#(though I will say for the record writing incest in a positive light is not cool in this house) | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

thequeenoffish · 5 years

Text

A look at the main argument of the antis

I just saw an anti make a list of mostly non-sequential ideas, in an attempt to argue that starker is bad because it is fictional paedophilia and fiction effects reality. For now let's throw out the question ‘Is Starker fictional paedophilia?’ because quite honestly we could go round in circles about how people age characters up or how to define the word, or how the age of consent varies country to country etc. So let us assume that antis are right it is fictional paedophilia no matter the circumstance.

Now let us look at the main argument antis use (and basically only), and some of the arguments that this person in particular used.

Before anything else, we need to define what we mean by ‘effecting reality’, I will be using this to mean a situation where something happened as a direct consequence for them reading fiction. As in, someone did something, they would not have done if they had not read the fiction.

Of course, fiction does affect some areas of reality, because when we read fiction, we have read it, and so it makes us feel and think things, and maybe talk about or create because of those things. But antis are arguing that it is more than that, that fiction can change elements of our moral code, and lead us to believe things we previously believed were terrible are now right, and that they can even cause us to do said wrong things. Now I set the record straight on what exactly this argument is about, on to specific points. ---

First, they use an appeal to authority, they know the ship promotes paedophilia because they are a CSA survivor. However this in no way informs them about the complex relationship between fiction and reality it only tells them that some humans are fucking monsters.

I will take this opportunity to say that if you are a CSA survivor I am so sorry that it happened, and I hope whoever did that to you is rotting in jail. Those people are an example of the worst humans can be, and if I could I’d erase them all from the world. However, it does not mean you can suddenly decide which fiction is morally right or not. There are also many starker shippers who could use the same appeal with exactly the same grounds to argue for the ship, so that doesn’t really help anyone. They next argue that when things happen in fiction and are then condoned by people they become reality. They cite zero sources, and if there is anything I can tell you about arguments you should really cite your sources, or in fact, use a source at all so then I have some idea at least where you could be getting these numbers. Despite the lack of sources, this statement is filled with the moral panic that has effected comic books, and then videos games. The debate on whether video games cause anti-social behaviour or violence is ongoing, and there are lots of studies for both sides but an article from Psychology Today points out that,

‘That the latest statistics show youth violence at a 40-year low—despite the popularity of video games‘ Does that alone prove that video games, a medium where you are not just a passive reader, but an active player does not promote violence? Well no, but I think it does show that this is likely to be the same kind of moral panic that affected comic books back in the 50s. And that Antis can in no way prove that even games, a medium where you can actively kill avatars of humans, affects reality by making people violent. Therefore them attempting to prove that people writing paedophilia is making people paedophilia’s is a huge stretch even believing studies that support the idea of videos games causing violence.

Another related argument is that by shipping it, and seeing it in a positive light, shippers are in somehow affecting the social norms or society. I will not attempt to argue against this, as, there is no way at the most 100,000 people from all over the world quietly writing fanfic on tumblr can change the opinion of society. Far larger groups of fans cannot. Game of Thrones shows awful things like rape, paedophilia, incest, and murder, millions love it and the characters who do, yet rape, paedophilia, incest and murder are still illegal and considered morally reprehensible.

Why is this? Maybe because people are perfectly capable of telling fiction from reality? Just a thought.

This person also claimed to know of cases where people used, the ‘it was in fiction and no one cared’ excuse and got off free in paedophilia case. If this happened wow that judge and jury are stupid as all sin, and that person is a sack of shit. I doubt this ever happened though, sorry you can’t make a claim like that with no evidence to back it up.

Overall this argument boils down to the fear that shippers are leading to less CSA victims being believed, and if you can show me proof of that happening or beginning too, I will seriously reevaluate my position.

---

While I think that is the main argument has just been covered this person tried to compare the high rates of rape of sex workers and low rates of conviction to this argument, which makes no sense as it is part of a completely different argument. But as this bit pissed me off Sex workers are raped in higher numbers, and their rapist prosecuted in low numbers because sex work is illegal in most countries. Sex workers often have more to fear from the police than protection from them, and often rate the police as the biggest source of violence in their lives. Men know this and take advantage. This does not mention the stigma around sex work that means that sex workers are not taken seriously when they do report rape to the police. All this contributes to an unsafe environment for sex workers, it has nothing to do with fiction and its effect on reality.

This is clearly not connected at all. However, people should be more informed on issues facing sex workers, and this is a great video to start with. I encourage you to watch it.

Overall I hope this post sums up somethings shippers think but have not articulated in this way. I could go on, but I am tired. So I hope you all have a lovely day <3

#starker #anti starker #antis #discourse

7 notes · View notes

uhlexsuhmuhchel-blog · 5 years

Text

Abortion and the Ban in Ireland

My topic is abortion and the banning of it and I am doing an analysis because I’m passionate about women’s sexual health, rights and the process of which laws get put into place and are formed. In this analysis, I am going to explain the use of pathos, ethos and logos and The NY Times’ use of these rhetorical devices in this article.

When it comes to the Climate of Fear: When Part of a Country Bans Abortion, one of the main points of the article is that Belfast and Northern Ireland have banned abortions, similar to the laws being set up in Louisiana. Another important main point is that women are traveling outside of the country to have abortions for a variety of reasons because of the laws in place. These women are forced to carry the fetus full term, no matter the conception whether it be rape, incest or even if the fetus could not and would not survive outside of the womb. When it comes to getting caught trying to have an abortion, even if you are pregnant because of one of the previous reasons, women can face life in prison as there doesn’t seem to be an addendum to the law that states otherwise.

The purpose of this article is to inform people of the problems that are occurring in different countries with abortion bans and how this may affect those that are in a place where abortion bans are being put into effect around the country and in other countries. I believe the intended audience are those potentially affected by the abortion ban as well as those who may be in a position to help anyone affected. This also may just be an article that sheds light on the subject as a whole as well and can explain what the women are doing in response to this ban, bringing attention to the illegal abortions as well. Overall that feels like the main purpose of the story.

Ethos is the use of credibility or trust to influence the reader and allows the source to give the reader confidence in the source they are reading and gives the reader faith in the journal as a whole and leaves little room for a reader to feel they need to question the information or the source. One piece of information in the article that could be pushed when it comes to ethos is the statement that says “activists worry that even if abortion is decriminalized, the anti-abortion movement will become more aggressive” which doesn’t expand on that statement and doesn’t give any back up for the statement, giving me the idea that the New York Times generalized the statement and spoke for a vast amount of women whether this was the truth or not because readers would trust the statement.

Another statement that could rely on the use of ethos when it comes to the credibility that the New York Times has is the statement “Several women have been prosecuted after police officers have raided their homes or workplaces” which doesn’t give any support for this information. The lack of back up information causes me to question its validity and the source.

The next thing I want to analyze for this paper is logos which is the use of logic, reasoning or proof, one of the examples being the same as one of the last ones I used, being the statement that claims that many upwards of 10 women have been arrested for seeking out a medically-induced abortion. This specific statement makes a large claim but doesn’t back it up with any form of arrest records, or names, maybe even if for confidentiality reasons, this statement should be backed up. There is no proof of these women being arrested for seeking out an abortion or for any reason and doesn’t give the reader any option to do their own research either.

The next statement I want to include when it comes to analyzing logos is a statement that does include the use of reasoning is the statement that discusses the other choices for women who are looking to have an abortion, stating that there are fully funded abortion services in England, though not all women can make the trip, citing reasons such as disability, domestic abuse or a lack of childcare. This statement presents the solution to the problem these women face then immediately answers the question of “why is this not valid for everyone?”

I want to analyze the use of pathos now which is the use of emotion and I have two statements in mind as I do so. The first one being the mention of the abuse women face and one woman in particular because she explained her want for an abortion to a counselor while her husband was present. She believed that this would be safe but once they got home, he beat her with a metal spatula and threatened worse but didn’t follow through as she was pregnant. This is an intense statement and a point of tension for a lot of people, men or women when explaining that someone has been subjected to this type of treatment. I believe that the New York Times uses this to tug at the readers’ heartstrings and to gain sympathy from the readers, even those who don’t agree with abortion.

Another statement I want to analyze is the statement that includes the fact that women are banned from having abortions, even when it comes to death, rape or even incest. I believe that this statement alone shows that no matter the reasoning, there is a reason to be upset about the fact that a woman can not freely choose to abort no matter the reason, but even those in the most intense and dangerous of situations are stuck with carrying a baby to full term and only then can they take the situation into their own hands by choosing to put the child up for adoption or have to attempt to abort illegally.

