#corrects them when we’re doing literary analysis and they get something wrong | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

caelestis-composition · 3 years

Note

killshot anon! YEAH i totally agree w/ your view on kaeya. it's so weird to me that people will blame him for his role in a situation he was forced into as a child through no choice of his own. that itself had to be traumatic, not to mention everything that happened later. i hate when people say he's untrustworthy - like yeah, he's lied, so has everyone? it's clear he does it mostly to protect himself. not to mention that (& sadism) can be symptoms of trauma. kaeya deserves nothing but happiness

take a seat folks it’s time for a “brynn should’ve been an english major” lesson! today we’re gonna learn some literary theory; specifically, we’re gonna apply psychoanalytical trauma theory to kaeya’s backstory and current character. killshot anon i bet you never thought this would result in a whole ass essay.

disclaimer one! you are allowed to dislike kaeya! i am not saying you need to like him or his character, you’re entitled to your opinion and i’m not here to change your mind.

disclaimer two! i am in no way an expert and this is all for fun! this is just my silly little analysis of one of my favorite characters as someone who’s studied literary theory and rhetoric and can also apply personal experience. seriously analysis is like a hobby to me and this is just an excuse for me to ramble about kaeya.

disclaimer three! this contains lots of spoilers! basically for everything we know in-game, general knowledge as well as stuff from his voicelines and character story. don’t read this if you don’t want spoilers.

since this is going to be filled with spoilers and is about to get really long, everything will be under a cut. for those who wanna read my dumb super informal essay: enjoy!

final note: yeah this is over 2000 words long can you tell i like analysis

⭒

let’s start by getting a quick rundown of trauma theory out of the way. to begin, what is “trauma?” in this case, trauma is going to refer to an experience that greatly affects and changes one’s life; attitudes, memories, behaviors, mental state, etc. while not all changes may be bad, per se, the overall effect of trauma is generally a negative one, which is why it’s so significant. literary trauma theory, then, explores these changes and the impact of trauma in literature. it analyzes the psychological and social effects of trauma, explaining what those effects are and why they happen. in the context of a specific character, trauma theory breaks down said character’s behaviors, feelings, and general mentality in relation to their past experiences; trauma theory hopes to explain to others the reasons for why a character may act or feel the way they do, all based upon the character’s experiences, particularly traumatic ones. our character today is the lovely kaeya alberich, with the “literature” being genshin impact. i’ll be referencing kaeya’s wiki page to ensure i get all details correct for his character story and voicelines.

it would be good to review kaeya’s backstory before delving into the actual analysis. though we don’t know much about his life before living in mondstadt, we’re told he was sent as an agent of khaenri’ah. and by “sent,” i mean his biological father abandoned him in a completely unfamiliar land to serve khaenri’ah’s interests and fullfil his mission—what this entirely entails hasn’t been revealed. mondstadt, however, welcomed kaeya “with open arms when they found him.” crepus ragnvindr took him in as his adopted son, with diluc as his adopted brother. kaeya and diluc were “almost like twins,” so close they “[knew] each other’s thoughts and intentions without a word.” he’d began a new life in mondstadt, one surrounded by friends and family that loved him; one that was completely shattered by crepus’s death. kaeya arrived at the scene of the disaster, and was led to believe diluc was the one who killed their father to “set his father free” from the effects of his delusion. there’d always been one big question in kaeya’s life: if it came down to it, who would he support? the nation that abandoned him, but he still felt loyal to, or the nation and family that took him in and really loved him? overrun with guilt, kaeya confessed his purpose to diluc, sparking a fight between the two brothers. in this fight, kaeya receives his cryo vision. though both brothers stepped away alive, they’ve never been able to make peace with one another. now, kaeya is the eccentric and charming cavalry captain of the knights of favonius; a man who gets his way by using any means necessary, regardless of whether or not it seems right.

