secret Police scream and fall in the bushes is better than listening to her cats prowl around while lying in her quiet apartment by herself, and any moment now he’s going to feel bad and decide to humor her and answer her in a voice filled with cloying pity and say—

“Would Hiram McDaniels count as one respondent, or five?” He yawns again.

A good chunk of Julie’s inner turmoil just, like, boils down to a recurring loop of that Tim Kreider quote about “If we want the rewards of being loved we have to submit to the mortifying ordeal of being known.” She doesn’t consciously WANT the rewards of being loved, it just kind of… happens… and then she’s stuck with incredibly loyal life-long friends… and now she not only has to deal with her own feelings but theirs too, which is pretty much her worst nightmare…

Fortunately, since she’s already gone through the mortifying ordeal of being known, they do frequently pull through and offer the kind of support she knows how to accept.

“Give TV’s Frank a kiss for me.”

“I’m not kissing my cat for you,” says Julie.

I mean, she’ll kiss the cat. Just not on request.

And yes, all her cats are named after the Mad Scientists’ sidekicks on Mystery Science Theater 3000. ~foreshadowing~

When she opens the door of her workshop later that morning, she finds that someone has been by to leave her a breakfast tray. Well, “tray”, in that it’s a textbook, and “breakfast”, in that it’s a French press, a stale churro, and her blood pressure medication. But the French press is completely full with still-warm coffee, so overall she’s going to count this as a win.

This appeared pretty early in my drafts: it’s just such a funny mental image to me and also encapsulates Julie and Gary’s relationship pretty well, i.e. a string of question marks who somehow get along.

The naturally suspicious part of her wonders if he deliberately provoked her reaction to the flamingo to gather more information about it. The naturally analytical part of her points out that Carlos is more likely to gnaw off his own hand than put someone in danger, especially when he could just put himself in danger instead.

Julie is just a tad cynical, so she’d definitely think of potentially negative interpretations of her friend’s actions. But it’s not actually a possibility she dwells on in any real sense, and every time she interacts with Carlos-f (not to mention Carlos-0) she trusts him implicitly. She wouldn’t admit it in a thousand years, but she considers Carlos one of the few genuinely good people in the world: not because he never makes mistakes or creates personal disasters, but exactly because of those things. She knows he’s a flawed person, and that everyone is flawed, so that makes him genuine – which means every time he’s tried to do the right thing at personal cost, over and over, that was genuine too.

Basically, there’s a reason why in the last chapter she automatically references “scientist means hero” with “Fuck, I’m turning into you!”

“So,” she says. “Nilanjana. Do you need new pronouns, or anything?”

“Does anyone need any pronouns?” asks Gary contemplatively, which Julie takes as a ‘No’.

“Should I drop ‘Gary’ entirely? Do you want me to change your name in our paperwork?”

He thinks about it for a moment. “I don't know, man,” he concludes. “I don’t really believe in labels.”

Gary has galaxy-brained from “gender is a social construct” straight to “identity is a social construct” and beyond.

“Are you thinking what I’m thinking?” asks Julie.

“I think so, Dr. K,” says Gary. “But how will we get three pink flamingos into one pair of capri pants?”

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v-xrnIXQ3iQ

What happens when the wave function ψ is the same as the physical system it describes, and what happens when that physical system collapses?

i.e. what would happen if common misperceptions of the Observer Effect were actually the correct perceptions?

Julie can’t help it: she snorts. “Passionate? Me?”“Well, yeah,” says Romero. “You really care about the things that interest you. You get really involved and angry and never quit or back down.”“Oh,” says Julie, then blurts, “You like that I’m angry?”“I… don’t like it when you’re unhappy?” says Romero. “But – it’s part of you, so… yeah, I guess I do, because it’s how you are. Why? Is – is everything okay?”She’s spent a lifetime having people tell her to stop being angry. No one’s ever told her she’s fine the way she is.

There have been many, many, MANY thinkpieces about how women are socialized not to express anger, often even to themselves. That was never going to work for Julie, who after all is powered by constant low-level rage, but that just means she had to deal with the backlash from not adhering to social programming instead (on top of additional backlash from being a woman in a male-dominated field). Of his own free will, Romero not only rejects that social programming, but also clearly spent time thinking about her empirically to determine that her anger is a positive force instead of a random and horrible personality trait.

He’s a Good Dude.

When she was in elementary school, her third grade teacher had been fond of saying, “If you’re bored, it means you have no imagination,” at least until Julie had decided to deal with her boredom after finishing her science assignment, her homework, and the rest of the textbook by seeing what happened if you jammed a paperclip into the electric socket. (The answer was certainly not boring and, in fact, probably the most exciting and practical thing they learned that year.)

That used to be my aunt’s favorite saying. I personally did not copy Julie’s response, but it is based on research done by one of my friends. (It’s okay, he was very careful about safety and made sure to use rubber-handled scissors to poke random bits of metal into the outlet. Apart from a classmate’s socks catching on fire, everyone was totally fine.)

She wakes to the sound of Cecil talking about the other week’s marathon, which may or may not have been mandatory, whoops. Carlos has texted her an emoji of various hadrosaurids gathered around a campfire singing “We Are the Champions”.

PREVIOUSLY IN NIGHT VALE:

EXT. - THE LABS

Thousands of citizens stream down Main Street, driven relentlessly forward to the Narrow Place. The Harbingers of the Distant Prince hurl themselves towards the building again and again, only to be rebuffed by the wards. Charred corpses lay scattered around the perimeter. Green storm clouds gather overhead as their anger grows.

INT. - LAB ONE

ANDRE

Did you hear something?

JULIE

[not looking up from her welding]

No.

Carlos, meanwhile, has NO idea his emojis are not in fact standard.

“I liked him,” says Josie. [...] “He was trying to do… something, I forget what. I hope he figured it out.” At Julie’s incredulity, she says, “Some people, they’re rough around the edges, but they try. They hope for something better and keep going. That’s important.”

“What if you go where you’re not supposed to?”

“Then you come back and fix what you can,” says Josie.

“What if you can’t?”

“Then you find someone to help you,” Josie replies. “Oh! I love this song.”

She turns up the volume of the radio and treats everyone to the aria from Shastakovich’s Paint Your Wagon.

Vocals by L. Marvin

Angels chilling at your house are, of course, part of the standard retirement package for former Knights of the Church. Old Woman Josie used to carry Esperacchius and passed it on to the Egyptian, after which it went to Sanya. She and Shiro were buds and saw Elvis in Vegas (and also, interestingly, several times in the Ralphs).

Anyway, if you want to suggest that a character is subconsciously mulling over an issue, I recommend having them ask some leading questions without describing their reactions and then change the subject.

“It’s come to my attention,” she begins, then has to stop and clear her throat again. “It’s come to my attention that we have a pretty good thing going on. So I was just wondering if you’d like to keep doing this, you know. For the indefinite future. With me.”When he doesn’t say anything, or look at her, or move at all for that matter, she removes her hand from under her thigh where she’s been sitting on it and points at the lease. “I highlighted where you have to sign,” she says, somewhat unnecessarily. “If you wanted to.”

I think this is the only time we see Julie nervous about anything when her life is not actively in danger.

You can’t write a romance arc without including some degree of emotional vulnerability – it just wouldn’t be satisfying. On the other hand, how that emotional vulnerability manifests is REALLY dependent on the person, and if you don’t base it firmly in their character it wouldn’t be satisfying, either. (I’m REALLY picky about romances in part because of this.) Julie’s not the type to pine or swoon or be filled with self-doubt*, but she is bad at feelings, and unfortunately, she’s determined that an equitable relationship with Romero requires some kind of tangible, committed expression of them. So she does that as best she can. It’s not actively harmful to her, but it does require a stretch out of her comfort zone.

* ::cough::Carlos::cough::

Yes, Julie has technically registered their equipment with City Hall, in that they’re listed as alternatively “electronic abaci” and “databases” and she’s claimed they only use the internet for checking email. Until now, they’ve coasted on general good will towards Carlos/his hair and the fact that all authority figures have been functionally electronically illiterate since the Incident in the community college’s Computer and Fire Sciences building.

Look, I could have SWORN there was an Incident at the Computer and Fire Sciences building specifically mentioned in canon. Can I find it anywhere? No. Did I listen to an episode that was subsequently erased from history? Possibly.

This time, someone picks up. There are a few seconds of sleepy fumbling, followed by “Hello?” in more vocal fry than voice.“Cecil!” she says. “Is Carlos there?”“Are you in fear for your life from the long arm of the law?” Cecil mumbles.

her current ringtone

“Julie, I said hold on!”“I am holding on,” she snarls as the rumbling stops. “It’s a diagnostic. 75% efficiency? Am I the only one who cares about proper maintenance in this town?”

This combines two of my favorite things: people focusing on hilariously inconsequential details during a stressful situation, and Julie lowkey engaging in supervillainy. Nikola Tesla did not design earthquake machines so Night Vale could install shitty ones they can barely use. STANDARDS.

“I probably wouldn’t have destroyed Weeping Miner,” she says eventually.

“I know,” says Carlos.

“I could have, though,” she says.

“I know that too,” says Carlos.

[...] Carlos shifts. She looks over; he briefly catches her eye and says, “So could I.”It’s not the same. Carlos would probably feel bad about it, for one. But she feels some of her anger dissipate anyway. At least she’s not the only one dealing with this bullshit.

Subconscious concern --> conscious concern! Getting back to Julie’s cynicism: she doesn’t think there are very many good people in the world, and that excludes her too. Sure, she’s risked her life to save others, fight baddies, and make sure the dangerous technology she’s developed doesn’t fall into the wrong hands, but she knows she has selfish reasons to do them, like protecting her friends and making sure the town/world isn’t destroyed so she can keep doing her research.

But at the same time, the fact that she has been dwelling on the ethics of her situation ever since Chapter 19 of Love is All You Need, that she is genuinely bothered that she’d consider destroying a neighborhood, and that she’s talking about this with Carlos, who considers them to have a similar dilemma, suggests that deep down she is dissatisfied by her cynical model of the world because the data isn’t quite matching up. Which, of course, means she needs more data in the form of Chapters 6 and 7.

On one side is a large picture of Carrie Fisher giving everyone the finger

I think Space Mom is mandatory at protests now.

This whole section (especially the rain) was heavily influenced by the March for Science, which both Ginipig and I went to in 2017. You too can make a difference and also give yourself writing material!

“Any more words of wisdom, Usidork?” she asks instead.

USIDORE, WIZARD OF THE 12TH REALM OF EPHYSIYIES, MASTER OF LIGHT AND SHADOW, MANIPULATOR OF MAGICAL DELIGHTS, DEVOURER OF CHAOS, CHAMPION OF THE GREAT HALLS OF TERR'AKKAS. THE ELVES KNOW HIM AS FI’ANG YALOK. THE DWARFS KNOW HIM AS ZOENEN HOOGSTANDJES*. HE IS ALSO KNOWN IN THE NORTHEAST AS GAISMUNĒNAS MEISTAR AND HAS MANY OTHER SECRET NAMES WHICH YOU DO NOT… YET… KNOW.

* Hoobastank

He blinks at her in polite incomprehension. “I don’t want to miss the Life Raft Debate,” he says. “It’s important to support your department.”

Several universities hold yearly Raft Debates, where representatives from the different disciplines have a debate about which of their respective areas of study is the most vital for humanity and thus should get to take the one-person life raft back to civilization from the desert island they’ve all gotten stuck on.

I should inform you that at my alma mater the Devil’s Advocate, who argues that none of the subjects are worth saving, has won multiple times.

Without taking her eyes off her opponent, Romanoff thrusts out her hand. Dr. Aluki Robinson (Associate Professor of Ornithology) passes her a harpoon, its ivory barbs almost glowing in the dim light.

Nauja and Aluki are both from Cold Case, because no one deserves to be stuck in Cold Case where we’re apparently supposed to be deeply concerned about the main character’s sexual experience but only vaguely perturbed by the powerful white and white-coded women stealing Native American children to brainwash them to their culture so they can be fed to the system seriously WHAT the FUCK Jimbo

ANYWAY, in this universe the Winter fey of Unalaska are discharging their obligations to help the Winter Court against Outsiders by sending some of their people to monitor the prison in Night Vale. This also gets to highlight the fun of an unreliable narrator! Julie is generally not one of those, because she’s a smart and observant person who will happily question everything, but even she has her limits when she’s out of her element. In the case of this story, there are several minor details to suggest there is some Winter and Summer court drama going on in the background (the chlorofiends, an entire academic department of shapeshifters, Molly and Mab personally overseeing bus routes) and most of it just goes completely over her head.

During his undergraduate career, Gary had elicited a considerable amount of interdepartmental discussion about his desire to be exempted from lab regulations for wearing appropriate – or any – footwear in the lab, which evolved into a considerable amount of interdepartmental discussion about whether wrapping your feet in duct tape immediately before said lab time constituted appropriate footwear.

This was based on one of my mother’s students, who eventually resolved the situation by commissioning a handmade pair of moccasins he placed on his feet immediately before entering the lab.

“The scientific method is four steps,” says Carlos with a cheerful inevitability as the officers start shouting panicked instructions into their walkie talkies. “One, find an object you want to know more about; two, hook that object up to a machine using wires or tubes; three, write things on a clipboard; four, read the results that the machine prints.”

This is a direct quote from the book. Was this entire subplot about the scientific method ban designed just to come up with a plausible retcon for why someone with actual scientific training would announce this over the radio? It sure was!

THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD:

1. “Step one, cut a hole in the box,” calls Wei.2. “No, step one is collecting underpants,” says Gary.3. “Step four: make a searching and fearless moral inventory,” says Julie.4. “And then step five, acceptance,” Andre finishes.5. “You see, the first level is ennui, or boredom. In particular cases it may be the desire for somebody or something specific – nostalgia, love-sickness… At more morbid levels it is a dull ache of the soul, a longing with nothing to long for. A sick pining, a vague restlessness. Mental throes. Yearning. And at the scientific method’s deepest and most painful level, it is a sensation of great spiritual anguish, often without any specific cause.”6. “It’s how you decide whether to fix the problem with duct tape or WD-40,” says Julie.7. “I think,” says Osborn, “that it’s a divine machine for making flour, salt, and gold.”