Overall, this piece used ethos, pathos and, logos to intrigue the reader as well as keep their attention on the main point of the article. I believe that overall this is a well written, informative piece by the New York Times, meant to bring attention to those who are unaware of the current struggles women in other countries, and soon our own country will be facing.

MWA 1 Reflection

Some general concepts I learned during this sequence was how to write sentences effectively and in a way that makes them less bulky as well as getting to the point more effectively. I also learned how to analyze how sources use pathos, ethos, and logos to influence their readers as well as how to use pathos, ethos, and logos to make an effective argument.

When it comes to the student learning objectives for this sequence we are meant to learn how to compose effective arguments with different sources of information and we’re meant to use writing o explain our personal beliefs, making effective arguments as we do so. It also taught us to provide relevant and important information only, getting rid of any unnecessary fluff that may not be helpful to the points we want to make as writers.

When it comes to learning how to analyze arguments, I have learned how to see what rhetorical devices the author is using to either break down their argument or strengthen it effectively and I learned that there are certain aspects you need to have in an effective argument, such as effective and correct sources, correct information and a professional and unbiased tone. The use of images, audio and text can help strengthen an argument as long as they are valid and vital to the argument. They can hinder the argument if they don’t correlate well to the information trying to be pushed and spoken about. For example, if talking about climate change, adding graphs of the amount of CO2 being put in the atmosphere could help you make the claim that CO2 is hindering the health of the planet but if you added a comic style photo of a “sick planet” it may be relevant but not all that professional and can hinder the argument.

My opinion on the argument that I made is still the same, SWA 2 and MWA 1 didn’t change my viewpoint but did make me feel as though I can talk about it more effectively and in a way that seems more educated than it would have been before these writing assignments. I still believe that women's sexual and reproductive health should not be hindered by the government and that no matter the situation, it should be a woman’s choice to make, not politicians. I did learn more about the topic than I did know though I was already well versed when it comes to the topic overall.

Publishing my work publically didn’t change my perspective on my perspective because my feelings about the topic are ones I have discussed publicly and this is a view that I would keep myself from discussing as it can affect many people in ways that can be life-threatening and fatal. I know that not everyone is going to agree with my views and they are free to do so, which is just a part of having opinions and if someone disagrees with me after seeing the piece, I wouldn’t take offense to it. The only aspect that changed was that I did want what I said to be accurate when it comes to my writing and feelings as I wanted to give my opinion and thoughts in a well thought out way as well as an effective way.

The technology didn’t change how I formatted this writing because I have previously used media to publish my writing, even if it isn’t something I’m comfortable with it is something I’m used to.

I can apply using what I’ve learned in this sequence when I go on into the work field and need to form unbiased and professional opinions as well as professional and clear arguments in my career field. I also know that I can observe the ethos, pathos, and logos in many arguments as well as different pieces of writing now that I have learned how to do so and I can use those to form informed opinions based on what I am viewing whether it be the news, social media or even writing. I can use it to make sure that I am informed and know how the author of a certain piece is trying to inform the audience or even to tell if they may be trying to manipulate an audience in a certain way.

Yeginsu, Ceylan. “Climate of Fear: When Part of a Country Bans Abortion.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 10 Aug. 2019, www.nytimes.com/2019/08/10/world/europe/abortion-northern-ireland-roe.html?searchResultPosition=11.

1 note · View note

agentcaito-moved · 5 years

Note

I have a genuine question and I don't want to so come off sounding as bitchy or anything. Like I understand you personally hate Felix but what's the big deal if other people like him? Some people just like villain characters it doesn't make them bad people by extension. You don't have to say shit like "your opinion doesn't matter" or whatever that post was

you’re fine anon! when i say “felix stans” im referring to a very specific bunch of people, not people who like felix, or even just like villains in general.

(yikes sorry anon this ask got really long so a cut)

felix stans are generally people who admit to deeply relating to and projecting onto felix, and while relating to and projecting onto characters is fine in of itself (i personally relate to wash and will project onto him from time to time!) when someone says that they relate to a character like felix, who is a canonical narcissistic liar, manipulator, murderer, and abuser, basically your textbook sociopath its.....sketchy to say the least.

that’s not my main problem with felix stans though, my main problems with felix stans are:

they ship lolix, and in doing so they romanticize, sexualize, and idealize the abuse felix put locus through as his abuser. as an abuse survivor im extremely against anything that so much as even hints to showing abuse in a positive light. im extremely against it because fiction does impact reality, but thats a conversation for another time.

they usually romanticize, sexualize, and idealize other forms of abuse and morally wrong and harmful content such as rape, pedophilia, incest, and others in addition to the above under the excuses of “im coping!!! uwu” and “its just fiction it cant hurt people!” which is complete bullshit. if fiction cannot hurt people, fiction cant help people either, so graphically writing and drawing about the so called “trauma” that they have “suffered” through, especially in a positive way where they have people commenting about how sexy it is and how it makes them all hot and bothered is in no way helping them “cope” with it. (i put trauma, suffered, and cope in quotation marks because i believe a majority of the people who do the above haven't actually been through the trauma they claim they have, and they just want to use the “im coping” card as a way to avoid the criticism and consequences of their gross art and fic)

they take anything anyone says that is even just barely alluding to being negative about felix, including jokes, as if you just told them you killed their pet. the first example im going to give involved a friend, who is trans for the record, making a joke post involving felix. in the tags of the post he explicitly states that its a joke and that he was making fun of the way cis artists often draw trans characters and in specific was referencing rcdart or whatever their url was, who is known for drawing ridiculously and fetishy proportions when it comes to trans characters. the post itself was a picture of felix as he appears in s14 with a filter applied that gave him comically large hips, and the image was captioned with something like “my trans felix hc!! heart emoji heart emoji” the 2nd example is my own experience involving a felix stan, and im going to give some background information that you can read here* because this ask is already long, but a tldr; i made a badly worded post dissing white content creators but it came off as racist and in specific had a diss about felix in it. despite apologizing and later clarifying what i had really been trying to say I was continuously harassed by a felix stan and all of said felix stans friends (all of whom are 21+) because of that harassment, irl events at the time, and stress from previous harassment i had a breakdown and the event traumatized me. just talking about the event is triggering for me as it has me on the verge of tears and my heart has been racing for about an hour and a half now.

*i will insert the link later, the tldr explains why

#i started writing this answer at 3pm and as of writing this tag it is 7:36pm #asks #anon #discourse

5 notes · View notes

fallout4-companions-reactions · 6 years

Note

Gore Warning! How about companions reacting to sole getting their foot caught in a trap and then cutting it off? Sorry if that’s too graphic…

((Nah, graphic’s fine. For the record, I have no personal trigger warnings, but I will ALWAYS make sure to tag big triggers, and if anyone needs me to tag something, or if I miss any, let me know. Just remember that with asks, I have to tag after I post, so give it a couple minutes before warning me of anything I forgot. I am sort of trying to figure out what my real limits are, but all I can think of are the ones I listed in a previous post(they’re beastiality, incest, and pedophilia, just in case anyone didn’t see that). Also, I won’t do rape, because I forgot to list that in that post. Though I may write about a scenario where someone was a victim of these things in the past, but I will not put it in a positive light or depict it directly in writing/art on this blog. I’m not sure about that yet though.))

Preston: General! Shit, you could have waited a little bit before jumping to that…I’m sure we could have gotten your leg out…*Runs them to the nearest doctor*

Piper: Jesus, Blue!! You didn’t have to jump the gun like that… *ties her scarf tightly around Sole’s leg so they don’t bleed out as she runs them to a doctor*

Nick: Dear god…There are better ways you could have handled that…Hindsight’s 20/20 I guess…But this seems extreme *Tears off one of his shirt sleeves to use as a tourniquet before running Sole to Dr. Sun*

Curie: My goodness! You didn’t need to do that! I am a doctor…I could have done something!!! *Quickly works to stop the bleeding and cauterize the wound*

Deacon: Holy…*gags* You know you didn’t have to-…Shit, okay, stay calm, we can get you to the Doc…He’ll take care of this…*carries Sole to the RR-HQ*

MacCready: Fuu…I mean-…That was over kill! I could have cut the chain or something! What the hell? *Runs Sole to a doctor*

Danse: Soldier! That wasn’t necessary. *Doesn’t say anything else before running to a doctor*

Cait: Holy shit! The hell’s wrong with ya?! There are a dozen things we coulda tried before jumping to that! *Runs to doctor*

Hancock: Shit…And I thought my missing pieces were bad. Come on. Let’s get you fixed up…I’m sure someone’s gotta know how to make a prosthetic foot!