kaeya’s not evil; he’s morally ambiguous, and that stems from what appears to be a general distrust of others. his life is one shrouded in secrecy. from the moment he stepped foot into mondstadt, he was surrounded by secrets. even now, he doesn’t talk about a lot of things, namely his past, vision, and feelings. though he’s always willing to get information out of others, kaeya never reveals anything about himself. he repeatedly tells the player they can confide in him, but whenever you try and pry into his life, he deflects your questions with some sort of witty comment or flirty remark. anything he does reveal is vague, or spoken in some sort of “code.” for example, his “interesting things” voiceline. he tells us about the owl of dragonspine, how it “seems to look right through you, while letting go of none of its own secrets,” and then tacks on a “quite fascinating, don’t you think?” it seems like an awfully accurate parallel to himself; kaeya does all he can to get information from others, but never gives anything about himself. now, this whole thing—his relationship with diluc falling apart and his need for secrecy—could have probably been avoided if he had just come clean about his mission years ago. so why didn’t he? to start, kaeya was a literal child. not only are children unable to properly tell the difference between right and wrong, but they’ll also typically follow their parents’ orders blindly. kaeya had just been abandoned, and he wouldn’t want to risk being cast out by mondstadt as well if he came clean right away. you see, there’s this thing about trauma, something that trauma theory states. traumatized people feel a sort of shame or guilt regarding their traumatic experience; they’ll keep quiet because they don’t want to cause problems or bother others with their issues. of course kaeya wouldn’t tell the truth about his past, he doesn’t want to destroy the genuinely loving relationships he’d built in mondstadt. his fight with diluc only proves what he was afraid of: if he’s honest, he’ll be abandoned again. and if kaeya’s used to all the lies, why should he bother changing?

another thing, if he’s not going to tell the truth, then why would he have initially gone along with his father’s plans? again, he was a child. he really had no choice, and was forced into a very wrong and cruel situation. there’s a good explanation for this, too, which is also stated in trauma theory; traumatized people will still do their best to please their abusers. especially if said abuser is a parent, that will drive traumatized people to work even harder to please them. although his father hurt him by ruthlessly abandoning him, kaeya still sought to make him and his homeland proud. he was willing to be used as a tool for their gain; that is, until he found people who actually cared about him. he was an impressionable child, of course he’s going to obey orders. but as he gets older, he feels torn. does he serve those who abandoned him, or those that took him in? his father—and arguably, khaenri’ah as a whole—hurt him, sure, but he still feels some loyalty and connection to his former home. instead of revealing anything, he lets the situation play out. that way, he can’t be blamed when things fall apart.

the thing about claiming he’s untrustworthy is that hardly anyone in-game believes that. he’s adored by the older folks in mondstadt, and foes and allies alike find him easy to talk to. despite seeming lazy and uninterested in work, kaeya takes his job very seriously. in fact, his story states that crepus’s death was the “first and only time kaeya failed in his duty.” the “only time” is especially important, because it signifies kaeya still fulfills his duties successfully. he’s had a total of one slip-up, and hasn’t failed since. no, kaeya is not untrustworthy. rather, kaeya finds everyone else untrustworthy. it’s not unlikely that this is a direct consequence of being abandoned as a child. although it’s been established that kaeya and diluc were very close as children, when crepus dies, kaeya assumes diluc is the one that killed him. in order to jump to such an extreme conclusion against someone he was so close to, there had to be some underlying sense of distrust. furthermore, kaeya expresses feeling as though he doesn’t belong anywhere. he was abandoned by khaenri’ah, and then worried he wouldn’t be accepted by mondstadt. he is, but there’s still that worry. if you place him in your teapot as a companion, he tells you that your home feels like someplace he belongs, following it up with a “heh, who’d have thought…” kaeya still feels as though he doesn’t belong in mondstadt; despite the fact that he’s a high-ranking knight of favonius and rather popular, he still feels like an outsider. he doesn’t trust that anyone actually wants him around, and he finds joy in testing peoples’ trustworthiness. it’s noted in his story and through his voicelines that the beloved cavalry captain has a rather sadistic nature. he likes putting people into difficult situations, to see what decisions they will make. he does this to both opponents and allies, testing to see who’s going to back out and who’ll keep fighting; in the sake of allies, who can he trust? or who will turn tail and abandon their teammates at the slightest hint of danger? i mentioned it previously, but kaeya doesn’t care what measures he has to take so long as his job gets done and he gets the answers he wants. it’s a sort of self-preserving mindset, putting himself above the safety of others. kaeya’s trying to protect himself, which makes sense with all he’s been through. he doesn’t want to be hurt, and instead finds pleasure in threatening harm upon others. it’s twisted, sure, but it’s because he can only trust himself in a world that he believes is out to get him. he’s got as many enemies—if not more—as he does allies; of course kaeya focuses on protecting himself first, whether physically or through keeping his secrets, well, secret.