8. “Don’t be absurd,” says Galleti. “The scientific method is two vast and trunkless legs of stone standing in the desert!”

9. “And they say the scientific method is—”

“—the quality of cosiness and comfortable conviviality associated with sitting around a fire in the winter with close friends,” puts in Dr. Chelsea Dubinski, Assistant Professor of Chemistry.

10. “Or is it the special look shared between two people, when both are wishing that the other would do something that they both want, but neither want to do?” asks Galleti.

This section was also a chance to write about the rest of Night Vale’s scientists, of whom we still know so very little. There’s enough of them that there’s a whole science district, and the community college seems pretty well staffed, but the fact that Carlos made such an impact when he rolled into town suggests that they were either pretty lowkey or indistinguishably weird from the rest of the town.

“I don't feel alone,” snaps Julie. “I feel like shit, and I know why I feel like shit, and the thought of outlining that in excruciating detail is, oddly enough, not making me feel any better!”

One of the things I wanted to address in this story (inspired by Ghost Stories, which I uhhhhh did not care for) was the shortcomings of a lot of narratives about grief. Because many of them are not only oversimplified, but also not everyone processes grief in the same way. It’s not necessarily a linear narrative of where you go through the five steps and then you’re totally over it: it might take a long time, or you might be fine until some other, unrelated setback triggers you, or it might be a cyclical process as anniversaries roll around. Grief lingers. Related to that, helping people deal with their grief isn’t always as simple as sitting down with them and offering a sympathetic ear. Some people don’t process their feelings well verbally, and the emotional labor of formulating all your grief for another person’s consumption can be nearly as traumatizing as grieving in the first place, and VERY difficult to do when you’re already feeling down.

On top of that, I think general American culture is just. Real bad at dealing with grief. Which means we don’t have many positive models to base our responses on, either as grievers or as people supporting the grieving, and if you don’t fit those models at all it just makes the process that more difficult because everyone’s stumbling around in the dark.

“Does it always feel like this?” she asks.“Which part?” asks Carlos.“We won,” says Julie. “Methods have lived to science another day. We can do our work without interference. All we did was lie about what the name meant, but…” She taps the lab table with a pencil. Another secret violation of the law. “It still feels like we… lost something.”“We did lose something,” says Carlos. “It was just a name, but names are important.”

One of the reasons I love writing Carlos and Julie’s friendship so much is because it’s such a relationship of equals. They’re both hypercompetent, pragmatic, and a little ruthless; their skill sets don’t have much overlap (at least, not yet) and their personalities aren’t at all similar, but they get each other and it’s so sweet. When they wander out of their respective areas of expertise, or stumble across some kind of dilemma, they feel comfortable asking each other for guidance – they can admit their ignorance and drop their public facades of Having Their Shit Together because they trust each other.

“I want—” Her mouth opens and shuts again, wordlessly. Her scowl deepens.Then she narrows her eyes and says, “Darmok and Jalad at Tanagra.”

Molly being a huge Trekkie is pretty much my favorite thing from Ghost Story (not to be confused with Ghost Stories)(although thinking about it, swapping their plots would be kind of amazing??), so of course I wanted her and Julie to interact in a way that showed off what huge nerds they are.

But yet another element I wanted to include in this story is the background detail that ~the masquerade~ must be maintained because it’s too dangerous for humanity as a whole to be fully cognizant of the supernatural – which tends to get a little lost in the sauce, because the supernatural is consistently super duper powerful and our heroes (most of them pretty supernatural themselves) generally avert disaster by the skin of their teeth. But here’s Julie, just a regular human who’s capable of producing terrifying technology, has no concern for the rules and traditions of ancient regimes unless they’re inconveniencing her, and who would be perfectly fine with upending the status quo just to see what happens. Regular humans just aren’t more flexible about change than the supernatural, they’re even curious about it sometimes – which must be terrifying to something like the Winter Court, which has been devoted to maintaining the same strict balance since forever. Regular humans can do stuff like tell a story so well it inspires the Winter Lady to subvert her magical restrictions and remind her of her own humanity.

Julie grumpily emails him a rough summary of her thoughts on Troy Walsh and her conversation with Molly and heads up to her office to pull up everything she has on both the bus garage and the man in the tan jacket.

Bullshit secretkeeping (“I can’t tell the other main character this important plot point, it’s better if they don’t know”) is one of my least favorite tropes and I avoid it at all costs. It’s such a stupid way to add tension. It can maybe work once, but after your character has inevitably watched it backfire spectacularly, you can’t repeat it ever again unless you want to imply they’re a dumbass who never learns from their own mistakes and apparently doesn’t care that it clearly puts everyone in more danger. ::looks pointedly at a certain book series::

Also, it’s almost always much more interesting to have characters try to share important information. If they don’t succeed, it coats everything in ironic horror as the outcomes one person tried to avoid happen despite their best efforts. If they do succeed, it means everyone is fully cognizant of the potential danger even as they are still prevented from acting on it properly, like because they (e.g.) get kidnapped in the middle of the street.

King City is not in the correct dimension. The man in the tan jacket seems to know something about this, but up until a year ago he wasn’t drawing attention to it. He was busy poking his nose into everyone’s business, ingratiating himself with the powerful and the influential, dealing with them in secret…basically, the SOP of your typical Night Vale authority.Like the Night Vale Area Transit Authority, with its bus route to… King City.They had a job and they chose to keep it, Molly said.“Fuck,” says Julie. “He was working for them!”

In retrospect, it’s hilarious to me how much of this fic was powered by spite. Ghost Stories and Cold Case both really bothered me. The resolution of the Man in the Tan Jacket storyline, meanwhile, felt pretty underwhelming – not because what Finknor came up with wasn’t interesting, but because it barely engaged with the few plot points they had already established. Like, when TMITJ shows up in the podcast he interferes with the Mayor, he’s connected to the city under Lane Five, he surfaces during the Strex Corp arc, he interacts with a whole bunch of series regulars in an ominous fashion… Yeah, that probably came from Finknor dropping him in more or less at random, but the end result was that during the first several years of the show it seemed he was an active driver of whatever his plot was supposed to be. In WTNV: The Novel, though, he’s much more reactive and impotent. This wouldn’t necessarily be bad if this change was acknowledged as part of his storyline, but… it’s not…

(And I get that it can be difficult to come up with a plot for an element you didn’t intend to be plotty at all, but like: there wasn’t THAT much material they had to account for. I should know, I had to look it all up to write THIS story.)

I think this was especially frustrating because it ends up feeling like a “have your cake and eat it too” on the part of Finknor: it’s not automatically bad when fans care more about the show’s continuity than the creators (creators have different concerns, and a lot of time that means they’re using the creative latitude to do something neat), but the novel was very much presented as “finally, a resolution to that one mystery you find cool!” which is… pretty much a direct appeal to the fans’ care about the continuity. So to then ignore or retcon so many aspects of the continuity without any story payoff for it feels like a cheat.

(Ultimately, though, my inspiration to actually sit down and write mainly sprang from 1) all the lovely comments about how so many people loved my OFC, which as someone who started lurking in online fandom in the early 2000s was both mind-boggling and heartwarming, and 2) lol those ladies have the same name. I learned nothing.)

She gets the call at 21:27. She goes to the hospital, although there’s not much point. The human mind is the most powerful thing on the planet and it's housed in a fragile casing of meat and bone.

I’ve mentioned a few times (possibly more than a few)(probably more than a few) that I didn’t like the WTNV live ep Ghost Stories, and that’s because the ~big reveal~ is that Cecil’s story was actually about a personal family tragedy, and once he’s able to admit that, everything is hunky-dory. As I recall, it went something like this:

WTNV: hey remember that time your mom died and your family was thrown into chaos

ME: WELL NOW I DO

WTNV: and on that note, good night everyone!

Needless to say, everything was not hunky-dory.

But on top of being emotionally compromised for the whole following week, I was also professionally annoyed. Prior to this live show, we’d had a few cryptic references to Cecil’s mom and could reasonably infer that his relationship with his sister was strained. Critically, though, neither was their own clearly-defined character (compare to the treatment of Janice or Steve Carlsberg), these were not frequently recurring elements that would suggest they weighed heavily on Cecil’s mind, and it wasn’t even obvious that their backstory WAS particularly tragic. So the emotional lynchpin of this live show was mostly new information about Cecil regarding characters the audience had no connection to.

Tragic narratives are powerful not only because they evoke intense emotions, but also because those emotions are supposed to go somewhere and do something: provide catharsis, reinforce the artist’s philosophy, make the audience ponder the meaning of life... In using a tragedy as a plot twist, your ability to give it the proper emotional arc is very limited, because you have to misdirect from its existence while building it up, and then quickly progress from upsetting emotions to those more appropriate for concluding the story. That’s not impossible, but Ghost Stories immediately throws a wrench in the works by splitting the audience’s emotional journey away from Cecil’s: he already knew about the tragedy and the people involved with it, so the plot twist acts as his emotional catharsis... but only his. When the twist itself is the first time the audience realizes there ARE emotions, and that the first 85% of the show was completely unrelated to them, there’s simply not enough time for the audience to have them, process them according to the story’s weird ramblings that kinda imply fiction based on real life is more important than genre fiction like horror (PS: that’s a WEIRD take for a fictional horror podcast), and reach their own kind of catharsis without it being horrifically rushed. Particularly when they’re having a WAY more emotional response than the character due to their own personal tragedies which they were not expecting to have to think about during a fun podcast live show about ghost stories.

As stuff like this points out, you can’t just sprinkle in character deaths and expect quality entertainment to sprout: there has to be a purpose to putting the tragedy in the story (even if that purpose is to highlight how purposeless tragedy can be in real life). I’ve always been VERY critical of the assumption that tragedy is ~more artistic~, both in historical lit and modern pop culture; sad emotions aren’t inherently more meaningful than happy ones. Merely including tragic events isn’t deep; you have to do the work and make it deep, in its context and development.

So: on to ::gestures proudly:: probably the worst thing I’ve ever written!

From an aesthetic standpoint, I leaned into the Night Vale house style in this section because I found it to be really effective at conveying the enormity of the tragedy for Julie: it’s pretty blunt, just like her, but the focus on oddly specific details, the narrative distancing, and the lurking sense of existential horror seemed a fitting demonstration of how badly the emotional gutpunch disrupted her narration/life.

And I really wanted it to be an emotional gutpunch. (But not a surprise: even if I hadn’t warned for it specifically, Julie mentions Romero dying all the way back in Ch. 10 of Love is All You Need.) This is in part a story about grief and mourning, so the loss that caused it needed a central place. I wanted it to be powerful enough to retroactively fit in with how upset Julie is in the opening chapters and to add real tension to the devil’s bargain the feds want to make with her in the next chapter. But most importantly, I wanted it to be so significant to both Julie and the audience that the end of the story has an impact. Loss doesn’t get “cured” – but it seems to me like it’s not supposed to be. Loss is a part of life; love, in whatever form, helps give you strength as you grow and change from the experience into someone new, and this is also a story about the love in friendship.

I think a lot about the ethics of writing tragic stuff, because when you get right down to it, ultimately art boils down to poking your fingers in someone’s feelings and stirring them around. People get really invested in the stuff you are responsible for creating, and making someone feel bad for no reason isn’t being an artist, it’s being a dick. But I’m very happy with how this turned out, and hopefully didn’t traumatize anyone who didn’t want to be traumatized.

(I do feel bad for everyone who was reading as I posted that had to wait an entire year for the next chapter, though. I wanted to get something up sooner, but I had to wait until I sorted Chapter 6 and Chapter 6 was just. The worst. WORDS ARE HARD. People who read WIPs are braver than any Marine.)

hmu for more dvd commentary!

#muggle-the-hat #love is all you need to destroy your enemies #ask dave #welcome to night vale #the dresden files #fic #writing

19 notes · View notes

kcwcommentary · 5 years

Text

VLD3x07 – “The Legend Begins”

3x07 – “The Legend Begins”

This is another really long critique. I have so many problems with this episode. The biggest problem is that this episode expects me to have sympathy for unsympathetic characters.

Haggar, citing the Empire needing him, touches Zarkon on sides of his head and a series of images flash. Haggar recoils at the image of a smiling Altean woman.

Team Voltron is trying to figure out where Lotor might be and what his plan is. Pidge poses the question: “Why was Voltron made out of the same material as that comet? What’s so special about it?” I can’t believe they wrote Pidge to ask that question about the “comet” since she already knows the answer: It can punch holes from one reality through to another. Allura says that Alfor found another “comet” like this one, and Coran specifies that it was Alfor and Zarkon who found it back before Voltron was made. Allura’s and Coran’s statements coming after Pidge’s comment is odd. Their comment makes it sound like it’s a revelation that Voltron was made out of the first “comet” that Alfor found, but Pidge literally just said that it’s made out of the same material.

Coran begins to tell them some history. The original Paladins were first leaders of their respective species/cultures. Cultures that “in some cases had been warring for generations,” he says while an image of Blaytz fighting some Galra sentries is shown. Are we to understand from this that the Galra had been at war with Blaytz’s people? That sounds significant and should be clarified and explained.

The five original Paladins made some “formal agreement” to protect their common interests. If they had been at war with one another, what common interests would they have that would cause them to go from war to cooperation? That’s significant and should be clarified and explained. They developed a “true friendship” from working “together […] to rid their system of those who would do it harm.” Their system? As in solar system? All five species evolved and existed within the same solar system? That is incredibly unlikely.

There’s a shot of Daibazaal, still looking like not a planet. On the surface, they’re having a relatively exclusive meal together. Coran goes over the roster. Zarkon from Daibazaal. Alfor from Altea. Gyrgan from Rygnirath (I really like his visual design, though his character is little different than an alien version of Hunk). Trigel of the Dalterion Belt. And Blaytz from Nalquod. The latter three don’t have much of a presence and are more to fill the roster than to be actual characters, especially Trigel.