Strong: Puny human remind Strong of mutant hound Strong trapped. It died. If puny human live, Strong won’t eat human.

X6-88: That was…highly unnecessary. *Teleports to The Institute to get Sole medical help*

Codsworth: Dear god! What did you do?!! I am certain there were other ways to deal with that…*uses torch arm to cauterize wound before trying to help Sole get to a doctor*

((I had NO idea what to do with Dogmeat, sorry! I know he’d react, but I honestly didn’t know how X.x))

47 notes · View notes

septembercfawkes · 7 years

Text

Why We Need Stories about Dark Things

One of the things I get tired of from time to time is the perspective that if something shows evil behavior then that means the story, song, game, whatever, is inherently bad. But there is a difference between illustrating evil behavior and promoting it.

Not all appearances of bad behavior invite bad behavior.

While one purpose of storytelling is to entertain, another purpose is to teach or educate--a purpose that in today's world, most people seem to have forgotten.

A long time ago, there used to be all sorts of horrific stories told. Open Grimms' fairy tales, and you'll see that Cinderella really isn't that Disney-friendly. But often some of those older stories were meant to teach a lesson or scare children into behaving (that latter point is one I personally don't condone). Horrific things happen in the Bible (and the Book of Mormon). We can often learn from these accounts, but some of them are simply a record of what happened (if you believe in that), whether you like the content or not. It is what it is. Conspiring incest, rape, slaughter, and even cannibalism can be found in scripture stories. In today's world, most people have been conditioned to believe that stories are only meant to entertain. Or entertain and uplift.

Those two things are valid. But what I get tired of, though, is the perspective that all stories should be full of puppies and rainbows (yeah, that's an exaggeration, but you know what I mean), and that's what we should be writing, and if a story is dark, it's "bad" or lesser or . . . something.

The World Needs Stories about Dark Things

It's important we write about what I call "the big and heavies"--rape, addiction, suicide, massacre, societal brainwashing, etc. And when I say "we," I don't mean specifically that you or I HAVE to; I mean "we" as in us, writers and creatives everywhere. The world needs creatives who delve into the big and heavies, and here's why:

1. Stories provide a safe means to explore and discuss dark things

The big and heavies are vital to discuss for a healthy society. We shouldn't be turning a blind eye to dark deeds. We should be turning the right eye to them. Literature offers a safe way to explore and discuss these issues. It offers some distance (because it's usually a work of fiction) while simultaneously having the ability to offer closeness--empathy.

Also, fiction provides a type of lens to view these behaviors through. Speculative fiction might have a more exaggerated or symbolic lens, such as the fashion industry of Panem in The Hunger Games, or the discussion of pure bloods in Harry Potter. A lens lets us view the issues in a way that may emphasize certain points or give us a new perspective on them, and again, the distance can provide a bit of a "safe" buffer for readers. We aren't talking about racism; we're talking about magical blood--and we can have a whole discussion on it that correlates with issues seen in racism, and no one needs to feel uncomfortable because this is about wizarding blood. Even realistic fiction provides a perspective, though less exaggerated, to see these issues through.

2. Powerful, emotional ramification drives home a point or idea or lesson.

Unlike reading text books or the news, fiction writing often works off making the audience feel something. It appeals to emotional experience, even more than intellectual experience. It is one of the only mediums where we can put on the skin and thoughts of another person.

In parts of society, we try hard to divorce intellect and emotion, but powerful emotional experiences are often what cement ideas and lessons into our minds. Back in the day, fathers used to take their children out to their property line and beat them so that the child would never forget where the property line was. We've seen similar conditioning with training wild animals. Both are crude examples, of course, but the emotional experience drove home the lesson. While negative emotions are powerful, this same thing can happen with strong positive emotions. We remember powerful feelings of happiness and of love, and if there are any lessons or insights associated with those, we recall those too.

In fiction, emotional experiences can drive home powerful lessons. And they stick with the audience.

Strong emotional experiences in fiction amplify the conceptual ramifications of dark deeds, and cements into the reader the weight of such behavior, in a way that pure intellect cannot. Once we "experience" an issue, we care more about it. Fiction is a vehicle that allows us to develop and fine-tune our empathetic skills, so we can better understand and relate to those who've dealt with such issues.

3. Explore, cognitively, the causes, consequences, and facets of the big and heavies

In the real world, we live our own lives in our own perspectives, and that's it. In literature, you can include several perspectives of those involved with an issue. You can often see the issue's causes, consequences, and facets to a degree you may not in your own life. You can see far-reaching effects in a matter of hundreds of pages, rather than decades or hundreds of years. This opens up new ideas, new perspectives on the topic, which leads to more discussion.

4. To provide hope and uplift, in spite of darkness. To overcome.

I sometimes see this weird idea that an uplifting story needs to not cross some invisible line too far into the dark. In some ways, that couldn't be further from the truth. As a Harry Potter fan, I've had friends come up to me and talk about how they're disappointed that the stories got darker and darker. Maybe I'm weird (okay, there's no "maybe" about it), but I like that. I like stories getting dark. I like when they get darker and darker. I like my evil, evil. I want the Voldemort who tries to possess Harry to get Dumbledore to kill him. I want the Voldemort who tortured animals as a small child and who murdered others to split his soul into seven pieces. The world is often an evil place. And how much more powerful is it to overcome the bowels of the most wicked, than it is to overcome a guy who shoplifted? I like my evil, evil. Not because I want to be part of the dark, but because I like seeing people overcome it.

A story that includes dark materials can be just as uplifting, if not more uplifting (because of the contrast) than a story that doesn't. The idea that a story can't be dark and inspiring is just unfounded.

Every Christmas season, I become a fan of The Trans-Siberian Orchestra all over again. If you've never heard of them, you may still recognize some of their most iconic Christmas songs, some of which have gone viral on synchronized Christmas light videos.

What many people might not realize is that each of their Christmas albums actual tells, and comes with, a written story. If you see the Trans-Siberian Orchestra live, they will read the story to you bits at a time, interspersed with music. But not all their stories are about happy sleigh rides, warm fires, Christmas hams, and decorated trees. There are parents who abandoned their disabled children, babies born addicted to crack, love that has been lost. But the stories and albums are uplifting, not because the creators avoided dark subject matter, but because they illustrated the power of overcoming--overcoming difficult times and personal mistakes. It's hard to make it through one of their performances with a dry eye through the whole thing.

5. To render reality--others' reality or your own

But some stories aren't necessarily meant to be about overcoming the dark or inspiring an audience. Some stories are just about reality. Human nature. The natural man. Experiences that people actually go through. Some stories are simply meant to render, often for reasons 1-3. It's a statement. It's meant to create social awareness, empathy. Maybe it's meant to start a discussion. Those stories need to exist too.

Closing Thoughts

Keep in mind that many audiences only see stories strictly as mediums for entertainment and, on a subconscious level, a reinforcement of a positive, maybe even sugary, feelings and ideas. Those audiences may (on a subconscious level) refuse anything that is otherwise, and consider any mention of the dark and heavies as something that shouldn't be there. That is their right.

And in some cases, they are correct. Some stories do not need and should not have dark content. It doesn't serve the purpose of the story, it messes up the tone of the story, and it can ruin what was already working. You wouldn't, for example, put in a serious plot line in The Office about Pam being legitimately raped. It doesn't fit.

And with all that said, you shouldn't feel forced to write content you feel very uncomfortable writing. Your work should reflect the writerly you.

Next week, I'll talk about how to write about dark things without promoting them.

#writing #writer #writing tip #writing tips #writing advice #writeblr #writerblr #writing help #writing tips and tricks #writing helps #creative writing #fiction #author #writing lesson #writing lessons #fanfic #fanfiction

2K notes · View notes

cursivesugg · 7 years

Text

Brighton || Joe Sugg

Requests are currently [ CLOSED ]

Masterlist can be found [ HERE ]

Word Count: 2.2k+

A/N: This is a request from a while ago that I could never find inspiration for but now here it is, better late than never huh?? Remember, requests take longer to write because I like to make them 100% and a lot longer than my usual imagines, so if you have requested an imagine please be patient, I promise It’ll be posted at some point xo

"M'so sleepy." You mumble, mostly to yourself but partly toward Joe as you walked into his office with the duvet wrapped around your shoulder and your bottom lip jutted out.

He turns his vlogging camera toward you and throws his head back in laughter at the state of you. "Oh my god, you look like Dobby the house elf."