his most obvious traumatic effect is definitely his alcoholism. but he uses it as a distraction, not just to wallow in self-pity. this is seen again in his story, particularly in story 3. it’s found that when his favorite drink, death after noon, is out of season, mondstadt’s crime rate is decreased drastically. at face value, this just means kaeya spends more time working when death after noon is low in supply. but kaeya doesn’t skip work to go to taverns; it’s already been established he takes his job very seriously, so this means he actually patrols and tracks down threats while off work when he can’t indulge in his favorite alcoholic drink. he doesn’t get drunk simply because he’s depressed. if he did, there wouldn’t be a drop in incidents when death after noon is out of season. no, kaeya uses both the alcohol and fighting to distract himself. after all, it’s a little hard to think about feeling sad when you’re either drunk out of your mind or fighting for your life.

despite being so secretive, kaeya gives us glimpses of his true emotions from time to time. as previously mentioned, his flirty attitude is nothing more than a mask to hide how he really feels; and kaeya is terribly, terribly lonely. that may be why he seems so extroverted. constantly being around people should, logically, drive away that feeling, but it doesn’t work like that. when he talks with the player, he frequently expresses disappointment when you have to leave. each time, though, he dampens the weight of his words with playful or flirty language. he’s lonely, but doesn’t want you to know that, like he’s afraid of asking you to stay. he takes the seriousness of his feelings, and basically bends it into some sort of lighthearted joke. kaeya hides his true feelings—negative feelings, to be exact—so that he doesn’t bother anyone. which is, again, something that happens with traumatized people. he displays that hesitance to reveal his true feelings, because there’s a shame or guilt that comes with his past. he doesn’t want to bother others or hold them back, so he puts on a smile and amps up the charisma. one other very important thing—but very small detail—i would like to note is his feelings toward family. his fell apart not even once, but twice, and kaeya still holds familial relationships in high regard. we know he doesn’t exactly care how he goes about getting his work done. he doesn’t pay attention to what’s “right” or “wrong,” so long as he gets what he needs. but one of his informants, vile, notes that the cavalry captain has one exception: he won’t work with those who threaten others’ families. in fact, kaeya claims those who do should be hunted down and destroyed. even though his own families have caused him so much pain—and he ended up estranged from both—he still understands the importance of having people who love you in your life. because he didn’t get that.

kaeya’s not evil. ultimately, as a knight of favonius, his goal is to protect others, because no one was there to protect him. and because no one was there to protect him, because he’s been hurt time and time again by people who were supposed to love him, kaeya has taken to protecting himself. he hides any and all negative feelings with a charismatic, friendly façade, because he thinks it’ll drive away his persistent loneliness. any “bad” actions of his were hardly his fault; he was forced into a life of secrecy and lies, and then abandoned by the first people who truly loved him. kaeya’s a multi-faceted, tragic character, one that toes the line between good and evil, and that’s what makes him so interesting.

#brynn yells #brynn answers #killshot anon #brynn's writing #genshin #genshin impact #kaeya #kaeya alberich #genshin kaeya

226 notes · View notes

andmaybegayer · 4 years

Text

Long Poetry Wallowposting

One of my favourite poems is William Carlos Williams’ “Red Wheelbarrow” (or “XXII” if you’re being dipshit about it), not because it’s an exceptional poem, but because of the circumstances surrounding the first time I read it.