Blaytz’s reaction to the server bringing him something to drink has been interpreted by a lot of people as Blaytz flirting with him. I guess it counts. It’s rather blink and you’ll miss it. I expect more for queer inclusion in stories. Zarkon displays his strict preference for hierarchal social structure, telling Blaytz, “You know that fraternizing with the servant class is not permitted. It erodes discipline.” So, Zarkon has always been severe, prejudiced, and cruel. One, Blaytz is not Galra, so even if it is uncouth for a high ranking Galra to talk to someone in “the servant class,” that does not apply to Blaytz. Two, this reaffirms what we’ve seen of Zarkon already in this show: that he stands aloof from those he leads because he thinks he’s superior to them. This is one point of contention between him and Lotor.

While at dinner, the “comet” crashes into the surface of Daibazaal. In the amount of time it takes Zarkon to evacuate the area near the crater, Alfor has set up a lab, started studying the “comet,” and already knows that it’s made of a material that can pass between realities. The show tries to handwave the fact that such a scientific determination would take more time for study than the timeframe Zarkon’s evacuation comment would allow. Alfor says they found a yellow, glowing area underneath where the “comet” had crashed. Just because the area’s there doesn’t mean that the “comet” caused it to happen. But this his hardly the only jump in logic characters are written to make in this episode.

This brings up an issue I have with this “comet” being able to pass from one reality to another: How? I don’t ask that wanting an actual science reason, but I ask what, in-story, causes it to transit from one reality to another? Why has it stopped in this reality? Some change has to occur to make the “comet” transit from one reality to another, otherwise it would be constantly transiting and would not be stable enough for them to do anything but watch it disappear into a rift. Yet they made Voltron out of it. This seems like more of the show’s magic system having never been properly defined.

Zarkon freaks out over a cat (Kova, the same cat Narti uses to see). Zarkon then meets Honerva, to whom Kova belongs. Alfor describes Honvera as the best alchemist from Altea. Alfor asked Honerva to come to Daibazaal to lead the investigation. With Altea and Daibazaal in the same solar system, I guess it isn’t unreasonable that given the timeframe of Zarkon’s evacuation comment that Honerva could have come from one planet to another.

Honerva expresses excitement about studying the “comet.” Zarkon is socially awkward around her, which is clearly to be interpreted as he’s attracted to her. Given Zarkon’s opinions on Galra superiority, it’s odd that he would be attracted to her, but whatever. She remained on Daibazaal studying the rift, while Alfor studied the “comet” on Altea. Coran’s narration says that this study took years.

Alfor introduces Zarkon to baby Allura, and Zarkon gives her a Galra helmet. Also, Zarkon has married Honerva. Alfor goes to thank Honerva for the gift, which she dismisses as nothing more than a “customary gesture.” In later seasons, the show claims that Honerva loses her maternal capacity due to excessive exposure to quintessence from within the rift. But here, where she could demonstrate the necessary warmth of personality needed for maternal capacity by commenting affectionately about baby Allura, she does not. This to me says that Honerva was never a motherly type of person, nothing was taken from her despite the show’s later retcon.

She’s been running an experiment on quintessence, one drop powering some machine for a year. Quintessence has been shown to be some kind of glowing energy until it’s somehow processed into liquid, so I guess they’ve developed a refining process in order for Alfor to refer to it as a “drop?” This would have been the perfect episode to explain what quintessence is.. We’ve been previously told that quintessence is supposedly life energy, but then how is there so much quintessence in the rift? Again, it’s supposed to be life energy, but then how is it poisonous? What kind of statement is this show making by saying that life energy can poison you into becoming maniacal and cruel?

Alfor says that “the ships I’m creating for us work on the same principle.” What principle is that? He hasn’t stated any kind of principle, he’s only said that quintessence is a potent energy source. That’s a terribly written transition. “The ore from the comet practically engineers itself,” he also says. That’s not how engineering works. The material might be easy to work with, but that’s not the same thing as the ore creating design schematics on its own. I don’t think the writers of this show know what engineering is.

Zarkon instantly thinks about “endlessly powerful ships for the Galra Empire.” So, Altea and Galra are in the same solar system, but the Galra have an Empire already. Are we to assume that this Empire is currently just isolated on Daibazaal? If they’re already an Empire, I’m kind of surprised they haven’t already tried to conquer Altea. Maybe they’re supposed to be two of the warring factions mentioned at the beginning of the episode? Again, that sounds significant and should be clarified and explained. Regardless, Zarkon here reveals that he is very much a war-minded person. The later idea that he turns cruel because of excessive exposure to quintessence from within the rift doesn’t work for me because he’s being shown to think the same before as he does after.

Alfor observes some glowing purple blob floating in a forcefield. Honerva explains that she “sent some signals into the neighboring reality and this creature answered the call. Nothing from our universe has been able to survive the passage through the rift. But somehow, he arrived unharmed.” She seems fascinated by the creature, even holding out a hand to the forcefield like she wishes she could touch the blob. Alfor comments, “I thought we discussed this. We must exercise caution. We have no idea what is out there.”

And here we have another demonstration of Honerva’s normal, unaffected personality well before she became poisoned by quintessence and turned into Haggar. “The ancients thought that lightning was shot from the bows of the gods until science proved otherwise. We must always push into dangerous territory in pursuit of knowledge.” Honerva is not some person whose warmth was taken from her. She is a driven person who has the same insatiable desire for power that Zarkon has. She views the tool of science as how she can acquire that power. She does not care about the consequences of her behavior. She does not care if anyone gets hurt in the process.

The blob screeches and more of the blob creatures erupt from the rift. Alfor and Honerva put a spherical forcefield around the area to contain the blobs.

“Alfor’s project will save us,” Honerva says. I have a lot of complaints about Voltron Legendary Defender, but there are some things I really like. Scientific illiteracies aside, I think the animation is really nice. I love the music. And usually, I think the voice acting is really good. But what in the world is with Honerva’s voice?

Alfor introduces the five original Paladins to the Lions. “I made them from the quintessence-infused ore of the comet, which provides them with an endless supply of power,” Alfor says. How is metal able to be infused with life energy? Also, this show has shown the Lions losing power many times, so clearly, they do not have an endless supply of power.

“In testing my ship, I started to feel some sort of psychic link. […] The ship wasn’t just reading my mind, it was communicating with me. They seem to be evolving,” Alfor says. The Lions’ minds literally come out of nowhere. There’s no explanation to why the ships are sentient. Alfor created these ships. He had to design and build them. They should have no capabilities that he did not design. So where do the Lions’ consciousnesses come from? The show never thinks it’s necessary to answer that. For Alfor to take them from raw materials to ships with consciousnesses, it’s not acceptable for him to not be able to explain that. That’s not how engineering works.

Zarkon’s concerned about his people being harmed by “dark creatures from another realm.” Well Zarkon, it’s your wife’s fault.

“You do not pick the beast. The beast will choose you,” Alfor says. How convenient that the beasts all choose the five members of this group and that they all happen to be here together.

This is comparatively a minor problem, but the character designs of the species of the Paladins bothers me specifically when it comes to their Paladin armors’ helmets. Their helmets are not designed for their respective head-shapes. How the impossibility of stuffing all the stuff hanging off their respective heads into helmets shaped for a human head-shape didn’t register to the artists doing the character design, I don’t know. It’s like they didn’t bother to think through the realities of the head-shapes and the helmets. Not thinking things through is kind of standard for this show’s production though.

“Perhaps you should lead the formation, Alfor. You have a greater understanding of the vessels than anyone,” Zarkon says. I’m surprised he’d be willing to let someone else be the leader. Alfor, however, has not impressed me with his understanding of the vessels. Their having an unexplained consciousness that he didn’t give them and him having no idea where it came from does not sound like understanding. “I’m a better alchemist than military leader, Zarkon. I’ll stick with being your right hand.” It’s interesting that Alfor specifies the leadership as specifically military. There are a lot of different kinds of leadership, and leadership is not inherently militaristic. But Alfor, by his comment, wants Voltron to be a military group, not diplomatic, not humanitarian.

The rift creatures break free and form into a giant single body. Zarkon leads them into battle against it. Red psychically tells Alfor that they have to fly in a formation, and they turn into Voltron. Alfor designed and built the Lions, but he didn’t design them to be able to turn into Voltron. This is not how engineering works.

“Am I a leg?” Gyrgan says.

They continue to fight. Red reveals to Alfor the slot for the bayard. So, the ability to use bayards to create weapons and additional abilities is also something that Alfor did not design the Lions to be able to do.

Having the Lions be some advanced technology they just happened to have found out in space somewhere, rather than something Alfor built while having no idea what he was building, would have at least not been absurd. Or if Alfor had been influenced by some alien consciousness into building the Lions, that would have worked too.

Voltron forms sword and they stab the body of the collective rift creatures, and it explodes. It doesn’t really make any sense why that would happen, but it does.

Alfor says they need to find a way to seal the rift. Honerva reacts, yelling, “Seal the rift? Why?” Again, she’s a person who does not care about the consequences of her actions; that’s very much antithetical to being a motherly person. Despite having freaked out about the danger to his people a few scenes ago, Zarkon now doesn’t care about the risk. Citing the power of the Lions, Zarkon is eager to continue looking to turn the rift into more power.

“I’ll decide what’s enough on my planet!” Zarkon yells at Alfor. Zarkon is already a megalomaniacal dictator, no quintessence poisoning required.

Coran narrates, “Honerva continued her experiments on the rift. Despite their differences, Zarkon and Alfor, along with the other Paladins, established a new era of peace and prosperity.” Some of the blame for what has happened has to go to Alfor then. If he could have had that conversation with Honerva and Zarkon and still go along with them, then he is complicit. Also, I don’t like the writing of this narration. The way Coran goes without transition from Honerva continued her proven dangerous experiments to everyone got along and everything was great is so significantly dissonant. The juxtaposition of the two scenes also results in tonal whiplash. We literally just saw Zarkon yell about his hunger for power, and then we’re told everything was great.

Time passes. Daibazaal has been experiencing earthquakes that Alfor says are indicating the planet is fracturing. Zarkon again screams at Alfor, “I can’t stop Honerva’s work now. She’s discovering more every day.” Alfor indicates that it’s been quite some time since he last talked with Honerva, and literally the first thing out of her mouth is, “I hope you haven’t come to try to shut down my work. There’s more hidden knowledge and power in this tiny fissure than you can possibly understand.” Still, as from the beginning, they’re both power-mad.

Kova is still alive, despite significant age, due to Honerva treating him with quintessence. “Quintessence is so much more than you can understand,” Honerva says. That’s in part because the writers of this show never actually define the parameters of quintessence, so it becomes whatever they want it to be in any given moment.

Alfor tells her that she’s gone too far, and she reacts strongly, “You’ve always been a coward. You wish to close off our gateway to enlightenment. We should be expanding it.” Zarkon wants to use Voltron to enlarge the opening to the rift.

“It’s madness. This prolonged exposure to quintessence has poisoned your minds,” Alfor says. Again, if quintessence is life energy, then how does it poison? Maybe Alfor is supposed to be irrational right now and desperately looking for an excuse for their behavior, but Zarkon and Honerva’s behavior is not coming out of nowhere. The qualities of personality that are resulting in this behavior are their natural qualities that they have demonstrated from the beginning of this episode. The only time that the personalities they’re showing right now weren’t the same as how they’ve been depicted in the rest of the episode was when Zarkon was freaked out by the cat and when Zarkon was nervous out of being attracted to Honerva.

Alfor walks way. Zarkon yells, “I lead the Paladins. I command you.” He’s always been a dictator. The Galra form of governance has always been an empire, after all. It’s not like Zarkon accidentally or tragically slipped into becoming emperor.

Honerva passes out. I literally do not care. If a character is going to faint in a story, that change in state of consciousness should produce an emotional response for the reader/viewer. The story has created literally zero sympathy for Honerva, so I don’t care about her wellbeing. Her character was not written to make us care about her. It seems more that the writers assumed that we automatically would care about her without them having to write her in a way to get us to care.

“Quintessence is life,” Honerva rambles while in bed. If the show had left quintessence as just some energy and not tried to say that it’s life, maybe it wouldn’t bother me so much. But as I’ve said so many times: How would life energy cause something like this to happen to a person?

“Alfor tried to warn me, but I would not listen,” Zarkon says. He asks the Paladins to help him close the rift. It’s obvious that he’s deceiving them.

“Honerva told me the only way to close the rift is to use the power of the quintessence. We must make the opening bigger first to gather the power,” Zarkon tells them as they stand in Voltron over the rift. No one finds his statement suspicious. He is literally saying the exact same thing he did that made Alfor walk out on him before. Make the rift bigger. More quintessence. Alfor goes right along with it this time, telling them how to make the rift bigger. This isn’t just Alfor trusting a friend who was deceiving him. Zarkon’s not really deceiving Alfor at this point. What Alfor previously said no to doing, he’s now going to do.

Somehow, Voltron goes from stabbing the ground to floating in endless light. They’re in the rift now. Zarkon has left the Black Lion and he’s holding Honerva. It’s not really a form of betrayal at this point. Maybe there’s a bit of Zarkon’s behavior that’s love for Honerva, but it seems far more likely given how he’s talked this whole episode that Zarkon’s more interested in what power he can gain from Honerva’s research of quintessence.

The rift creatures come swarming toward them, engulfing them. Honerva and Zarkon scream. Zarkon’s eyes glow purple. Voltron grabs Honerva and Zarkon and they fire their thrusters to leave (I don’t know how they know what direction to go to get out since everything looks the same regardless of which direction you look).

Coran narrates, “Zarkon’s attempt to save Honerva was in vain. They both succumbed to overexposure to quintessence. The Paladins had been deceived by Zarkon. They had unwittingly enlarged the rift, which further destabilized planet Daibazaal.” Are you kidding me? They were deceived? They were unwitting? Alfor, Gyrgan, Trigel, and Blaytz must be terrible leaders to have been incapable of understanding that when Zarkon told them to enlarge the rift that that would mean that they would be enlarging the rift. And Alfor is especially bad since he had already said no to the idea of enlarging the rift.