You roll your eyes and tug the heavy quilt closer to your body, grabbing the iPad from his desk before sitting down on the floor with your back against the wall as he continued to explain to his viewers what your plans for the day were. You turn the screen on and go onto the Tumblr app, already logged into your account seeing as Joe wasn't active on his; both a blessing and a curse. You'd pay to watch him scroll down the 'thatcherjoe' tag.

"You wanna tell the viewers what you're gonna be doing this morning, gorgeous?" Joe asks, and you look up from the screen with your face scrunched up. "I'll take that as a no." He chuckles amusedly, turning the phone back to himself and rolling his eyes. "See what I have to put up with every morning guys? Madness." He declares, smiling at the camera for just a second longer before he covered the lens with his end and stopped recording.

You look up from the iPad screen when he stands up to readjust his green screen, biting your lip curiously. "What're you filming?"

He glances down at you and shrugs. "Well, there's finally a new episode of The Walking Dead out for me to film, and then if I've got time I'll probably film another Sims video." You hum in understanding and let your eyes follow him around the room as he begins to set up his equipment. He glances at you over his shoulder and grins. "You staying to watch, love?"

Biting the skin on the inside of your cheek, you nod and push your head into the comforting duvet. "Maybe for a while, but then I need to go pack."

He nods and flicks on one of his umbrella lights making you mean and look away with a wince, only looking up when he crouches down in-front of you and cups your cheeks in his hands, brushing his lips against your and smiling. "Goodmorning, pretty."

"Morning, handsome." You mumble, pulling away from his lips before kissing him quickly once more before he stood back up and walked over to his gaming chair, turning on the camera and his microphone before slipping his headphones onto his ears and filming his intro.

You only managed to stay in the insanely bright room for around twenty minutes before you abandoned the duvet and proceeded to walk around the apartment in just your underwear, which wasn't so much of a rare occurrence as it perhaps should've been. You contemplate whether or not to make food, but breakfast had never really been your forte anyways so you eventually decide not to bother and instead head up to the bedroom to start packing.

Joe was done within the next hour or so, which meant you could finally stop attempting to pack what he needed and instead leave him to sort his own things out as you finalize everything you needed for the day. By the time you were done and had made a quick smoothie for you and Joe to share, the Uber had arrived to take you and Joe to Tanya's, where she was waiting to give you both a life into Brighton.

Luckily Tan only lived around twenty minutes away, and so the uber ride was relatively short, but still long enough for yourself and Joe to have a quiet conversation about the movie you'd both watched the night before as you shared the green smoothie. You pull up to Tanya's house and thank the driver before jumping out and walking up to the front door, knocking twice and sharing a silly look as you waited for the door to be opened.

Tan opens the door with a wide smile on her face as she squeals and pulls you both into quick hugs before beckoning you inside and apologizing for Martha, who was barking at your feet, excited to see you again after what seemed to have been forever. Seeing as you were already slightly late, you can only spend a small amount of time at Tanya's, which was mostly spent having a playfight with Jim on the living room floor which you were ninety-eight percent sure Joe had captured for his vlog.

Soon enough you found yourself sat in the back of Tanya's car with your laptop open in your lap, drafting up a few emails and laughing at Joe as he made a stupid joke before pulling our his phone and holding it up.

"Is this an instagram story or a vlog?" Tanya asks quietly as she watched Joe hold up his phone from the corner of her eye all whilst checking her mirrors. They'd stopped at a red light, and joe had taken that as his chance to continue vlogging.

"A vlog. So we're on route to Brighton." Joe says as he holds the camera higher and Tanya begins to wave. "Tan is at the wheel! We've actually made it, well- I mean, how far into the journey actually are we?" He asks, though before either of the girls could answer he works it out himself. "Like an hour into the journey almost."

"Half an hour." Tanya corrects and Joe nods.

"Half an hour into the journey, and we're still here." He grins, fist-pumping the air as he glanced out of his window for a split second as tan began to talk.

"We're still alive." She smiles widely, tilting her head towards the camera as she spoke.

"Which is surprising since Tan hasn't driven in a bloody long time." You pipe up, closing your laptop and putting it on the seat next to you before leaning forward and smiling at the vlog.

Tan laughs and shakes her head. "No- oh and, also, are we going to get to any big roads?"

Joe nods. "Well, yeah. We're actually gonna be going onto a motorway at one point."

"Do you think we actually will though?" She asks, a frown on her face as she tried desperately to stay positive about the whole situation.

You laugh and nod, causing Joe to tilt the camera toward you. "I'm pretty sure we will, yeah." Tan sighs and chuckles a little when you eye her suspiciously. "When was the last time you drove on a motorway, Tan?"

"About four years ago." She replies, turning back to face the road as you share a look with Joe before sinking back into your seat and smiling to yourself as your boyfriend continues to tease the driver on camera and you proceed to continue writing up a few emails that you'd been ignoring for the past day or so.

The drive was full of laughter and groaning as you got stuck in traffic in Croydon, though you managed to make it through the entire journey without complaining once that it was taking too long, something Joe grinned and praised you on when you arrived at the Zalfie household, much to Tan's amusement.

There was a flurry of hello's and hugs and happy birthday's before everyone piled into the bigger car, Joe, yourself and Tan in the backseats as Zoe and Alfie sat in the front. The two Sugg's both began to vlog at the same time and you couldn't help but laugh when Joe gave up and held his phone down, frowning grumpily as Zoe continued to vlog. "So we've got Joe and (Y/N) in the back, Tan." She draws out Tan's name. "You're like our three kids."

"Incest!" You yelled out in amusement at the exact same moment as Joe yelled, "I'm an astronaut!" Equally as loudly making you groan and cover your ears and nudge him softly. He laughs and wraps his arm around your shoulder, pulling you into his side and kissing the top of your head as Alfie begins to back out of the driveway.

You arrived at the hotel in no time, and checking in proved hardly any trouble compared to a few other times you'd had to check into a hotel just for one night. But luck seemed to be on your side that day.

You and Joe walk hand in hand up to the room, having parted ways with the rest of the group in the lobby once everyone had acquired their room keys.

Walking into the room first, you grin widely and place your luggage down onto the queen sized bed before you started checking out the place. Satisfied, you sit on the bed with your legs crossed and a smile of content on your face as you open up your handbag and bring your phone out.

"Tell you what guys, I have made t to my room here in the Artist- oh, what was it called?" He furrows his brows in confusion as he shows the vlog parts of the room.

"Artist Residence." You remind him, your voice soft and a small smile on your face as he glances back at you with a grateful wink.

"Artist Residence, uh, in Brighton. And all this reclaimed stuff looks incredible. And they have Joe's tea, um, 'welcome to the Artist Residence in Brighton. Have a few drinks on us', smiley face." He pans the camera down on the handwritten note as he reads it aloud. "And two drink vouchers. But everything about this room, like, I love the finish. Like this whole vintage type of stuff is incredible."

"It really is beautiful." You add in agreement, nodding your head as Joe turns the camera toward you. "Have you showed them the view yet?"

He shakes his head and clicks his fingers, walking over to the window and beginning to talk about the view and the I360 that was perfectly centre in the view from the window.

Later on that day, you and Joe were walking down the streets of Brighton, your jacket pulled tightly around you and Joe's hand entwined with yours as you walked the short distance from the hotel to the restaurant where everyone was meeting for Zoe's birthday meal.

"I love this place." You say quietly as you walk down the cobblestone path, looking up at Joe as he looked down at you and smiled. "Look how beautiful everything is." Your words are soft as you look up and around at your surroundings, in awe of everything you were seeing.

"Yeah, me too." He nods, and you smile at him gently, tightening your grip on his hand as you use your other to tuck a piece of hair that was tickling your nose behind your ear.

The meal was wonderful, you finally got to catch up with Poppy and Mark after way too long of not seeing them both, and you managed to sneak your present to Zoe inconspicuously under the table. She'd been confused at first, but when you quietly insisted that she just put it into her bag and open it up later on, she gave up asking.

It wasn't anything bad, but you didn't want it to seem like you'd only got her the gist you did just to make yourself seem better in front of others. Instead, you wanted it to be strictly between you and Zoe.

A real silver charm bracelet with Cartier diamonds sat in the velvet box, with five charms hanging from the chain. One representing Nala, a little pug. One representing YouTube, a camera. Another representing your friendship, that one being a single rose. The last two were just as special, and all in all you were proud of the present you'd spent so much time thinking about over the previous few months.