In 2015 I convinced two of my friends to join me for a multidisciplinary academic competition thing. One of the rounds was the independent essay, which has an interesting twist: your team of three gets all three essay topics (critique a given essay, write an essay on a topic, and analyze a poem) and you have 30 minutes to discuss and split the topics before a 90 minute solo writing period.

(I could write another extended post about the bureaucratic shenanigans I went through surrounding that competition, someone remind me to tell that story sometime.)

I don’t remember what the other two topics were, but the poem was to analyze William Carlos Williams’ “Red Wheelbarrow”, a poem which looks like this:

so much depends upon a red wheel barrow glazed with rain water beside the white chickens

Now, I got roped into this competition by a teacher who I did not know and who gave us no more detail other than “Get a team of 3 together and I’ll vouch for you to skip a day of school and attend this competition” so we did not know that there was actually a published list of poems, books and artpieces that you should have studied before coming to this competition, including John Campbell’s “Hero with a thousand faces” and Jeff Koons’ “Puppy”.

So we were in for this Sight Unseen, No Background. We didn’t even know who Williams was.

Fortunately for me, my friends are horrible nerds. We’re not the dead poets society but we were still the kind of people who, bored in the back of english class, would write short poems and read each other’s shitty writing and who had fun proving that the integral of e^x was e^x and we took part in OTHER competitions and would show off obscure academic skills to each other and we thought that was cool. We were not lost at sea here.

So we stare at this for a second. With zero context, what the hell does this mean. Chicken is an implicitly funny word, of course, but that’s the 2000′s talking and this must be the 1900′s sometime. The enjambment is interesting but nothing crazy here, this isn’t e.e. cummings (not a fan by the way) and so, there’s really not a lot to look at. We spent ten minutes throwing ideas back and forth before almost simultaneously coming to the conclusion. This is just a scene, being described in poetry.

We discuss this idea for a few more minutes, and we allocate the actual writing of the essay to a friend (I messaged him about this to make sure I had my story straight) and then time was up, and we turned to our individual essays.

Reader-response analysis is a school of literary theory that is, some would say, kinda garbage. It asks the reader “what did that work make you think of, what did that work make you feel” and treats that as ground truth. The reader is an active element in this, and the way the reader feels is of course very flexible, leading many people to conclude that it is useless, since the reader is an unknown quantity here. Well, reader-response analysis is not actually garbage and can be a very useful tool in your literary toolkit if used appropriately. We all found we had the same reader’s response: a clear mental image of a scene. Maybe the floor is gravel, maybe it’s grass. There is a wheelbarrow leaned up against a shed, gleaming with the last drops of rain. A chicken pecks around nearby, with more close at hand. The smell of a heavy night of rain persists, the light is the bright cold glow of a wet morning that can shine without burning off the dew just yet.

So, that’s what we found. There’s no deeper meaning here. This poem is simply conveying to you the idea. We, of course, being dweebs, took it further. Attempting to find deeper meaning in this poem demonstrates an inability to take information at face value. Sometimes the pipe is just a pipe. Sometimes the red wheelbarrow is just a red wheelbarrow.

Turns out, that analysis is correct. At the time this was written, Williams was busy doing Imagism, which means he was being economical with words and precise with meaning. The poem is short because it needn’t be long. There’s some chickens and a wheelbarrow. The Wikipedia article for this poem is hilarious, there’s a section of quotes from people who believed there was a deep hidden meaning about a dying child Williams had cared for (he was a doctor) who had a red wheelbarrow as a toy. This explanation is nonsense, and I have rarely enjoyed reading someone being wrong as much as I have enjoyed reading phrases like:

At the time, I remember being mystified by the poem. However, being properly trained in literary criticism, I wondered what the real meaning of the poem was, what it was really about. ... What is left out of Williams' poem is the fact that when he conceived that image he was sitting at the bedside of a very sick child (Williams was a medical doctor). The story goes that as he sat there, deeply concerned about the child, he looked out the window, saw that image, and penned those words.