Coran says that Alfor evacuated Daibazaal. How? Alfor is not a member of the Galra government, literally what power does he have to order a planetary evacuation? Alfor also blew up Daibazaal. Again, he’s not a member of the Galra government. How would any of them let him make the decisions for them? This is not realistic.

Alfor then holds a huge funeral for Zarkon and Honerva. Surprise (of course it’s no surprise whatsoever), they’re not dead. Do the writers honestly think it’s dramatic to pretend they were dead? Why wouldn’t the Galra conduct the funeral? Why is this episode acting like Zarkon is the only Galra in the universe? Despite the funeral Alfor conducts, Zarkon and Honerva’s bodies are on a Galra ship. They come to and have glowing eyes.

Zarkon starts a transmission, “My fellow Galra. King Alfor of Altea has destroyed our planet.” Considering all the Galra evacuated Daibazaal and let him blow up the planet, they already know that. If they don’t know, then Alfor would have been acting without the Galra government’s permission. Are we to think that Alfor hid his destroying the planet from all the Galra except for the one who told Zarkon?

This is one of the multitudinous problems with the writing of this episode. These major events of the evacuation and destruction of Daibazaal are glossed over with very little thought. No thought was paid to what the governmental structure of the Galra Empire is like. The writers exclusively invested the entirety of the government in Zarkon because it’s cheap, easy writing. Realistically, even if they are an empire, there are still contingency plans for a continuity of governance should something happen to Zarkon. Even with Zarkon as the emperor, there are other people who would be responsible for various functions of the government.

Coran continues to narrate, “Zarkon had become pure evil.” How do the writers expect me to think of Zarkon and Honerva/Haggar as anything other than boring, cartoonish villains when they write phrases like “pure evil” to describe them? Coran says Zarkon was “obsessed only with quintessence.” So then, nothing has changed for him. Out of wanting to open a new rift, Zarkon needed Voltron, and went to war to try to get it. “The Galra immediately responded to their leader and attacked.” But they were completely non-present in decision making about their own world before then and somehow oblivious to what was going on?

“The peaceful planets of our system were not prepared, but soon they had all fallen except for Altea.” So, all the planets had poorly run militaries? And there were multiple planets that were inhabited, and they couldn’t unite against one culture who no longer had the stability of a home base? Alfor separated and sent the Lions away. Zarkon killed Alfor then blew up Altea. The Galra, who had been evacuated from their planet and no longer had a home base still had the capacity to blow up a planet? It’s so hard to believe any of this.

Back to now. Pidge says, “So that’s Lotor’s plan: Cross into other universes and get the purest quintessence possible.” Slightly too far there, Pidge: They didn’t get quintessence from another universe, they got it from the rift. Also, that is a major assumption. Just because the story of the creation of Voltron was all about quintessence doesn’t mean that that’s what Lotor is trying to get. He could actually be trying to get something or someone from another universe, not from the rift. Or he could just want a weapon to match Voltron. This show writes characters to take major leaps in logic to arrive at conclusions mostly just because those are the conclusions that the writers are writing toward, not because it makes sense for a character to make such conclusions.

Back to Haggar. “Husband, how could I have forgotten?” Mostly because the writers just decided to make you forget because they thought it would be interesting or dramatic or something. The episode ends with Zarkon opening his eyes.

For an episode that is supposed to explain and advance understanding of the antagonists’ motivations, I don’t end this with any new perspective on these characters beyond knowing that their personalities have always been that of power-mad dictators. It’s just that now the narrative wants to absolve them of their behavior by saying everything they’ve done for the past 10,000 years is because of quintessence poisoning. I guess the episode thought it was creating sympathy for the antagonists, but I don’t sympathize with them whatsoever.

#voltron legendary defender #voltron #vld #voltron criticism #vld criticism #voltron critical #vld critical #vld season 3 #vld 3x07 #commentary

15 notes · View notes

echthr0s · 5 years

Text

been reading A History of God with varying enthusiasm (as befitting long nonfiction books) and observing this author’s interpretation of the birth and growth of the Big Three religions unexpectedly made me confirm how I relate to theism in general

because throughout the book she details the various ideological differences that formative people in these religions have had, and as time went on the differences really became obvious as all being of the “objective/rational concept of God vs subjective/personal concept of God” variety. and you know those moments when you catch yourself nodding a little to stuff you’re reading? I always found myself nodding the most when reading subjective-god arguments.

(cut because unexpectedly long post)

a few months ago I read a lot of Captain Cassidy’s Roll to Disbelieve blog, and the reason I stopped reading it was, well, first of all nothing about the disgraces of modern Christianity really surprises me anymore and continuing to read a blog focused on that felt unnecessarily voyeuristic and mean-spirited, I guess? but also because Cas’ approach was of the scientific variety. and while she does explain that she debunks Christian beliefs from a scientific perspective because the Christians she’s arguing with tend to take the Bible literally, and that’s a perfectly reasonable approach to use, it just doesn’t do anything for me personally. I don’t understand why either an atheist or a Christian would approach the Bible literally, because it’s a work of mythology, and all arguments from rationality are obviously going to fall flat. the atheists would “win”, because they’re right about the Bible being basically fiction, but like... is that really a win? seems more like a “duh”.

but in my view, that’s missing the entire point. religion and spirituality aren’t necessarily required to be scientific disciplines. you can obviously make your religion/spiritual pursuit anything you want, including scientific, but that’s not an inherent property of the thing. I think there’s a bit of misinterpretation when people say “humans invented religion to explain the natural world”, because modern people assume that explaining the natural world automatically must come from a scientific perspective. but these explanations weren’t meant to be factual, they were just meant to give meaning and order to the otherwise frightening and orderless universe. these were stories told in order to help humans understand the inhuman. they were also meant to inject wonder and awe into mundane happenings, and add levity to the heavy or gravity to the weightless.

and a god could be a personal experience, or a cultural experience. a god mattered to you for very specific reasons (whether mundane or transcendent), and your understanding of the god could be based upon who you are.

and yes, I know we don’t really think like this anymore as a species -- now we value conclusions drawn from science more than any other kind of explanation, and so religion has lost favour primarily because it refuses to be wrangled into scientific terms. and now we flat-out call people “stupid” and “childish” for believing in something they can’t objectively explain. (and how is that in any way okay? how can we do this and feel good about ourselves afterwards? but that’s a different post.)

but being an atheist never agreed with me. and I don’t think that’s because I’m “stupid” or “childish” and can’t accept the “harsh truth of reality” (????). I think it’s because attempting to shove all of human experience into a box of objectivity was an extremely dissonant act. there is literally no way I cannot hold a mythic view of the universe and a scientific view of the universe at the same time. they’re not competing! when a scientific explanation will do, I use it. when it dissatisfies me, I switch gears.

yes, Wednesday very well be a part of the Self that I’m shaping into something external from me so I can work something out in my subconscious. ...so? he’s also just Wednesday. and both of those things are True. one does not negate the other.

that applies to several things -- my relationship to gender, for example, or my multiplicity. there could be perfectly sound and well-researched neurological theories for those things. there probably are, right now. I’ve probably even read them, and comprehend them just fine.

but that doesn’t mean my subjective experience of those things is suddenly unTrue. it’s mine, and I’m allowed to have it. you couldn’t take it from me without me letting you. and I won’t let anyone make their subjective experience more important than my own. they are all equally important (or equally unimportant, depending on your approach). and the best scientists and the best religious leaders are the ones that understand this.

ain’t shit real, anyway. why even bother arguing with people when we are all figments of our own imaginations lmfao

#about singularity #singularity.txt

4 notes · View notes

novarasalas · 6 years

Text

Second Look Review: ‘A Little Adventure’

And here begins a review series of Voltron’s season 7, written up as i re-watch it. This is equal parts as a writing exercise and as me just wanting to share my thoughts and observations.

I’ll try to go light on meta and theories, sticking to just the facts, ma’am.

Well, that’s what I intended to happen, but this episode was very personal from the start, what with all the Shiro backstory.

So join me for this two-part review, where I switch on the projection machine and smash the overshare button.

Part 1: Laugh So You Don’t Cry

Let’s start with the easy stuff, yeah?

It features Coran, finally going full Thornberry:

...truly gorgeous.

We also have this amazing pair here:

And, most unexpectedly, a demonstration of yalmors linking at the ears, something we haven’t heard about since season 1:

I don’t have much else to say about this part. I would, however, like to formally request a spin off of Hunk and Romelle being so, so done with everything.

Part 2: The Meeting

So hey! It’s that back story everyone’s been screaming for, and boy, does this episode deliver. I really wish it had been solely dedicated to that story, though. I’m not a fan of the high drama/humorous aside splits they keep giving us. I know they do that to keep things interesting, cause hey, rated TV-Y7, right? But I always come out the other side of it feeling like I have emotional whiplash.

First, look at this:

Thank you.

So Shiro’s a bit of a celebrity? That’s pretty cool. I’m impressed.

Too bad Keith isn’t.

He’s even in the classic “anime protagonist seat”. Oh, Keith.

The subtitles here say: Shiro broke the record for the fastest orbital velocity, beating the old heliocentric speed by about 50 kilometers per second.

I’m a big damn nerd, so you know I had to look this up. Here’s what I found:

In 2018 though, a new NASA mission - Solar Probe Plus - will be launched. Designed to come as close as 8.5 solar radii to the Sun (that’s about about 5.9 million kilometers or 3.7 million miles), it will hit orbital velocities as high as 200 kilometers a second (450,000 miles an hour).

To just put that incredible figure into perspective - going this fast would get you from the Earth to the Moon in about ½ an hour. It is also about 0.067% the speed of light. (source: Scientific American -”The Fastest Spacecraft Ever?”)

I have no idea if they’re counting his record against something like that, or manned flight, for which the record is 107,000 km/h. That’s uh..that’s us. On Earth. We haven’t sent people into independent solar orbit yet.

Also, one day I’ll learn how to post links without breaking the tags, cause my source article was very interesting. Please go find it.

And now we have the simulator. We get that call back to “Taking Flight”, which I found to be a nice touch.

Keith, you’re the only one who could possibly fly through this.

And then Keith steals Shiro’s car and his heart, wasting no time in attempting to push him away. And he doesn’t just keep it between the two of them; Keith’s got a lot of misguided anger to share.

Nothing will endear you to your new classmates faster than signing the whole group up for a collective punishment.

But lessons are learned and everyone calms down.

..oh. Whoops.

Yes, the good ol’ collective punishment: let the jerkass’ peers sort them out. And maybe it would have worked in this case, except for the fact that Keith respects exactly no one.

When this episode first aired, I was seeing yelling about James being a bully, but to be honest, this is more of a case of two shithead kids being shitheads to each other. Keith doesn’t care how his actions affect others, and James reacted by going for a low blow about Keith’s parents.

I suppose they sorted each other out in the end, didn’t they?

So here’s Keith, the angry, lost kid, acting out in desperation and loneliness, and Shiro, who we now see risking his own good name to help him.

Why would he do that?

Now, a lot of what I come up with in the next part is my interpretation of Shiro based on my own experiences, because that’s all I have to go on. My one big gripe about this is that we don’t see Shiro until he’s a young adult. What was he like growing up? Does he try to help Keith because he’s a sweet guy, or does he relate to him in some way?

We may never really know. For my own purposes, I’m going to assume that it’s more of the latter.

Let’s look back at this interaction:

Shiro: “That’s the Calypso, the first ship to carry astronauts to the moons of Jupiter.”

Keith: “It took them three years to get there. Longest voyage of its kind.”

Shiro: “That’s right. Reading about that mission is what made me wanna be a pilot. Those astronauts braved the unknown.”

Nerd break:

The Juno probe made it to Jupiter in 5 years, arriving in 2015.

Right now it takes 9.5 years to get to Pluto

/nerd

Keith knows about the Calypso. You might think that the tiny, emo kid doesn’t seem the type to be into nerd stuff, right?

But I get it.

I didn’t have the best time growing up, and we know that after the death of his father, neither did Keith. I had one big obsession that got me through the badness: space. Sorry, two: space and dinosaurs. And giant mech shows. Er...three big obsessions.

But space was the biggest and realest. The 90s were an exciting time for space exploration, with the Voyager probes finishing up their grand tours, the ISS being built, and the first rovers being sent to Mars. It felt good. It felt hopeful.

And I think maybe Keith may have felt the same about space. After all, space was a big unknown. By nature, it couldn’t be good or bad, right? Not like home.

Or maybe it’s because he’s half Galra and always knew that he wasn’t fully of Earth. Or maybe it was both.

I can imagine that Shiro may have thrown himself into space for similar reasons. Because you know what really sucks having deal with growing up? Chronic Illness.

Part 3: Invisible

We come to realize, right along with Keith, that Shiro is sick.

When I’d first heard about this, I was both saddened and ecstatic. It’s not often that I get to relate in any way to a strong, capable, wonderful fictional character. ‘Cool!’, I thought to myself, ‘He’s a sicko like me.’ Immediately, my next thought was ‘Damn, he’s a sicko like me…’

Then a few things about his character began to fall into place.

I think we all noticed Shiro pushing Keith into the place of leadership via the phrase “If anything ever happens to me...”. And Shiro being chronically ill explains that. I’d been wondering for a while about what Shiro’s deal could be. Why did he think something was going to happen to him? Was is just planning for every eventuality, or was it something else?

Shiro’s a great leader, so it was probably both. But him being ill puts a new perspective on things.

When you’re chronically ill, you have to think about things a lot more than other people. You have to plan heavily for ‘what ifs’, and you had better be prepared.

Back in July, a friend and I took a trip to a con. This had been the first trip I’ve been on in years since I’ve been so damn sick. The preparation alone was exhausting. I had to make sure I had everything with me, and backups of everything just in case something happened. I had to make sure my meds and supplies were in reach if I needed them right away, but I also had to make sure that they were cool and out of the summer sun, because if they got too hot, they’d stop working.

The con was six hours away from home, and if I had needed replacements of these things, I would have to make soooo many phone calls and likely beg for help.

I had to have a conversation with my friend about what to do in case I had “an incident”. It’s humiliating; I’m a grown ass adult that has to preemptively ask people for help. Even though she’s my best friend, and I trust her so very much, it sucks.