Joe knew that you'd bought her it, of course, and had reassured you so many times that he knew she'd love it, which had calmed your nerves slightly. But when Zoe stood up to go to the bathroom and returned a few minutes later and sat down next to you with a smile, she waited until nobody was looking before leaning in and giving you a quick hug and whispering in your ear. "Thank you so much, (Y/N). I honestly love it."

You couldn't seem to stop smiling, and neither could she, and when you glanced over at Joe, he simply winked at you as if to say 'I told you so' before going back to eating his food and having a conversation with Alfie.

When the meal was over and done with, you all decided to walk down to the beach; which, seeing as by that point everyone was at least a little tipsy, probably wasn't the best of ideas. But nonetheless, when you arrived and almost immediately tripped face first into the pebbles only to be caught by Joe who couldn't help but laugh at your expense along with the rest of the group, you couldn't help but laugh.

You spent a relatively respectable amount of time on the beach, shoving each other towards the water and popping into what felt like at least twenty different vlogs.

The walk back to the hotel you and Joe spent walking behind the others, or well, Joe did anyways. You'd bribed him into giving you a piggy back, and so now you had your legs wrapped around his waist and your chin resting on his shoulder as you breathed softly against his jaw.

"Hey Joe?" You hum, and he turns his head to look you in the eyes curiously. "I love you."

"I love you too, pretty." He grins, and you lean around to kiss him quickly before squeaking and tightening your grip on him as he sped up to catch up with the others. "Hey guys, wait up! My little legs are carrying another pair of little legs now too!"

#Joe Sugg Imagine #Joe Sugg Imagines #Joe Sugg #thatcherjoe #thatcherjoe imagine #thatcherjoe imagines #thatcherjoe oneshot #thatcherjoe oneshots #Joe Sugg oneshot #Joe sugg oneshots #The Buttercream Squad Imagine #The Buttercream Squad Imagines #the buttercream squad #buttercream squad imagine #the buttercream squad oneshots #buttercream imagines

88 notes · View notes

bensoloredemptiontrain · 5 years

Text

The Rise of Skywalker Teaser Trailer & Defense of Bendemption / Reylo

I was emailing with a friend and fellow Reylo, and she was concerned that Reylo might not happen and Ben might not be redeemed, based on the new trailer. I wrote a lengthy response, and am posting a slightly edited version here:

These are my thoughts, in outline format:

The title, "The Rise of Skywalker" - does this mean Rey is related to Luke, and therefore to Kylo?

There are various possible other meanings. It could mean that Rey is a symbolic Skywalker. It could mean that Ben carries on the Skywalker legacy. It could mean that the "Skywalker" rises in Ben, that he returns to the light and carries on Luke's legacy. It could mean that Rey and Ben get together and carry on the Skywalker legacy together by teaching a new generation and making Skywalker babies. It could mean that Luke's influence increases after his death.

There is no way Rey is a Skywalker by blood. They've said that she's never seen Han or Leia or Luke or Kylo in person before The Force Awakens (TFA). That rules out her being Leia's kid. They could still theoretically have her be Luke or Han's kid (with an "unknown" mother), but remember this is Disney we're talking about. Sexual purity and sex only in the context of marriage is a big thing. This is a movie marketed for twelve-year-olds, and sex outside of marriage is NOT a kid-friendly topic. I can't imagine Disney going that route. Also, you think people were upset because The Last Jedi (TLJ) wasn't what people expected? Imagine the backlash if they make it canon that Han cheated on Leia. No. Just... no.

They're not going to go the incest route again, or else they risk being labeled as the franchise that promotes romantic attraction between relatives. (Again. This is Disney.) The attraction between Luke and Leia was mostly an accident; George Lucas did not plan on having them be related when he wrote IV; then during V he wasn't sure if Harrison Ford would sign for another movie (so Leia needed to have another option besides Han), so he kept the Luke/Leia option open until VI, when he could go full steam ahead with Han/Leia. The overall arc of this series (VII-IX) was planned beforehand; you'd think that if Rian wrote the "smut hut" scene and they were related, someone would have gone, "NO NO NO NO NO, THEY'RE RELATED YOU CAN'T DO THAT."

Many Star Wars movie titles really only make sense after the movie, in the context of the movie.

Regarding the title, Kathleen Kennedy said, "It could mean a lot of different things. And I think that’s what was important to us. We didn’t want to have a title that felt like it was telling you the story." i.e. the interpretation is not meant to be obvious, and the title is not meant to imply that Rey is related to Luke.

Is there still hope for Reylo? The teaser looks like JJ might be pandering to the antis/fanboys.

YOU BET THERE'S STILL HOPE FOR REYLO!

The trailer needs to bring the fandom back together. TLJ was really divisive. If they make a Reylo teaser trailer, the antis won't even think about watching the movie. They've had the whole basic story arc planned out even before TFA was released, and I believe JJ started writing The Rise of Skywalker (TROS) before TLJ came out. They are NOT going to change the whole direction of the series because a few people are stupid and loud. But they likely WILL make a trailer that appeals to everyone, so everyone will want to see the move.

The trailer for Return of the Jedi (ROTJ) focuses on Luke, Leia, and Han, so it makes sense (from a "throwback" perspective) to make this trailer focus on Rey, Finn, and Poe.

JJ Abrams liked TLJ.

There ABSOLUTELY is a romantic/sexual subplot between Ben and Rey - the bridal carry, "I can take whatever I want," "I can show you the ways of the Force," "you're not alone" / "neither are you," the hand-holding scene, the elevator scene, THE ENTIRE THRONE ROOM SCENE WHICH WAS BASICALLY A SEX SCENE FROM THE MOMENT BEN SUMMONS ANAKIN'S LIGHTSABER AND MAYBE EVEN BEFORE THAT, "please," etc., etc. Rian says that the two fingers touching is "the closest thing to a sex scene that Star Wars will ever have." Mark Hamill refers to the "romantic tension" between Rey and Ben (he starts to say "sexual tension" and then stops himself) and adds, "they never let ME touch a finger!"

The principle of "Chekhov's gun" - you only put something in a story if it's relevant. (The Luke/Leia subplot doesn't count, see discussion above.) Therefore, from a narrative perspective, the romance between Rey and Ben must be relevant to the story in some way. It's not imagined or made up by fans.

Rey's story arc - the thing Rey wants most is belonging and a family. Doesn't she deserve to get this? Therefore for her to get HER happy ending, she needs to have a family. The Resistance is a symbolic family, but I'm talking about more than that. You could pair her with Poe or Finn, but that doesn't work as well. Poe doesn't have the emotional depth that Rey does, and Finn has Rose. I have a theory that one of the main reasons Rose was introduced was so that Finn would have somebody to love, because he's not getting Rey. What would happen to Rose if Finn and Rey got together? (We're sure Poe will be fine if he doesn't get Rey, the guy has chemistry with anything that stands still long enough.)

Again, heroine's journey. Cue Beauty and the Beast, Tangled, etc. The heroine of the "heroine's journey" story line ALWAYS falls in love and lives happily ever after (after her lover nearly dies). The heroine ALWAYS falls in love with someone that is different from her in some way and who helps her grow as a person. You CANNOT say this about Finn or Poe; you can ONLY say it about Kylo.

JJ was the one who STARTED Reylo. TFA looks so much like a fairy tale, it's not even funny. Rey's dressed in white, Ben looks like a dark prince (and his lightsaber looks like a knight's sword), their first and last meetings in the movie take place in FORESTS, the scene where Rey runs out of Maz's castle looks like the scene where Cinderella runs out of the king's castle, the scene where Ben says "I can show you the ways of the Force" sounds like the scene where Aladdin sings to Jasmine "I can show you the world," and the whole idea of a beautiful girl meeting a guy who seems and looks inhuman at first sounds an awful lot like Beauty and the Beast. JJ's not stupid. He knows how this comes across; he knew EXACTLY what he was doing. Also, who carries someone bridal-style across a battlefield?! That's literally the most romantic but also dumbest way to carry someone - he can't reach his lightsaber! (Contrast this with when he captured Poe, he just had the stormtroopers drag him onto the ship.)

Kylo is repairing his mask, is fighting together with stormtroopers, and may be the one who attacks her in the beginning. / Is this a waste of Adam Driver's talent?

Take a good look at the hands repairing the mask. They do NOT look like Kylo's hands. They look kind of furry or hairy, so either this is a humanoid alien, or it's a human wearing some really hairy coat. Also, look at the bracelets on the wrists. I am almost 100% positive that this isn't Adam Driver.

He's fighting with stormtroopers. Yes, it appears that way. This could either take place before his redemption, OR there is a theory that either Hux will try to overthrow Kylo and the First Order will split into factions (so this could be Kylo's men against Hux's) OR there is another theory that Finn will help the stormtroopers rebel (so this could be Kylo on the light side leading the stormtroopers who are in rebellion).