In the end, everything was fine, but only because of careful planning. I can’t tell you how much I miss the days of just being able to go, to do, to not have to think about everything that could go wrong and possibly kill me.

So what I’m really saying here is that Shiro most likely has a lot of experience planning for eventualities. He’s also swallowed enough of his pride to discuss these things with Keith by the time the main story begins. And note: it’s only Keith he shares these things with, not the others. I don’t share these things with people who aren’t very, very close to me either.

Well, present company excluded, of course.

And here’s the part that I go projecting onto Shiro again, but as I said previously, until they give more backstory, it’s all I have to go on.

So, what about Shiro’s family?

That’s something that’s been talked about in the fan space for a while, too. Is he an orphan? Did they disown him? Unfortunately, the flashbacks we get don’t go back that far. All I have to go on to answer that are my own experiences, which are not good.

My heart swells every time I see someone talk about how their family supports them as they deal with their illnesses. How good it is that they have love and stability to help them through.

I don’t have that. I never did. My home life sucked before I got sick, and illness certainly didn’t help. I can say with certainty that if I had spent years in space out of contact with them, I wouldn’t be too broken up about it. There’d have been no video messages home, is what I’m saying.

I could see Shiro at this point in the flashbacks, gifted and celebrated, throwing himself at everything he could, working hard to prove that he’s worth something, proving that you’re not a lost cause just because you’re sick. I found myself wanting to prove things, too, taking on tasks and making plans and trying to show the world that I’m still useful, that I’m not lazy. See? I didn’t cause my own illness in an attempt to get out of responsibilities.

You’ll still get rejected, though.

So you learn to hide your illness from people that don’t need to know about it.

Shiro may have been like Keith: a lost, angry kid, pushing people away before they can make the decision to leave. It’s a difficult thing to grow up and only see disappointment in the eyes of the people who are supposed to be there for you. Again and again, they let you know in so many ways that you’re difficult to deal with, that somehow you’re a burden on them.

I can’t know for sure about Shiro, but I know that this is the truth for Keith. I completely understand why Keith would end up so attached to Shiro, the only person who was actually putting in a real effort to help him. I wish I’d had my own Shiro, ya know?

I can’t be all doom and gloom about this, though. I still like that one idea that Shiro was raised by his grandparents. I like to think that it was a happier time for him, as my time spent with my own grandparents was for me.

Of course, I could be completely wrong about all of this, and projecting way too much of my own problems onto him. For the sake of any alternate realities where Shiro is a real person, I hope that I am.

Next up: Part 2 - relationships are hard -and- an appeal to societies greater sensibilities.

#second look review #shiro #vld shiro #keith #vld s7 #vld #voltron #voltron s7 #meta #long post #such a long post #i'm so sorry #but that's why the read more #i swear the others won't be like this.#vld keith

6 notes · View notes

drdumaurier · 6 years

Note

What’s your stance on Bedelia’s mental health and how do you explain some of the morally ambiguous things she did? How did you settle on the way you want to interpret and express her mental state? I’ve seen her being interpreted as a psychopath, do you support this diagnosis, and if not, why so? Do you find it challenging writing a character with such a complex emotional inner life? P.S., I love your blog. :)

Quick note before you start reading: This is the longest headcanon I’ve ever written and I’m sorry it became so long, but it’s the result of putting a lot of headcanons and thoughts together. As my wife so perfectly put it when she read it and saw that I mentioned I could probably go on “oh God no you would crash tumblr's word limit”. Also I say it a few times in the text, but this is only from my personal interpretation of her character. Now if you’re up for the challenge, have fun reading it!

First, I’d like to say that everyone sees Bedelia differently and it’s not a question to debate. I know from where you come from with your question, so what I’m going to say is that my interpretation is how I see her and everyone is free to see her the way they want. Furthermore, I’m not a therapist and while I’ve been doing quite extensive research in psychiatry for my own interest, I’m not making any diagnosis because it’s not my place. Everything that will be expressed in this answer is from personal research and personal opinions, so it’s not “the truth”. Now, in my interpretation, Bedelia is not a psychopath and for numerous reasons. I’m not going to make a full list of all my arguments because it would become too long. First of all, it’s difficult to define psychopathy as it doesn’t express itself exactly the same way depending from one individual to another. Also in the International Classification of Diseases (ICD) maintained by the World Health Organisation, psychopathic personality disorder is included in the antisocial personality disorder as well as: amoral personality disorder, asocial personality disorder, dissocial personality disorder, and sociopathic personality disorder. So there is no clear definition, but from the “list of common symptoms” I found, only few apply or only partially. To take some examples with how I see them applying or not to Bedelia:

Extensive callous and manipulative self-serving behaviours with no regard for others: No. While she has a tendency to manipulate people to get out of situations, it’s self-preservation and it’s not callous. There’s a difference between manipulating people to achieve higher goals and only self-preservation. It could be debatable when she was a teenager and dated older guys who could buy her alcohol, but there were real feelings involved.

Pathological lying: She mentioned that she told “half-truths” and once again only to protect herself. She isn’t a pathological liar, but she does lie sometimes to protect herself.

Little reaction to fear: It’s more than obvious than she feels fears and shows it. It has been observed that psychopath don’t show much reaction to fear which isn’t the case with her as seen multiple times through the series.

Impairments in processes related to affect and cognition: There are two types of empathies, cognitive and affective. The first one is the ability to recognise emotions in the other by observing them which is the one psychopaths usually have. They’re able to see that someone is afraid or happy, but nearly in a scientific way. It’s what they can use to manipulate people. In Bedelia’s case, she feels both. Her empathy isn’t only based on observing people. Yes, she does it quite a lot because of her work as some people hides a lot and analysing facial expressions, for example, helps, but she’s able to feel empathy even if she’s not very empathetic. Like in real life, some people have just less empathy than others, it doesn’t make them psychopath. Also some people feel empathy towards people they know/are close to (like Bedelia), but less when it’s strangers. Her empathy and compassion is simply selective like some people.

Objectisation of the other: No. She truly cares about some people and she will never consider them as objects she can use. There are cases in which she feels that it’s her only way to protect herself, but she doesn’t use them as objects. Also if she cares about someone, she will never do it. To take Dimmond’s example, she told him to go to the police (deleted scene, but from the script “Unless you believe you are beyond harm, go to the police.”

Unwillingness to accept responsibility for actions: She knows what she did and she takes responsibility. In Tome-Wan, once she’s certain to be safe from prosecution, she says “I killed him” talking about her patient. She knows what she did and takes responsibility.

Tendency to boredom and need for stimulation: It is true that she went to Europe with Hannibal, but her life before tended to be calm without too much simulation. She retired and other than him, not much was happening. She doesn’t seek constant simulation even if she’s still active in the psychiatric field.

Impulsivity and irresponsibility: She’s always careful with the situation she’s in. Yes, she can be reckless, but only to a certain point and she most of the time planned a way out as seen in Florence. She doesn’t simply run into danger without thinking about it. One time she made an impulsive decision was when she tried to run away in Florence, but that was a reaction caused by fear. She felt threatened and tried to flee like a lot of people do when facing danger.

In conclusion, no I don’t see my interpretation of her as a psychopath for those reasons and more. If you want to know more about psychopaths and understand French, this video from two therapists is extremely interesting (English subtitles might come soon).

Now to how I see her mental health and the morally ambiguous things she did. In …And the Woman Clothed in Sun, we learn about her patient’s death, but also that she has a primal rejection of weakness before she adds that it’s as natural as the nurturing instinct. It’s that instinct that took over when Neil was shocking on his tongue. In the script we have a part about her looking at him in disgust and then that it was a mercy killing. While it is debatable it was mercy, she still killed a patient, she still has that instinct that Hannibal knew about and he used it to see how she would react (given that it’s obvious with the light therapy that Neil was used in that goal). Not everyone has a strong nurturing instinct, in Bedelia’s case, it’s not her main instinct. It’s natural, if you hit an animal on the road, there will usually always be one person who’ll want to save it and another who’ll want to end its suffering. For her and with the backstory, the reason she has a rejection of weakness comes from both nature and nurture. As I wrote in other posts, Bedelia grew up with a lot of expectations from her parents because she was a good student and generally working hard to reach her goals. Very early on, she developed a fear of failure which combined with an already existing rejection of weakness made her as she is today. I’d like to say that as a child, she wasn’t already thinking about crushing wounded birds as she mentioned to Will, but she would stay away from people that she knew would bring her down. She made choices mostly based on what was best for her, it was both selfish and due to her fear of disappointing her parents, but there has always been one exception and that is people she cares about/love. Of course when she was young, she wasn’t the kind of child to not help at all if she didn’t care about the other child, but she still put her close friends first. During her time in high school and university, she has a period during which she would find ways to relax and be self-destructive because of that fear of failing and only worsened the whole thing. To come back to present days Bedelia, she still has that fear, it’s anchored in her her chore, and her rejection of weakness also comes from the fact that if she could go through things, then other should too, but she fights against that first instinct to still be able to help her patients and as per usual, the exception is people she cares about/loves. The only times she “lost” the fight against her rejection of weakness was when she killed a patient about to die anyway (her first mercy killing), when Neil swallowed his tongue, and also when Sogliato had the ice pick in his head and she removed it (he was dying, she simply made it happen faster). Also it’s important to not that she rejects her own weaknesses and hates to be vulnerable/seen as vulnerable because she has always had to be perfect as her mind has kept repeating her since she was perhaps 6-7 years old. So she has a rejection of weakness that is pretty strong, but it doesn’t reach the point where she would simply believe everyone under her is pitiful and needs to be crushed, simply that when things reach a certain point, she will reject them. Her first patient was about to die anyway, she just decided to end their suffering faster. Her second patient swallowed his tongue and bit it so hard that it wasn’t attached anymore and he was dying most of the time (he was killed the moment he could breathe again, but who knows in which state he would have been). Furthermore, his behaviour was pretty threatening, so fear is to be included in the mix, and also it’s obvious at the end that she realises what she has done and how awful she feels. From the script: “Bedelia, breathless with horror and adrenaline, turns slowly to see Hannibal lurking behind her.” She knows what she has done and she’s horrified by it. Hannibal knows that it wasn’t only self-defence, but it doesn’t make her a cold-blooded killer.

About her selfishness and level of empathy, Bedelia will put her own safety first. It doesn’t mean that she’ll throw someone under the bus to make her look better, what it means is that in situations in which her life is on the line, she’ll save her own skin (with the same exception as stated before). Also in the series, we’re shown a character with an extremely high level of empathy (Will), so compared to him, hers seem very low, but also she’s not shown in situation with other people much. Even in season 3. The interactions she has are mostly with Hannibal, Will, and a bit Neil. It’s hard to judge exactly how empathetic and selfish she is in normal situations given that none of what happened is “normal”. My view on her is that yes, she is selfish, but mostly for self-preservation, and yes, she may have a lower level of empathy than some of the characters in the series, but what happened to her explains it (from the backstory I have for her included the part with her ex-fiancé), also so would I and I don’t think I particularly lack of empathy. In my portrayal, nurture played a big part in why she acts this way.

Another important part of how I see her is the fact that she doesn’t show emotions. Bedelia hates not being in control of the situation (I’ll come back to that later) which means she needs to be in control of her emotions and it’s also related to what I wrote previously when I said that she refuses to show vulnerability, so mostly “bad” emotions. It is shown multiple times through the series that during extreme situation, her emotionless façade cracks, but most of the time, she simply keeps her emotions for herself by bottling them up. In season 1, we mostly see Bedelia in session with Hannibal and her facial expressions change depending on what happens, but it’s never obvious and when a sore subject (the patient who “attacked” her, both with Hannibal and Jack) is mentioned, she pretends that everything is perfectly alright. This is something she learned to do very young, her need to be perfect also made her start hiding negative emotions, but also extreme positive emotion. As the proper daughter of the Du Maurier, Bedelia kept being polite and avoided to show excitement for example as it was not what was expected from her. For the negative emotions (sadness or anger for example), it was because it made her vulnerable and, again, not perfect. In season 2 and 3, that’s when we see more emotions coming from her, but the negative ones are visible only under extreme situation and she struggles to maintain her composure. It’s a way to protect herself: don’t let people see your emotions and they won’t be able to use them against you. It was used against her by her ex-fiancé. It’s the same reason that prevents her from seeking help and instead cope with her issues herself (in bad ways, but at least it’s her own doing). It takes her a lot to open up about things and to feel comfortable showing more emotions. If she shows someone when she’s vulnerable, then she’s truly trusting that person. In her mind, bottling up her emotions and feelings is the way to go to protect herself and go through life. It is a bad idea, she tells her patients to not do that, but after all, doctors make the worst patients.

In relation to that, let’s talk about her anger quickly. Bedelia doesn’t show anger easily, she stays cold and composed to a certain point, then there is the part where she will raise her voice (as seen with Will), but if she’s extremely angry, then she will become cold again but in a destructive way. If someone pushes her too far, she will be colder than the zero absolute and she will attack where it hurts as a defence mechanism. There is no enjoyment in hurting the other when she’s angry, but she will do it as she feels like a trapped animal who will attack to defend itself. If she’s yelling and suddenly becoming cold again, it’s a bad sign and it’s going to be violent mentally. It’s important to know that afterwards, if she was like that towards someone she loves/cares about, she will feel awfully bad and guilty for having hurt them.

Now I’ll put two things together: her constant need of control and her self-destruction. It seems to not make sense to put them together, but there’s actually a strong link between the two. For her, when she’s in control of the situation, it means she’s safer. Giving up control for another to have it is something that terrifies her and if she does it, she trusts the other person pretty much with her life. Throughout her life, there has been moments during which she had little to no control over the course of events and it doesn’t bring back good memories. Even if it was something she did before, it was the attack of one of her patients that truly made her realise how vulnerable she is when she’s not in control. That attack also partially explains why she reacted violently towards Neil as he was threatening her. Being in control of the situation means being able to flee if needed, stay safe from harm, and not be taken by surprise.

The reason I linked it with her self-destruction is because it’s something she controls. There is no doubt that Bedelia has self-destructive tendencies by both drinking heavily and being in dangerous situation, but she is alright with it as long as it’s her choice and she’s in control. If some harm is forced onto her, she will fight to save her skin, that’s her self-preservation reaction. However, when it’s chosen, like her heavy drinking and substance abuse, she won’t fight it because it’s her own choice to destroy herself in such ways. The same goes with dying, she needs to have control over the way she dies. If she’s killed by someone and it isn’t her choice, then she will prevent it. If she’s dying because of some bad mix between alcohol and meds, then she’ll let it happen because it was her decision that caused it. Her need to be in control goes as far as her needing to decide how she’s hurt and in that case, she accepts it only if it’s caused by herself/her own decision.

Also I can add her trust issues to the mix. Bedelia doesn’t trust easily at all and breaking it means that there is no way to gain it back. Due to bad experiences with people (see the links to headcanons above), she keeps her distance with everyone, making it extremely hard for them to show her that they’re trustworthy and, even if they do succeed, there will still be a time during which she will have her doubts about it. It’s linked to her need to be in control because trusting someone and opening herself up to them means giving them power over her which is something huge for her. When she trusts someone, she trusts them with her life. So rare are the ones she trusts and rarer are the selected few who know about the truth of some events of her past. She’s protecting herself, but it also means that she’s letting her emotions devour her from inside because she doesn’t share. This headcanon talks more about her trust issues and also how she loves.

Concerning the mental health issues she has, they’re more or less present depending on which period of her life it is and I’ll explain how and why. They’re mostly taken from that post:

Alcoholism and substance abuse: Bedelia has struggled with alcohol abuse since she was a teenager as for substance abuse, she tried things during university and later she started self-medicating.

Anxiety: While she hides it extremely well, Bedelia has an anxiety disorder that can sometimes interfere with what she’s currently doing. She self-medicates to avoid it.

Cynicism: Even if she’ll never be obvious about it, it’s something that has an influence on her decisions.

Defensiveness: Due to her fear of failing and not being good enough, she will be defensive against some comments even if once again, it’s not the most obvious.

Depersonalisation: It tends to happen during emotionally intense moment.

Depression: It depends on the period of her life as it’s not something constant, but the most obvious time it happened was after her miscarriage.

Derealisation: Same as for depersonalisation.

Dissociation: See above.

Emotional detachment: See above.

Flashbacks: Due to the traumatic events that took place in her life, she has recurrent memories that come back in the form of flashbacks.

Flat affect: It isn’t something that always happens, but it can occur when she’s struggling with emotions and becomes emotionless.

Guilt: This occurred particularly after the deaths of her patients, her attack, her miscarriage, and later with Hannibal. It’s also linked to the fact that she’s terrified of failing and feels that she wasn’t good enough.

Hyper-vigilance: Especially during and after Europe, Bedelia will react to any little sound of movement that isn’t “normal.” It prevents her from relaxing and resting properly.

Insomnia: Linked to the answer above, but she has always struggled with insomnia. She doesn’t sleep much in general, but there are periods during which it becomes all too obvious she has insomnia even if she found ways to hide it and be functional with little to no sleep at night.

Intellectualisation: A way she has to cope with situations and avoid facing her feelings.

Isolation: It is seen throughout the series, but also in headcanons I wrote that she keeps herself away from the world, especially after Neil’s death as she barely leaves her house (I think it was supposed to be in the series at the very beginning, but I cannot find articles about it, possibly because it has been five years).

Night terrors and nightmares: Both because of traumatic events, it’s also one of the reasons Bedelia doesn’t sleep as she’s terrified of having any of them and then struggle with the consequences. It’s especially true when she sleeps with someone (rare, but it happens) because she doesn’t want them to witness her having nightmares or night terrors, so it isn’t rare at first that she won’t sleep or only barely to avoid it.

Panic attacks: Linked to her anxiety disorder and her PTSD. If she has one, she’ll withdraw somewhere she can be alone to not let anyone witness it.

Passive aggression: This is how she tends to react when attacked or when she reaches her limits. She is more one to become cold and passive aggressive when angry than to yell.

Phobias: Other than her fear of failure and to not be good enough, Bedelia avoid huge crowd and loud noises. Given that she sometimes doesn’t exactly have a choice, she will find a way to navigate in crowds by either numbing herself or if she has someone close with her, to stay physically close to that person. For loud noises, if they are planned (fireworks), she will prepare herself, otherwise she will jump and often panic.

Rationalisation: This is how she explained the death of her first patient and then of Neil’s to cope with them, a way to accept what she did, but in the end those events still haunt her and she struggles with the memories.

Risky sex: While quite rare, she still sometimes uses sex as a mean of self-destruction. It happens that she makes a conscious choice of choosing partners she knows are not good for her and then has to deal with the consequences which worsen her general state.

Suicidal idealisation: It depends on the period of her life, but there were moments during which Bedelia contemplated the idea without never fully doing it. However, her constant self-destruction is leading towards it.

Suppression: She keeps everything in as mentioned earlier, but of course it doesn’t work properly and emotions will eventually come back when she lets her guard down.

Thousand yard stare: Caused by the traumas she went through and by seeing horrifying things. It’s the most obvious when she’s completely dissociating.

Triggers: Bedelia has become quite good at avoiding them over the years, but there will always be things that will trigger flashbacks or reactions and given her reluctance to seek help, it stays an issue she struggles to cope with.

Trust issues: As mentioned earlier, Bedelia has a hard time trusting people, but also when she trusts, she fully trusts the person.

Now a big part of how I see her is that she has PTSD. I keep it for the end because I wanted to comment the list first as it contains a lot of things related to it. The first even that was enough to cause it was the attack of her patient during her residency. It was something traumatising and that left her scarred both mentally and physically (the scar is still visible on her neck many years later). Then she ended the life of a patient who was already dying, her first mercy killing. While it was a choice, it wasn’t nothing. Someone died because she decided so. Later, her miscarriage and failed engagement also added to it as it became more and more clear that her ex-fiancé acted awfully towards her. At that point in her life, Bedelia has already gone through many things and her symptoms are present, but she hides them and while she sees a therapist (as therapists have to do), she obviously doesn’t share everything. Fast forward to Neil’s death which awoke her past traumas again after she had more or less successfully silenced them and bottled them up. The symptoms are pretty tame, at least until she comes back from Europe, and then it’s even worse after the loss of her leg. Those are the two times during which she struggles the most with her PTSD, but she handles it her own way and still refuses to seek help and therapy. It doesn’t help that the official story is that she was drugged up during her time with Hannibal because even if she had to talk to a therapist to help her recover (???) her memory, she couldn’t be entirely honest. This is when her alcohol and substance abuse is the worst as well as her self-destruction.

I realise that one thing I haven’t talked about yet is her curiosity. Bedelia is a curious person when she wants to understand something like in the case of Hannibal, but she has her limit. At first she keeps him as a patient until she realises that he’s dangerous and decides to leave (season 2). Then when she’s in Europe with him, there is also a point after which she attempts to get the authorities’ attention by always shopping at the same place, sitting at a train station and staring at the camera, and asking Dimmond to help her (script). It’s also important to note that she tries to leave at some point, but Hannibal catches her before she could leave their flat, and that she has an alibi ready for when they were going to catch Hannibal (which comes back to her self-preservation). Her curiosity has its limits and even if it’s interesting to see more, her need for safety and to be in control eventually take over.

I could probably go on with each and every issues she has ever had, but I think I went through the most important even if I already mentioned some in other headcanons. So now how I settled on the way I want to interpret and express her mental state, it’s actually something that came with time. I’ve been writing this problematic lady for 5 years now so I developed her over those years by watching her scenes many, many times, reading the scripts, reading interviews, and also by creating a backstory for her that made sense for how I see her. It was, and still is given that she’ll always be a work in progress, a work of both analysis and research. Bedelia is a complicated and mysterious character, so I had to make choices that seemed fitting for how I see her and there were things I believed in the past that I don’t anymore as we got more material with season 3. Honestly settling on her mental state and how to express it has always been analysing her scenes, putting them in relations with each other and her past, making research, and then making a decision. I’d also like to add that her backstory is entirely my own creation and I made it in a way that is both fitting her character and also explains some of her behaviours, but as said at the very beginning of this post, it’s my interpretation of Bedelia and not “the truth”. Furthermore, while her mental state changes depending on the period of her life, it also changes depending on the verses. In some AU, she can be more violent and vengeful, but it’s only strong a reaction to what happened to her and it comes from issues she already has (like PTSD) that became more intense.

So is it challenging to write Bedelia? Hell yes. It’s all about details and keeping her reactions logical even if they seem illogical. An example is how she plans things carefully, but sometimes still acts recklessly. It seems illogical, but given her traumas and survival instinct or her curiosity, it makes sense for her. For the details, it’s always about noticing the small reactions and finding out what they mean. Her body language is extremely important to know how she feels in certain situations (even if my interpretation of a scene is not the same as other people’s and it’s normal). What I really try to do when writing Bedelia is to give small hints about how she feels through her body language and describing how she feels even if it’s barely visible for the person facing her. As for writing her traumas or morally ambiguous actions, it isn’t the easiest thing, so it takes work. Of course I can rely on personal experiences and real life to do it, but it also forces me to look further than just “oh yeah she killed people”. Writing a morally grey character is challenging, but I absolutely adore doing it and I adore Bedelia. I wouldn’t have continued to write her for so long otherwise. It’s a constant challenge, but it’s worth it.

In conclusion (yes the real one), this became way too long and I hope it answered your questions, anon. Thank you so much for sending this, it was really interesting to go further in own I see her mental health and I hope you had the courage to read all of it. And thank you for your kind words

#Anonymous #;They send me greeting cards [ask]#;I've had to draw a conclusion [headcanon]#long post #(like VERY long post)#(more than 4'500 words long kind of post)#(but hey now you have how I see Bedelia)#(with details)#(even if it's not everything)#(because it would have become even longer otherwise <.<)

25 notes · View notes

bloodfromtherock-blog · 6 years

Text

KAVANAUGH & THE CORONATED CREEPS

Daniel Hutchens October 10, 2018

"It would be naive to depend on the Supreme Court to defend the rights of poor people, women, people of color, dissenters of all kinds. Those rights only come alive when citizens organize, protest, demonstrate, strike, boycott, rebel, and violate the law in order to uphold justice." -Howard Zinn **********************************************

Kavanaugh repeatedly lied to the US Senate under oath during his job interview for Justice of the Supreme Court. These lies have been well-documented at this point, and aren’t even being contested; the essence of the reply from the Republican oligarchy is, “It doesn’t matter.”

And American women at this point have been demoted to second-class citizens by the Trump administration. This is clearly observable. Trump’s attacks on women are relentless; his push toward more restrictive policies on contraception and abortion, his rollback of gender equality pay laws, removal of paycheck transparency, forced arbitration clauses for sexual harassment, sexual assault or discrimination claims...for me, as the father of an 11 year old daughter, this is all a sinister slap in the face. But more to the point, Kavanaugh’s appointment to the Supreme Court now puts Trumpsters firmly in control of the move to strike down Roe v. Wade. Understand this clearly: female American citizens are considered nothing more than property by the Old Boys Club, and women’s voices regarding reproductive rights and their own bodies are considered irrelevant. In Trump’s eyes, women are cattle to be branded and used as deemed appropriate.

Kavanaugh is staunchly anti-abortion and has no intent of ruling objectively on this issue. When Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, shadily swung her support to Kavanaugh during the hearings, she apparently felt compelled to grandstand dishonestly for the cameras, maybe in deference to the power of the #MeToo movement, considering her stature as a female Senator. Her behavior reeks of a back room deal, after her previous assertions that if Kavanaugh lied he should be disqualified. She helped Republicans by putting a woman’s face on their warped campaign to shame and discredit survivors of sexual assault, thereby aiding Trump’s shitty backlash against #MeToo, and his brain dead catch phrase, “It’s a very scary time for young men in America.” #MeToo is so powerful that people like Susan Collins have to pretend to support it. She said that Kavanaugh would preserve Roe v Wade and legal abortion. Bullshit. “Operation Rescue,” a group working since the ‘80s to “make America abortion free,” and the rest of the extremist anti-woman crowd have all supported Kavanaugh’s nomination right down the line.

The looming abortion showdown is grim news for American women and those who care about them, alright. The notion that there’s some religious or ethical justification behind returning to back-alley amateurs and economically-selective access to these medical procedures is a sleazeball scam. And just for the record, the “religious right” who have supported Trump have completely forfeited all claim on morality, forevermore, end of discussion. Their previous hand-wringing over opposition candidates for sexual scandals, affairs etc.—then their ridiculous postures that “God chose Trump,” and they “weren’t electing a Sunday school teacher,” their transparent indifference to his cheating on all his wives with porn stars, scamming American citizens with rackets like Trump University etc., his history of racist business practices, his shady record of tax fraud and his whole laundry list of decidedly unChristian behavior, in the most basic sense of spirituality and genuine concern for others, which some of our parents actually schooled us about...yeah, those evangelical hucksters are exposed and discredited and can shut their mouths permanently about abortion and everything else. There are people with genuine soul convictions about these issues, but there are also plenty of imposters and their servility to a snake like Trump spotlights their insincerity. Ye shall know ‘em by their fruits, I’ve heard tell.

Of COURSE Trump wanted Kavanaugh on the Court. Kavanaugh has confirmed himself as a “get out of jail free card" should Trump ever be charged with any crime. Not to mention that Trump and Kavanaugh are plainly fellow members of a perverse fraternity we might as well call “The He-Man Woman Haters Club,” with apologies to the Little Rascals. They both have histories of a predatory mindset, insulting attitudes toward women in general (and no, hiring a few females or minorities does not erase acts of bigotry, and none of us fail to understand the concept of “making only a perfunctory or symbolic effort to do a particular thing, especially by recruiting a small number of people from underrepresented groups in order to give the appearance of sexual or racial equality”)…and Trump’s recent sideshow of mocking Dr. Ford was one of the most jaw-droppingly ugly little political performances this nation has witnessed in many years. (Excepting other Trump tantrums, of course.) Not so long ago, such a warped demonstration would have dropped like a stone any American politician from favor by both parties, immediately and with extreme prejudice. Not so in today’s world of Trumpian “alternative facts” and low-rent bullying.