When he strikes down the guy in the forest, his fighting style looks more sexy and assured, as opposed to the vicious and unstable fighting style that we've come to expect from TFA and TLJ, which might imply that his "soul" is healing.

Adam Driver knew where this was going from the beginning. They told him his character's whole arc before he signed, because he didn't just want to play the token bad guy. He wanted to play someone with emotional depth and challenges, so we can expect to see that continued in TROS. When Adam is asked about Kylo's story arc, he ALWAYS gets this little secret smile on his face, even though he's trying to keep his face neutral. It's adorable. When he was asked what he liked best about his character's story arc in TROS, Adam said that he couldn't say, but that "we're working toward something in particular with that character" (and he followed this with another one of those secret, adorable smiles).

NO ONE INVOLVED WITH STAR WARS CALLS KYLO THE VILLAIN. NO ONE. Contrast this with Vader (who was redeemed) who was blatantly called the villain in the teaser trailer for ROTJ. And, the teaser trailer for ROTJ had NO hint whatsoever that Vader was redeemable. No one guessed it. There weren't really hints elsewhere in A New Hope or The Empire Strikes Back that Vader was redeemable, either. (Contrast this with Ben.)

Maybe Kylo is the one who attacks her in the beginning. Sure, maybe. It looks like his gloves (although you don't see his face, so it might not be him). But if this is a fight between them, it could easily be at the beginning of the movie, before he gets redeemed and before they fall in love. Also, what if the trailer makes it look like he's attacking her, but really this takes place after he's redeemed and she's jumping into the cockpit to JOIN him? We don't know.

She's not being shot at. She's being chased, but we don't see her being shot at, which is interesting. You could make the argument that maybe the guns on the TIE Silencer have jammed, but that doesn't seem likely, given that the ship looks pretty sleek and new and intact.

You don't make a legitimate villain this sexy. You just don't. (JJ has even gone on record saying that Ben looks like a "dark prince" when he removes his helmet during TFA.)

Rey seems to hang around just with Finn, Poe, etc. / Kylo does not seem to play a major part in all this.

Kylo has NEVER played a big role in the TEASER trailers... they've always focused mainly on Rey (and Finn and Poe). In TFA teaser, we just see him from the back igniting his lightsaber in the forest. In TLJ teaser, we just see a close-up shot of Kylo holding his lightsaber. Kylo has NEVER had more than a brief cameo in a teaser trailer, but he's always had a bigger part in the regular trailer. Actually, his role in this teaser trailer is bigger than in the other teaser trailers!

They could intentionally be cutting down his screen time in the trailers if he doesn't really have any "villain" scenes in the movie, to keep that a surprise for when people actually see the movie.

Trailers are great at leaving out important details. The teaser trailer for TFA leaves out the fact that Rey has the Force. The teaser trailer for TLJ trailer leaves out the Force bond between Rey and Ben. (etc.)

Trailers are great at being misleading. The regular trailer for TFA trailer implies that Luke would actually have a role in the movie. The regular trailer for TLJ implies that Rey was talking to Ben when she says, "I need someone to show me my place in all of this."

Also, check out this picture of Ben in TROS! That look on his face totally screams tall-dark-and-broody-guy-redeemed-from-the-dark-and-reuniting-with-his-true-love ;) I don't think I've ever actually seen him look this at peace.

AND check out Daisy's reaction when asked about Rey and Kylo this weekend - the secret smile / trying-not-to-smile expression and the "we'll have to wait and see."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_0diw4fAisQ (3:30-4:00)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R5E6EbcAMRE (0:00-0:10)

#star wars #the rise of skywalker #episode ix #ben solo #reylo

0 notes

newyorktheater · 7 years

Text

Dennis, the sullen and unsettling student at the center of Julia Cho’s play “Office Hour” is strongly reminiscent of the real-life student Cho Seung-Hui, an English major at Virginia Polytechnic Institute who killed 32 people on campus in 2007. I was working at CNN then and persuaded his playwriting teacher to let me read the plays he had written for class. There was violence in his writing, and some foul and angry scenarios that had repelled his classmates. His teacher was understandably defensive – he couldn’t have known the plays were anything but the sophomoric fantasies of an aspiring writer who demonstrated no special talent.

In “Office Hour,” Dennis (Ki Hong Lee) is a would-be writer, and an outcast whose stories repulse his classmates. “Perhaps it was the combination of necrophilia, incest and cannibalism in an assignment that was supposed to be autobiographical that really pushed the class over the edge,” says Gina (Sue Jean Kim), his writing teacher.

In the first scene, two colleagues who previously had Dennis in their classes warn Gina that Dennis is not just garden-variety “troubled” – “this kid is trouble,” David (Greg Keller) tells her: “Painfully socially awkward. Totally isolated. Delusional—he thinks he’s a great writer. Obsessed with violence.” Dennis never says a word in class, or outside of class, to anybody. David believes the best-case scenario is that Dennis will kill himself; worst case “he takes as many people with him as possible.”

Genevieve (Adeola Role), Gina’s other colleague, says that maybe Gina will be able to reach him because “you guys must have stuff in common—not psychologically but, you know, a background.” Although there’s no direct mention in the script of what specifically that background is, there are a few lines that indicate both characters are from immigrant families, and both performers are Asian-American. (Cho Seung-Hui had emigrated with his family from South Korea when he was eight.)

So, Gina invites Dennis to see her during her office hour, which leads us to expect the usual formula of such set-ups: Although it will be a challenge at first, Gina will eventually break through to Dennis, who will slowly flower under her tutelage. Within a few minutes of his arrival, however, Dennis takes out a gun and shoots Gina dead.

But then there is a blackout, and when the lights come back on, they are back to talking as before – or, more precisely, Gina is back to talking and Dennis to ignoring her.

As it turns out, with the exception of the shooting and some later variations of it, as well as other similarly self-consciously theatrical touches, “Office Hour” does follow the standard teacher-student formula. Dennis does start talking.

Through their conversation, the playwright posits a handful of intriguing insights, much of it about stigma and the fight to overcome it. People who refuse to socialize or even speak, for example, may in fact feel alienated and powerless, but their silence is not necessarily an effort to disappear; quite the opposite. They might be forcing those around them to give them attention (even if it’s negative), and thus gain a measure of control

Largely, though, in “Office Hour,” Julia Cho doesn’t seem to be seriously exploring a terrifying national trend so much as capitalizing on it. She undermines her evident interest in alienation and connection, by creating interaction that too often doesn’t ring true. The meta-theatrical shooting is not even the most unrealistic moment in the play. Gina opens up to Dennis – about her difficult father; about her divorce — in a way that is hard to imagine a teacher doing, especially one who doesn’t know her pupil yet and has been warned about his behavior. Granted, even a very troubled teenager can be exceptionally intelligent and articulate, certainly grandiose, but Dennis, doubly-shrouded in baseball cap and hoodie while wearing sunglasses, has apparently been completely silent and withdrawn for years. When he expresses himself, through his writing, it’s been silly deliberate shockers about cannibalism and incest. It seems dubious that some of the first words he speaks aloud would be: “The way I am is a rational response to the situation I’m in…Society needs people like me just as much as it needs the leaders, the celebrities, the admired.” It doesn’t help that director Neel Keller seems inattentive to trivial but tell-tale matters of verisimilitude: Would a teacher at an official school activity sit in a quasi lotus position atop her desk?

It is possible to argue that “Office Hour” is ill-timed – that, had the play not been opening just a few days after yet another record-breaking mass shooting, it would be easier to appreciate, say, Julia Cho’s structurally inventive experiments in multiple-choice/alternative narratives, or the ethereal moments created by the design team. But, given the almost 300 mass shootings in the United States so far this year alone, a play that uses gun violence in the opaque and overly clever way that “Office Hour” does will surely be ill-timed for some time to come.

Office Hour

Public Theater Written by Julia Cho Directed by Neel Keller Featuring Greg Keller, Sue Jean Kim, Ki Hong Lee, and Adeola Role

Scenic Design: Takeshi Kata Costume Design: Kaye Voyce Lighting Design: Christopher Akerlind Original Music & Sound Design: Bray Poor Running time: 90 minutes, with no intermission Tickets: $75-$150. $20 lottery Office Hour is scheduled to run through December 3

Office Hour Review: A Mass Killer in the Making…or Misunderstood? Dennis, the sullen and unsettling student at the center of Julia Cho’s play “Office Hour” is strongly reminiscent of the real-life student Cho Seung-Hui, an English major at Virginia Polytechnic Institute who killed 32 people on campus in 2007.