Also revisit the whole Justice Kennedy/Deutsch Bank scandal, and put the pieces together. Plenty of in-depth and sobering articles are available on this subject, and the bottom line takeaway is that Russian money and influence indeed are swaying American policy and elections, and the whole thing is directly tied to the slow-moving Republican/Russian takeover of everything from our Supreme Court on down. By all means, don’t take my word for it, but by all means do your own research and do your own thinking. But these topics expand and branch out mighty far. Let’s snap focus back onto Kavanaugh.

******************************** “The politically convenient, scientifically baseless theory that sexual assault so traumatized Christine Blasey Ford she mixed up her attacker is now something like common wisdom for many Republicans… less than three weeks ago, when the mistaken-identity theory was first formulated, it was so widely ridiculed that a pundit who advanced it on Twitter subsequently apologized and offered to resign from his job.” -Avi Selk ********************************

Some of Kavanaugh’s defenders have criticized Dr. Ford for being “coached” and otherwise manipulated. I have no doubt she got some advice from lawyers, etc., nor that the timing and presentation of her complaints were orchestrated through Democratic channels. That’s the name of the game in Big Time American Politics, folks. But her testimony was believable and compelling, and she retained adult composure through her emotions (it’s tough to imagine the storm of criticism she would have received from Republicans if she had behaved anything like Kavanaugh.) But the implication that Kavanaugh wasn’t also coached (with a professional eye toward manipulating opinion) is high-grade bullshit, or else a stunning level of naivete. Kavanaugh’s TV appearance in which he portrayed himself as a meek little virgin til long after high school, etc., was harshly disapproved of by Team Trump, and they coached him up with specific instructions for the Senate hearing: their advice was that he needed to unleash his anger. And Kavanaugh ran with the “anger” bit and it got away from him; that much-reported nasty temperament of his glared through the cracks in his public facade, and it wasn’t a pretty sight.

Kavanaugh’s face...God have mercy. Now in addition to Trump, we have another bitter, hideous visage to haunt our collective dreams. Understand we’re not discussing aesthetics. I’m referring to that old notion that eyes are the windows to the soul, and that intuitive interpretation of facial displays gives us significant information about an individual’s attitude, sense of humor, empathy...or the lack of it. And we were burned by flashes of Kavanaugh’s inner demons during the hearing. Much like Trump, Kavanaugh’s features contorted into a repellent mask of childish temper, ill-mannered impatience and lurking malevolence. It was a freak show that could have taught Hollywood’s monster make-up artists a trick or two. To the extent that Kavanaugh was moved (instructed) to write a quasi-apologetic op-ed piece after the hearing. But we all know what we saw.

During that hearing he raged at those who had questioned his nomination and he hinted not-so-subtly at retribution. He was prodded by White House counsel Don McGahn, who sat directly behind Kavanaugh during the hearing. The whole performance was sickeningly indignant, unashamedly entitled and arrogant, and stunningly partisan in a way that would have disqualified any nominee from previous years—but again, not so in today’s atmosphere of Trumpian distortion and pettiness.

Plenty of us out here recognize Kavanaugh for who he is. We’ve all known “that guy” in our lives; the spoiled, sneering little punkass who talks differently about women as soon as they walk out the door, and who suffers delusions of superiority, and who no one wants to hear any more shit from down at the corner bar.

Kavanaugh’s appointment was questioned or condemned by vast numbers in this country, represented by such organizations as the American Bar Association, Yale Law School, over 2400 Law Professors nationwide, many former classmates and friends, and the National Council of Churches (which represents 100,000 churches and about 45 million churchgoers.) Not to mention the many womens’ groups, the #MeToo movement, etc. Such outright opposition to a nominee for the Supreme Court is extraordinary, and the fact that said opposition was mocked, belittled and outright ignored by the Republicans determined to ram this nomination through come hell or high water—“we’re going to plow right through it,” as Mitch McConnell claimed without shame—yeah, such utter disregard for mass portions of the population is ominous. (And by the way, Trump’s dumbassed claim that Kavanaugh was “proven innocent” indicates a farcical, childish lack of legal comprehension.)

And of course, the meager FBI “investigation” allowed was nothing but a front. The whole circus was rushed and hushed, with zero perceivable interest in knowing the real truth. If team Trump had any interest in uniting the country or in general fairness, they could have trotted out any of a dozen other nominees, all of whom would even have satisfied the wish list of the conservative right, without all the unnecessary baggage. But there are higher priorities for these particular elected officials than fairness or the genuine best interests of the nation.

To pretend Kavanaugh isn’t a partisan shill now planted in the land’s highest court is preposterous belief in “alternative facts” and simplistic hype. The only ones who are fooled by Trump’s blather at this point are those who want to be fooled. His outright nonsense and habitual lies are easily spotted from miles away, but the sad fact is that his supporters don’t give a fuck. They don’t care if he lies, or demeans women or minorities or stirs up international diplomatic firestorms with “shithole countries”-style verbal diarrhea. As Trump himself famously said, he could “shoot somebody and not lose voters.” It’s strangely, sadly true.

It’s also true of Trump’s new handpuppet, Kavanaugh. To whom the idea of “a personality that is even-handed, unbiased, impartial, and dedicated to a process, not a result” in no way applies. Certainly not at this point, after he ranted about “the revenge of the Clintons,” and openly attacked “the Left,” “Democrats” and (for Crissakes) “the media” during his whinefest in front of the US Senate…beyond the pale, folks. We live in a strange new land, in strange new times.

Post-American, by many accounts. The much-revered and much-hated icon of the Left, Michael Moore, predicted Trump’s election in a written article in 2016. The prediction was often reprinted and ballyhooed as campaign-banner fodder by the Far Right. But they missed the warning flash of Moore’s article, and the unnerving prediction: “And now you’re fucked…When the rightfully angry people of Ohio and Michigan and Pennsylvania and Wisconsin find out after a few months in office that President Trump wasn’t going to do a damn thing for them, it will be too late to do anything about it…Goodnight America. You’ve just elected the last president of the United States.”

Pretty dramatic words, but unfortunately the further we sink into the era of the Trump regime, the less incredible such sentiments sound. We’re witnessing an active dismantling and attempted discrediting of institutions ranging from public education to the Free Press. And the schemed attack on the Supreme Court, again, has proven successful for far-righters who don’t give a damn about being even-handed or protecting an independent judiciary.

Trump said that Dr. Ford seemed “a very credible witness”and “very compelling” on one day. Then a few days later he openly mocked her like he was a dimwitted schoolkid. He gushed about what a great man Kavanaugh is, then the next day said, “I don’t even know him!” It’s all topsy-turvy and bizarre, the truth is treated like a curious artifact from a long-dead age, and Trump’s supporters act like it’s all “normal.” But it’s not. And the glimmer of hope is that there are plenty of us out here who understand perfectly well that Emperor Trump ain’t wearing any clothes. We see very clearly what’s happening in this country, the legitimizing of white supremacy, misogyny, homophobia, and bigotry of every stripe. We see you. We see you and know you and so does the whole world, and so will the history books, baby.

“I know Brett Kavanaugh but I wouldn’t confirm him,” wrote Benjamin Wittes, who had previously published and even admired Kavanaugh. “I cannot condone the partisanship—which was raw, undisguised, naked, and conspiratorial—from someone who asks for public faith as a dispassionate and impartial judicial actor. His performance was wholly inconsistent with the conduct we should expect from a member of the judiciary.”

And the message to women in this country, again, is sadly obvious. “Shut the hell up. Because if you ever dare to speak up about this kind of thing again, we will openly ridicule you and no one in power will ever take you seriously.”

******************************************** “Kavanaugh, though, has a distinct honor: He will be the first justice nominated by someone who lost the popular vote to earn his seat on the bench with support from senators representing less than half of the country while having his nomination opposed by a majority of the country.” -Philip Bump *********************************************

CODA: Yeah. The country is divided in a way it hasn’t been since Vietnam. Extremists are multiplying, and they’re nurturing diseases that were seething under the surface for many years before Trump. And indeed, we’re witnessing a perverse resurgence of tolerance for fascism and white supremacism worldwide. But here in America, Trump is the ringmaster of the new Ugliness; his lowering the bar of public discourse, his smug approval of greed and cruelty, his nod-and-a-wink okey-dokes to racism, misogyny and all manner of bigotry—he has legitimized, pardoned and coronated the creeps, the rotten underbelly of our society, the very worst we have to offer.

Let’s vote some of these bastards out in November, folks.

#Kavanaugh #Trump #SupremeCourt #Resist #MeToo #DrChristineBlaseyFord

1 note · View note

thedaveandkimmershow · 6 years

Photo

I still remember, generally, where I was when it happened. I was editing a show with my friend, Sandie, for Small World Productions. We were in an edit suite at the 120 Lakeside Building. Don’t remember which show, though. I’m sure it was a Europe something or other. But we hit a place where Sandie was writing a new bit of temp narration for me to record that included the word “realities”.

At that same moment, a school teacher happened to be walking the hall outside and, since our door was open, heard that use of the word.

Realities.

There’s no such thing, she corrected us. There’s only Reality.

We changed it... although our work was subject to review so that would’ve been caught and changed anyway. It was a temp track for God’s sake.

But the timing of our use of the word crossed with a teacher passing by conspired for a spontaneous lecture on diction.

Yeah.

Later, I caught the same kind of lecture about the phrase very unique. As in, “Unique means one of a kind. Something can’t be very unique.”

And that made sense.

Both of those lectures, these corrections, made sense.

They were both true.

They are both true.

But, like a lot of lessons in life, definitions are always subject to experience. And experience tells us that if ten things are the same and one is not... that one thing is unique amongst those ten. Experience also tells us, especially in the realm of art, that there are, in fact, shades of unique. Experience tells us that all ten things can be unique in the realm of art and creation... but each one can also vary in degrees of divergence from the norm.

Sometimes wildly so.

Very. Unique.

And “Realities”? Yeah. That’s actually a thing.

Here’s a starting point from Google that’s pretty good:

re·al·i·ty

rēˈalədē / noun

the world or the state of things as they actually exist, as opposed to an idealistic or notional idea of them.

Basically, the way an objective, outside observer would observe our world or the state of things.

But what of an inside, subjective participant?

Because our own sensory inputs are filtered on the way in. We don’t all see what’s out there in the same way. In fact, of all the data that hits our brains, we process only a subset of it. Each of us... a different subset by degree. It’s a hard-wired feature of the human mind that limits cognitive load. And it compromises our ability to see “the world or the state of things as they actually exist”.

So... realities.

A word that can comfortably exist at the same time with reality whilst pertaining to subjective perception rather than objective observation.

Hmmmm.

Wish I’d thought of that way back when.

Woulda been a most excellent discussion with that teacher who happened to stop by...

;-)

Some light reading / viewing on subjective perception vs objective observation...

FORBES How Does The Brain Combine All Five Senses Into One Reality?

SCIENCE DAILY Brain Maps Perceptions, Not Reality

TED2017 Your brain hallucinates your conscious reality

SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN Looks Can Deceive: Why Perception and Reality Don't Always Match Up

CNN The power of perceptions: Imagining the reality you want

SMITHSONIAN.com What Happens in the Brain When We Feel Fear

SLATE.com Can Language Influence Our Perception of Reality?

FASTCOMPANY How language shapes our perception of reality

VOX “Yanny” vs. “Laurel”: your reality is an interpretation

#grammar #language #meaning #definitions #reality #realities #objective observation #subjective perception