0 notes

epistolizer · 7 years

Text

Christianity Solidified By Apologetics In The Early Days Of The Church

In the Church today, a debate rages over the relationship of philosophy and theology to one another. Some scholarly believers as epitomized by Norman Geisler argue that, since this world is God's world, both can be used to understand Creation if each of these disciplines are approached from a Bibliocentric perspective. The other side of the debate contends that, since theology contains God's revelation to mankind, philosophy at best merely repeats the understanding of theology or at worst actively undermines theology by enshrining human reason as the ultimate standard.

This debate extends back to the earliest days of the Church. Living in the Hellenistic world awash with numerous philosophies, mystery cults, and state religions, the Church quite early on had to address these realities.

Basing their approach on Paul's Mars Hill missionary efforts in Acts 17, early Christians advocating the value of philosophy pointed out that philosophy could be used as a point of contact with the unbeliever when both philosophy and theology concurred on certain matters. For example, Paul was able to win the attention of some Stoics because of the similarities between Christianity and that particular philosophy. Justin Martyr, who went from being a Stoic to an Aristotelian to a Pythagorean to a Platonist, ultimately settled upon being a Christian because he categorized the faith as the true philosophy.

The second approach emphasized its own Pauline justification as well by invoking I Corinthians 1 where in the passage the world's wisdom is categorized as foolishness. Elsewhere, Colossians 2:8 says, “See to it that no one takes you captive through philosophy and empty deception.” Those adhering to this approach noted how philosophy often bred heresy and unbelief.

A number of Church Fathers favorably disposed towards philosophy harbored questionable beliefs often linked to Platonism. For example, Origen of Alexandria believed that Satan was not beyond redemption since the Devil is a spirit not unlike a run of the mill human being (Gonzalez, 80). Such a perspective was often derived from the Platonic view that God was a nondescript entity that did not create the universe from nothing and did not personally care for individual human beings. Yet God as revealed through Scripture and incarnated in Jesus Christ is known personally by His followers and cares when even the tiniest sparrow falls to the ground.

When viewed from a certain light, both of these approaches relating philosophy and theology possessed merit. Each agreed regarding the centrality of God's revelation of Jesus Christ and on the need for salvation. Those appreciating philosophy were correct in pointing out that all truth is God's truth and that segments of truth can be used to introduce the lost to the source of all truth. Those leery of philosophy were correct in pointing out the danger the discipline would wreak if left unchecked. The descendants of the early Church walking the Earth would do well to consider both of these positions.

I Peter 3:15 commands the Christian to provide an answer for the hope within. Many apologists and theologians interpret this as giving a response to objections and inaccuracies raised by the unbeliever. In the process, the potential exists to bring a substantial number into the faith by highlighting those points of commonality shared between the faith and the most profound insights that human thought have to offer.

Realizing that a percentage of the persecution befalling the Church was the result of inaccurate rumors and incorrect assumptions, the early Apologists set out to set the record straight in a manner that would make a Madison Avenue public relations firm proud. The Apologists answered head on the charges leveled against Christianity and turned them against their pagan adversaries. When accused of orgies and incest through misunderstandings as to the nature of the love feast and the practice of calling fellow believers “brother” or “sister”, the Apologists explained what these terms meant and the pointed out that the pagans themselves committed such debaucheries as exhibited by certain Dionysian rites. (Gonzalez, 50). Accused of atheism for believing in what the Romans considered god and for not believing in the sanctioned state pantheon, Polycarp at his trial was ordered by the judge to vocally proclaim, “Out with atheists.” Polycarp theatrically gestured towards the assembled crowd and declared, “Yes, out with the atheists (Gonzalez, 45).”

Having deflected some of the criticism, the Apologists sought to win Classical civilization by showing that the insights and accomplishments achieved by that particular cultural tradition were not necessarily antithetical to Christian belief in and of itself. Justin Martyr argued that all knowledge stemmed from the universal reason of the Logos manifested in the person of Jesus Christ. Reason was to the Greek what revelation was to the Hebrew in terms of the basis of each culture's epistemological foundation. Justin in fact characterized Christianity as true philosophy.

The Apologists found themselves in an era hostile to the claims of Christianity. Yet they were willing to proclaim the message that the hostile forces arrayed against the Church needed to hear. Though it has not yet come to the same point in our society where believers are being executed for their faith, the contemporary Church needs to emulate this example before such a state of affairs occurs once more.

Over the course of its early history, the Church faced numerous threats. Some of these such as the hostile Roman and Jewish authorities came from without. Those claiming to come from within the Church's own ranks as embodied by the heresies of Gnosticism and Marcionism were as equally dangerous in their own particular manners.

Gnosticism was the name given to a number of related sects claiming they possessed knowledge beyond that held by the Church and the ordinary believer. Gnosticism was in fact a blending of Platonism Judaism, Zoroastrian, and Christian beliefs (Chadwick, 35). A number of these beliefs held by Gnosticism put the movement at odds with the Christian faith.

First among these was that only the spiritual was good and that matter was in fact evil. This teaching manifested itself in two primary ways. Some Gnostics engaged in extreme ascetic practices that ignored basic bodily needs. Other Gnostics invoked their disregard for the material as an excuse for debauched and licentious practices since they insisted bodily actions bore no impact upon one's spiritual well-being.

Beyond this, Gnostics possessed several faulty notions regarding Christ. For example, many Gnostics held that Christ did not actually possess a human body but rather merely appeared to have one. Such a claim would make Christ a liar and thus unworthy of worship.

In Luke 24:39, Christ Himself says, “See My hands and My feet, that it is I Myself: touch Me and see, for a spirit does not have flesh and bones as you see that I have.” If Christ did not have an actual material body, why would He go to such a length in deceiving His associates into thinking He had one? In regards to Gnostic conceptions of salvation, it was not enough to believe on the Lord Jesus Christ. Instead, one needed to be initiated into the inner circle of hidden knowledge in order to obtain the passwords needed to ascend to higher levels of enlightened existence.

The second heresy faced by the early Church was Marcionism, named for its founder Marcion. Marcion believed that the God of the Old Testament who created the physical world and who was worshiped by the Jews was not God the Father of Jesus (Chadwick, 39). The higher God sent Jesus into the world to correct the evil wrought by the maniacal Jehovah. To do away with physical procreation which nauseated him, Marcion argued that Christ stepped onto the world stage as a fully grown individual.

Marcion then took it upon himself to establish a canon of sacred writings suitable to the teachings of his sect. Having enunciated this antipathy for the Old Testament God, Marcion rejected that particular portion of Scripture. Of what came to be known as the New Testament, Marcion accepted only the Gospel of Luke and Paul's Epistles. Even these documents did not escape his editor's pen as Marcion proceeded to expunge these texts of their Old Testament quotes and allusions which he claimed had been placed there as Jewish propaganda.

Gnosticism and Marcionism presented powerful threats to the fledgling Christian Church. Fortunately, the Church was able to rally around the faith elaborated in Scripture and empowered by the Holy Spirit to keep these false doctrines at bay.

As the Church grew in number and influence, it was not long before those assembling under its banner or claiming to speak on behalf of its divine founder began promoting and squabbling over differing theological beliefs and interpretations. A number of these were either highly controversial or even blatantly aberrant.

Montanism was a reaction against Marcion and Gnostic theologies. Both Gnosticism and Marcionism sought to undermine the more conventional literal interpretation of Scripture by allegorizing these as many Gnostics had done or by denying the authenticity of such outright as Marcion had done. Each sect also denied essential doctrines such as Christ's virgin birth or physical incarnation.

Montanus along with Prisca and Maximilla were alleged to have prophesied under direct inspiration of the Holy Spirit against as what was classified as “...the Gnostic elimination of the eschatological expectation (Chadwick, 52). “ In many ways, Montanism proved as divisive as its Gnostic and Marcion competition. Many congregations in Asia Minor split, with the church at Thyatira remaining Montanist for nearly a century (Chadwick, 52).

The Montanist movement even appealed to theologians of considerable reputation such as Tertullian. Tertullian was originally attracted to the movement's rigorous ethics and spiritual vigor. However, even he grew weary of the innovation after a fashion because of the movement's failure to deliver on its promise of a new era marked by increased accessibility to the power of the Holy Spirit and its promise of a Christian life surpassing even that enjoyed by the Apostles themselves (Gonzalez, 76).

Such enthusiasm could not be sustained indefinitely. Even if it could, Montanism was not even necessarily that good of an idea since it was itself based upon questionable theological assumptions. For example, Montanists claimed that those doubting the veracity of their prophetic utterances were guilty of blaspheming the Holy Spirit, the greatest offense one could commit in violation of Scripture. Hippolytus pointed out in reference to the Montanist emphasis on supernatural manifestations that these were not the greatest miracle that an individual could experience. But rather that honor was reserved for the occasion of their own individual conversion (Chadwick, 53). The orthodox response to Gnosticism and Marcionism was not to be found in the fits of ecstasy and seeming irrationalism as offered by Montanism but rather in more powerful tools that the Church would find at its disposal.

It would probably not be an exaggeration to say that the average Christian thinks that the Bible plopped down from Heaven complete with leather binding and the words of Christ conveniently highlighted in red. However, the process by which the Church came to accept this gift from God, particular in regards to the books of the New Testament, was a gradual process fraught with a certain degree of controversy along the way.

In response to the Marcion and Gnostic denial of certain Gospels and portions of the Epistles embodied by Marcion's acceptance of only the Gospel of Luke and his removal of Paul's Old Testament quotations as Jewish propaganda, the Church felt that it needed to formalize which writings were binding as divinely inspired. Since Jesus accepted the Old Testament as divinely inspired, so would the Church. Therefore, most of the debate arose surrounding what post-Old Testament writings would be accepted into the corpus of holy writ.

According to Justo Gonzalez in “The Story Of Christianity: The Early Church To The Dawn Of The Reformation”, the first works accepted by the Church were the Gospels. Instead of being discouraged by alleged discrepancies between the exacting details of the Gospels, orthodox Christians pointed out how the considerable agreement between these documents undermined Gnostic claims to the secret knowledge as found in the sect's preferred text the Gospel of Saint Thomas (Gonzalez 63). The next set of works accepted by the Church included the Pauline Epistles and the Book of Acts.

The greatest debate centered around the texts found towards the end of what Christians categorize as the New Testament. Debate ensued over II Peter, Hebrews, James, II John, III John, Jude, and Revelation. Councils were convened at Hipporegiaus in 393, at Carthage in 397, and the Council convened in 419 was under the leadership of none other than Augustine. It was the purpose of these councils to identify which books stood out as having been authored under divine inspiration. However, this process of consensus did not always end the dispute as was the case regarding the Book of Revelation. Though accepted by the third century, its inspiration was questioned after Constantine's conversion because of the book's harsh words regarding tyrannical government and worldliness but this concern subsided by the second half of the fourth century (Gonzalez, 63).

Though the New Testament did not plop down fully formed from Heaven into the hands of Billy Graham or John Paul II, the Church can rest assured as to this work's divine authenticity because even to this very day there are few things to which all Christians agree. For example, Dispensationalists and Covenant theologians seldom agree on the specifics of Scripture's eschatological chronology, but both will agree upon the supremacy of the Lord proclaimed within its pages and the value of each inspired word to the salvation of mankind to this very day.

Faced with challenges such as Gnosticism and Marcionism, the Church formulated several weapons to be used against these kinds of heresies, the New Testament canon being the most powerful tool at the disposal of the Church. However, the Church also possessed a number of other supplementary weapons to be used in a supportive role in the realm of intellectual and spiritual confrontation.

One of these tools used by the Church came to be known as the Apostle's Creed. This symbol of faith was used to identify true believers since those reciting it with understanding were enunciating orthodox doctrine. This creed spoke to the subject of Jesus as God's Son, of the Virgin Birth, the Resurrection, the historicity of Christ's incarnation under the rule of Pontius Pilate and other foundational Christian doctrines with which assorted competing sects found themselves at variance.

The second used in the Church's arsenal was the Rule of Faith. Very much akin to the Apostle's Creed, the Rule of Faith provided a brief summation of key doctrinal ideas such as those enunciated in the Creed such as the Creation, the Incarnation, and the Ascension. Tertullian found the Rule of Faith easier to use than the Scripture itself since the heretics interpreted Scripture through the lens of their pre-established theological preferences while not accepting the doctrines articulated within the Rule (Chadwick, 45).

The third method employed by the Church to protect the faith was the notion of Apostolic Succession. According to the idea of Apostolic Succession, Christ passed his teaching authority on to the Apostles who in turn handed orthodox teachings over to their successors who eventually handed down this heritage throughout history in an unbroken chain. This idea was formulated to combat Gnostic claims of secret knowledge either passed down outside the established Apostolic channels or lost until rediscovered by the Gnostic adepts of succeeding generations.

Each of these tools used by the Church did possess considerable influence yet could not surpass the power of the New Testament Canon. Both the Apostle's Creed and the Rule of Faith were derived from the teachings of Scripture and were merely tools used to summarize the greater body of work contained within the pages of the New Testament. Apostolic Succession was only of use if those invoking it were willing to adhere to the truth of the Gospel proclaimed by the Apostles and embraced by the early Church. Succeeding centuries would provide the results of what would happen when the traditions of men were given nearly the same weight as the revelation of God.

I Corinthians 12:28 and Ephesians 4:11 list the office and gift of teaching as one of the primary missions within the structure of the Church. It has often been the duty of those taking up the mantle of teaching to fight the doctrinal errors of the day and to prepare their respective congregations to face challenges in the society at large. Two individuals taking up this role in the early church included Irenaeus of Lyon and Tertulian of Carthage.

Iraeneus was born in Asia Minor around AD 130. Eventually Irenaeus migrated to Lyon in southern France where he became presbyter and ultimately bishop after Photinus died under persecution. A disciple of Polycarp, Irenaeus had a pastor's heart in that his greatest interest was in teaching his congregation to live the Christian life and comprehend doctrine. As such, he did not engage in significant philosophical speculation (Gonzalez, 68).

That does not mean, though, that Irenaeus was an intellectual slouch. In “Demonstrations of the Apostolic Faith” and “Against Heresies”, Irenaeus played the role of an ancient Hank Hanegraaff or Norman Geisler by refuting the doctrinal errors of his day --- namely Gnosticism --- and by instructing his readers in essential Christian belief. Taking the shepherd role of a pastor to heart, Irenaeus saw God as a shepherd lovingly leading his flock of humanity to the culmination of history (Gonzalez, 68).

According to Irenaues, humanity was created as children eventually to takeits place as the judges of angels who themselves would help mankind in reaching the point of maturity like a tutor teaching a prince to one day take his place of rulership. Man is also to be taught by God's Word and Holy Spirit. Though history is now marked by sin, there would have been a history anyway (though one not quite as tragic as that now filling the world's libraries). In the drama of history, Israel is the instrument through which God's Word and Spirit reach out to all of mankind with an offer of eternal communion in the form of Jesus Christ.

The second teacher to be discussed is Tertullian of Carthage. In certain respects, Tertullian was the Francis Schaeffer or Ravi Zacharias of his day, utilizing logic and argument to reveal the intellectual and spiritual bankruptcy of his opponents. For example, Tertullian used his legal and rhetorical training to expose the inherent inconsistency of Trajan's policy regarding Christianity: don't actively flush out believers but indeed prosecute them if they happen to get caught (Gonzalez, 74).

Tertullian believed Christianity represented all truth and to seek truth apart from it through Classical culture was pointless at best and idolatry at worst. This sentiment was summarized by his famous aphorism asking what does Athens have to do with Jerusalem. Despite his wit and penetrating logic, Tertullian veered from the straight and narrow off into the Montantist movement which often emphasized alleged fits of the Spirit over the application of logic in addressing other rising heresies.

Perhaps Tertullian's greatest contribution was his understanding of the Trinity. His understanding was formulated in response to Modalism (the belief that the names of “Father”, “Son”, and “Holy Spirit” signify the modes or roles of a unitary God rather than distinctive individuals). Tertullian said of the Trinity that the Godhead consists of one substance and three persons with Christ as the Savior being that distinct person possessing two natures (Gonzalez, 77). And to top off this formidable existence of intellectual accomplishment, Tertullian is honored as the father of Western theology for being among the first to use Latin rather than Greek in his writings.

It is often easy to look down upon teachers and apologists for their application of the intellect in approaching the things of the spirit. However, it cannot be denied that these thinkers play a pivotal role in strengthening the faith of believers and in introducing the faith to a hostile and unbelieving world.

By Frederick Meekins

Chadwick, Henry. “The Early Church.” 1967.

Gonzalez, Justo. “The Story Of Christianity (Vol. 1): The Early Church To The Dawn Of The Reformation. Harper Collins Publishers, 1984.

0 notes