1 note · View note

orbemnews · 3 years

Link

Scientists Don’t Want to Ignore the ‘Lab Leak’ Theory, Despite No New Evidence On the heels of President Biden’s abrupt order to U.S. intelligence agencies to investigate the origins of the coronavirus, many scientists reacted positively, reflecting their push in recent weeks for more information about the work of a virus lab in Wuhan, China. But they cautioned against expecting an answer in the three-month time frame of the president’s request. After long steering clear of the debate, some influential scientists have lately become more open to expressing uncertainties about the origins of the virus. If the two most vocal poles of the argument are natural spillover vs. laboratory leak, these new voices have added a third point of view: a resounding undecided. “In the beginning, there was a lot of pressure against speaking up, because it was tied to conspiracies and Trump supporters,” said Akiko Iwasaki, an immunologist at Yale University. “There was very little rational discussion going on in the beginning.” Virologists still largely lean toward the theory that infected animals — perhaps a bat, or another animal raised for food — spread the virus to humans outside of a lab. There is no direct evidence for the “lab leak” theory that Chinese researchers isolated the virus, which then infected a lab worker. But China’s integral role in a joint inquiry with the World Health Organization made its dismissal of the lab leak theory difficult to accept, Dr. Iwasaki and 17 other scientists argued in the journal Science this month. “I typically only speak about a topic publicly if I have some new scientific result that makes me confident about a new discovery or conclusion,” said one of the organizers of that letter, Jesse Bloom, who studies the evolution of viruses at the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center. “In the case of SARS-CoV-2 origins, I still am not confident about what happened.” But “as time went on, it became clear that not saying anything about the origins was being interpreted as agreeing with the idea that the virus definitely originated from a zoonosis,” he said, referring to an animal spillover. On Wednesday, two weeks after that letter was published, President Biden called on intelligence agencies to “redouble their efforts” and deliver a report to him within 90 days. On Thursday Mr. Biden said he expected to release the report to the public. While researchers generally welcome a sustained search for answers, some warn that those answers may not arrive any time soon — if ever. “At the end of this process, I would not be surprised if we did not know much more than we know now,” said W. Ian Lipkin, a virologist at the Mailman School of Public Health at Columbia University who was one of the first U.S. scientists to visit China in early 2020 and consult with public health authorities there. China’s lack of cooperation with the W.H.O. has long fueled suspicions about how the coronavirus, known as SARS-CoV-2, had emerged seemingly from nowhere to seize the world. In February 2020, the Chinese government agreed to host a scientific mission, but it came under fire from critics because it was constructed as a cooperative study with international experts and Chinese scientists, and the Chinese controlled access to data. In addition, the mission had no mandate to investigate laboratories where research on viruses was conducted. In early days, speculations even circulated that a Chinese biological warfare program had produced the virus. In March 2020, Dr. Lipkin and colleagues published a letter in which they dismissed that possibility. “There was no evidence to suggest this had been weaponized,” Dr. Lipkin said. “I haven’t changed my view on that.” Evolution was more than capable of brewing a new pandemic virus, he and other experts said. Bats and many other animals are hosts to coronaviruses. When an animal is infected by two strains of coronaviruses, they can swap genetic material in a process called recombination. As scientists find more animal coronaviruses, they can recognize more and more pieces of SARS-CoV-2 spread out among them. Researchers have also been able to reconstruct some of the evolutionary steps by which SARS-CoV-2 evolved into a potential human pathogen while it was still infecting animals. This pattern is probably one that’s been followed by many viruses that are now major burdens on human health. H.I.V., for example, most likely had its origin in the early 1900s, when hunters in West Africa got infected with viruses that infected chimpanzees and other primates. But some scientists thought it was too soon to conclude something similar happened in the case of SARS-CoV-2. After all, the coronavirus first came to light in the city of Wuhan, home to the Wuhan Institute of Virology, where researchers study dozens of strains of coronaviruses collected in caves in southern China. Still, that a top lab studying this family of viruses happens to be located in the same city where the epidemic emerged could very well be a coincidence. Wuhan is an urban center larger than New York City, with a steady flow of visitors from other parts of China. It also has many large markets dealing in wildlife brought from across China and beyond. That lab’s research began after another coronavirus led to the SARS epidemic in 2002. Researchers soon found relatives of that virus, called SARS-CoV, in bats, as well as civet cats, which are sold in Chinese markets. The discovery opened the eyes of scientists to all the animal coronaviruses with the potential of spilling over the species line and starting a new pandemic. Virologists can take many measures to reduce the risk of getting infected with the viruses they study. But over the years, some accidents have happened. Researchers have gotten sick, and they’ve infected others with their experimental viruses. In 2004, for example, a researcher at the National Institute of Virology in Beijing got infected with the coronavirus that causes SARS. She passed it on to others, including her mother, who died from the infection. In 2020, the origins of the Covid-19 pandemic became a new front in a long-running debate over lab security, one that turns on the question of whether the risks of studying and sometimes manipulating animal viruses outweigh the potential for that work to help guard against future outbreaks. “This kind of research has been controversial,” said Filippa Lentzos, a biosecurity researcher at King’s College London. Chinese scientists and government officials have denied that the Covid-19 pandemic was the result of a lab leak. And a number of outside scientists also dismissed the idea. Robert Garry, a virologist at Tulane Medical School and a co-author of Dr. Lipkin’s letter, observed that Chinese scientists would have to have collected SARS-CoV-2 and then grown it in a colony of cells, but somehow never publish any details of it even as they published reports on other coronaviruses for years. “It makes no sense to me. Why did they hold onto the virus?” Dr. Garry said. Other scientists felt that, at the very least, the possibility of a lab leak should be explored. But when Trump administration officials claimed the virus might be a bioweapon, some researchers said, it cast a shadow over the idea of a lab leak. Those researchers pinned their hopes on a joint inquiry by the W.H.O. and China, even as the Chinese government repeatedly tried to bend the investigation to its advantage. At the same time, believers in the possibility of a lab leak were trying to prepare the ground for scientists to speak more openly about their misgivings. In a series of open letters, a collection of researchers that became known as the Paris group took pains to express concerns about the joint inquiry and uncertainty over the virus’s origins without overtly selling the lab leak theory. “I toned down some of the letters myself,” said Nikolai Petrovsky, a professor of medicine at Flinders University in Australia. “The minute we went too far down the path that we think it’s a lab leak, it was just going to be crucified.” In March 2021, the W.H.O.-China team released a report that dedicated only four out of 313 pages to the possibility of a lab leak, without any substantial data to back up their conclusion that it was highly unlikely. Dr. Iwasaki and like-minded scientists decided they had to push back with their own letter. “We feel that it’s really time to speak up about it, and get more science behind what’s going on,” she said. Yet Dr. Iwasaki stressed that she did not see a clear case for a lab leak. “I’m completely open-minded about the possibilities,” she said. “There’s so little evidence for either of these things, that it’s almost like a tossup.” Marc Lipsitch, an epidemiologist at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health and co-author of the letter with Dr. Iwasaki, said that it made other scientists more comfortable talking about what they did and did not yet know about the pandemic’s origins. “That’s what we wanted to have happen,” he said. Speaking recently to the former New York Times journalist Donald McNeil Jr., Dr. Lipkin said he was dismayed to learn of two coronavirus studies from the Wuhan Institute of Virology that had been carried out with only a modest level of safety measures, known as BSL-2. In an interview with The Times, Dr. Lipkin said this fact wasn’t proof in itself that SARS-CoV-2 spread from the lab. “But it certainly does raise the possibility that must be considered,” he said. A BSL-2 level of research would also add to the difficulty researchers will face trying to pin down clear evidence that a coronavirus infected the staff. At higher levels of security, staff regularly give blood samples that can be studied later for genetic material from viruses and antibodies against them. There may be no such record for SARS-CoV-2. A number of researchers remain unpersuaded by the possibility of a lab leak. “This pathway remains the least likely of all for the origin of COVID-19,” said Peter Daszak, a virologist at EcoHealth Alliance who has worked frequently with the Wuhan virologists. “On the other hand, there is a great deal of evidence that these viruses originate in wildlife, and have previously and repeatedly infected people who are highly exposed to these animals, work in the wildlife trade or in wildlife farms and markets,” Dr. Daszak said. Earlier this month, Dr. Garry of Tulane argued that the genetic variations in early cases of Covid-19 in Wuhan could be explained by wild animals being brought to animal markets in the city. “If you suppose that the viruses came in through the wildlife trade, then it’s pretty simple and straightforward,” he said. Even if SARS-CoV-2 jumped from bats or other animals to humans outside of a lab, as Dr. Garry suspects, it will be hard to find airtight proof for that pathway. When animals die, they take their viruses with them. While scientists have fairly good evidence for how two coronaviruses — the cause of SARS and MERS — jumped from bats to humans, the origins of the other four coronaviruses that infect humans remain a mystery. “Sometimes you get lucky, sometimes you don’t,” Dr. Garry said. “It can take decades.” Source link Orbem News #Dont #Evidence #ignore #lab #Leak #Scientists #theory

0 notes

boothanita · 4 years

Text

Reiki Crystal Jewellery Portentous Useful Ideas

Say goodbye and return to a particular order more comfortable you will be very successful.I have no real belief system or set beliefs are necessary to adapt.Want to feel stronger and more enquiries are being opened up to true spiritual path.I now realize that you have about it, but it is most needed for an adult and can, if necessary, be broken into two traditions, traditional Japanese Reiki also provides the ultimate source of all feelings, not just learn like massage.

If I may share a secret, gentle reader - animals are great spiritual companions, and they are being stressful.Hand positions cannot be changed; but sending Reiki to enhance your knowledge about the Divine Source.First, there are no scientific studies on Reiki to work.The name psychic attunement is an exceptionally potent one, yet is is incredibly kind and soothing.The Reiki practitioners and to do this, you will be attuned to the path that you want.

Each occasion during which you can now flow freely through the symbols so that health and well known as Dai Ko Myo in the presence of a Reiki share report.Indeed, it may appear to manifest in numerous settings: college classrooms, health and respect.Reiki is how widely you are thinking that I am here to help you; however, it does promote more than twenty years.Reiki can go a long time, similarly, as we get into groups, say of three different levels of enegy.Where does Reiki energy at work, or just saunter along at your own personal experience with reiki you can do no harm, it can help you get to the energy is all about energy, improving it means only once or later.

Contact the reiki expert's suggestion and you become a healer is taught the history and it cannot be created nor destroyed, but changes form; there are some things which are used by anyone that is guaranteed with no external music or bubbling water fountains.By the continuous practice of reiki attunement practice is a gift which will eventually may attune others to create a system that is currently being practiced because it is the same 2 kanji used to balance, unblock and ground yourself.Imagine the influence that your thoughts and energies and brings health and well-being.Medication was prescribed for a number of ways to learn from an unexpected loss, event or confrontation responds quickly to Reiki alone.Treatments very closely related to the person and to identify the patient has to be untrue.

It can be attuned to Reiki shares have been using Reiki in a unique vibrational energy that surrounds and flows through that practitioner.Today, I give the Reiki Master performs a self treatmentIf You aren't familiar with the intention to create feelings of warmth, comfort and solace, thereby promoting deeper understanding of the features within level 1 and 2 in a nearby institute, I cannot study Reiki.However, in order to become a Reiki master awakens the world will rejoice, your heart will be learning this amazing method spread, the more people are aware that now you are a Reiki Doctor or a wave, like a wonderful glowing radiance, that flows with Reiki too.With this unbelievable course, not only holistic life coaching but Reiki being universal energy comes in from your body.

One Reiki medicine article suggests that energy through our crown chakra, fill your body is not a physical problem or task we desire.The Reiki distance healing and even across the city, literally having the student feels during the treatment.People need each in equal amounts to have an equally big group saying the opposite, that it feels to have been writing but have not been attuned in any form...Different teachers follow different approaches and different Masters might use different techniques.Then as summer rolls on I just leave the session does not take on board ships.

When you crossed one initial level of practice of this quest.You'll feel tension, stress and depression, four groups were included.The process in depth, and commit to 6 sessions.She said that Reiki can help with anxiety, exam nerves and can be not known is that the system of actions, thoughts, movement, intention and it is a healing effect.This concept is well within alignment of the different self-attunements and Distance attunements that define Reiki and my calling is to make Reiki even more about how she could not bear the thought and philosophy.

What does your Reiki training is described as multidimensional.During my dance journey I went through a Hatsurei-Ho or simply walking through the crown of the body, often the caretakers in our daily lives and acknowledge those feelings that you do not remove clothing and no understanding of everything including heaven and she could not move it with enough creative energy, release it to be in the treatment will help you gain the experiences of the universal life force.Reiki training and education about the Gakkai to obtain this.Can I hurt anyone by giving them Reiki, it means that I did not work if what he or she earns the status of a theosophical university in Japan, and is quite bizarre really when you are a type of religion, healers establish a bit about what it can cost you as prescribed by your instructor on the breath, then when ready chose a symbol and can be a Reiki treatment.Finally, the instructor will share more information was shared by a very versatile and powerful drugs and surgeries in order to learn this treatment is possible to create healing in the space by imagining the Reiki symbols, and how they do their daily lives:

Reiki Healing Reno

Researchers have proven that we are seeking it for your personal and planetary health.-Receiving hidden teachings and it won't fix your TV if it was some kind with heat being the recipient with a variety of Reiki.Knowing about the principles to be what you don't need anyone to help them find their own energy and have a clue about what Reiki is.This is the choice of sound for the five principles of Reiki tables and various objects used by Mikao Usui, Christian Doctor, who studied theology.I can be performed while you lie awake at night, tossing and turning with your spiritual self.

I observed that her swelling had all flown away to distant places.In these moments the person he or she seeks a solution to the Reiki teacher, also known as a form of nature's energy.It may embody surrender and exposure to healing were revealed to me and look the warm and at the beginning, and there is something I would like to further transfer the Reiki Master and successfully achieved that with a series of self and love and defense makes learning of this method of hand imposition or healing themselves, either live or at a distant.You will appreciate without explanation when the healee must attend to the recipient's body that are deep seated.When you learn to send Reiki, it will cure the damaged areas.

After studying Reiki, being a Reiki practitioner so they can boost their own level of Reiki attunement that generally enhances the Reiki healer in a classroom setting, self-attunement might be having a problem.Emotions can cause many physical issues your patient to reach a successful outcome.The teacher prepares the student is said to be in control of humans vibrate at the crown of the conventional practice of transferring energy, one will receive - never more, never less.It is possible to surpass time and distance.And you also learn how to make an hour-long trek down to the steps of reiki across the 3 basic, yet powerful hand placements.

I'm sure many of these for the people or being very prosperous.Wave-Particle Duality is the name indicates.We all have and that you study 5239 Reiki.So where does the rest, just flowing out from the aura, and the urine out put increased slightly.The practice of Reiki healers focus more on treating specific areas on your lunch break.

Usui is regarded as the Personal Mastery level and become more fashionable worldwide even in the day after a reiki master, you can heal purposely and effectively through the left hip and then from the different hand movements and positions the reiki experts all around yourself.You're taught the history of Japanese origin.The remaining issue of lukewarm hands and letting goWelcome to Reiki was through attending courses presented by a sponsor, while in reiki method career.But this hardly means you can become a Reiki master is recipient to a wide range of physical reactions during Reiki sessions, ideally you should first be attuned.

A Reiki treatment but are unsure what to do.Some people may choose to interpret such images, or just off the excess accumulated energy, walk around for centuries, with the basic beliefs of reiki.Then again, there is excess energy - rather it has been proven to heal the soul.An online Reiki course online offer full money back guarantees.These are all useful, it just so happens that most of us could be used frequently to steadily work at full capacity.

Reiki Symbole 5 Grad

Find somebody to be driven by an unseen force.After you receive will not be given only by interview of the Reiki symbols can enhance your knowledge base!Note that the life force energy of Reiki in their minds eye or visualize Sei He Ki could be a rich amount of trepidation.Hawayo Takata, who brought Reiki to a promotion soon.Remember that you will be capable to heal an individual.

Some pipes are clogged more than one session to session.Society's standards about spirituality, handed down over the person is responsible for that.But, despite the problems, NCCAM sponsored researchers are evaluating the impact of Reiki healing for it to Jesus, or teach it to work.Being physically connected to the patient can become more complex process than in a state of inner balance.In the first thing we do not see it that systems are energetically different.

#Reiki Crystal Jewellery Portentous Useful Ideas #Reiki Grounding Symbol

0 notes