Of course you can't figure it out by studying the text. The clues aren't there. This poem was meant to be appreciated only by a chosen literary elite, only by those who were educated, those who had learned the back story (Williams was a doctor, and he wrote the poem one morning after having treated a child who was near death. The red wheelbarrow was her toy.)

and knowing that, you’re all wrong, get fucked. It’s just a wheelbarrow. According to Williams himself, he just saw this scene in a fisherman’s backyard and wrote a poem about the scene. I looked all this up the day after the competition, and I don’t think I’ve ever felt as good about a literary analysis.

Now don’t get me wrong, the curtains are sometimes blue for a reason. But in this case, absent any information indicating otherwise, the wheelbarrow really is just red because that’s what the author saw. In some cases you can draw additional meaning out of a work but it requires just as much discipline to read deeply as to prevent yourself reading too deep. We avoided the trap.

I think about this poem infrequently, maybe once every couple months. I can still recall it from memory. It is still an influential point of reference whenever I try to write something. I tried writing some Imagist works in high school, and I had those same friends read them. They thought I might prefer realism instead. Unfortunately it turns out that most of the time, I don’t find realism to be the best fit.

XXII by William Carlos Williams is a good poem, but maybe, not for you.

#poetry #literature #the red wheelbarrow #kali's life #william carlos williams

38 notes · View notes

stones-x-bones · 3 years

Text

Classic Blunder || Ben and Bex

TIMING: Current PARTIES: @professorbcampbell and @inbextween SUMMARY: Ben finds Bex reading alone in the hallway and decides she’s quite a remarkable find. CONTENT: Brief Domestic Abuse mention

Being back at school was a strange feeling. Bex was eager to be back, she did love learning after all, but the strangeness of it came from sitting through hour long lectures about modern law and criminal justice systems, because despite trying to convince herself that she could still do this, she really didn’t want to be doing this. There was a meager acceptance as she sulked through her mandatory classes of the day, only to give herself the gifts of her electives-- A Timeline Of History Before Humans and, of course, Professor Beck’s class, Our Monsters, Ourselves: Recognizing the Other in Speculative Literature-- after them. She always came away feeling refreshed from them, especially now more so that she was living at Morgan’s. Going home to a place that didn’t feel...suffocating was nicer than Bex had ever imagined. But, that still left a lingering fear in her-- because, ultimately, she’d have to go home one day. And it was probably going to have to be someday soon. So perhaps the strangeness was more a feeling of bittersweet, because despite the bruises now fading on her skin, and the cuts closing up, the things that brought her joy also reminded her of the fact that they would not last. They simply could not.

Morgan’s class had ended a while ago, but Bex still lingered in the hallway. She was reading one of the books she’d borrowed from Morgan’s library, about Ancient History and how the stories of the past influence modern literature. There was only one bench in the hallway and she’d curled up on it, letting the masses of students wander by, not paying much attention to them and they paid little attention to her. But she remained even after the halls had cleared and more classes had started, lost in her book. She didn’t even notice the footsteps in the hallway, or the man approaching her.

Shutting his attache case with a final sigh, Ben stood up from his desk and shut the door to his office. It had been a long day of grading, office hours, and a department meeting, but it was worth it in the end. Making the right appearances, maintaining a good work flow, ensuring that his end of semester feedback responses were just where they needed to be-- it was all a balancing act. And it was an act he excelled at. Locking the door behind him, Ben made his way through the winding hallways of his building towards the exit. As he made his way through the halls, his forehead creased as caught sight of a young woman lost in a book. “I hope you don’t have a class to be going to,” Ben commented loudly, slowing to a halt in front of the girl. “Not that I’d tell on you-- this isn’t high school, after all.” He said with a conspiratorial grin. “What are you reading?”

Bex nearly jumped out of her skin when the man spoke, snapping her book shut out of reflex. She looked up at him, trying to shake off the jitters that had suddenly crawled into her hands. “O-oh, no! I don’t! I just got out of class, I pro--” she stopped herself mid sentence and shook her head, “I just got done with my last class of the day, I just like, you know, the atmosphere here sometimes cause it gets real quiet and there’s usually no one around in the halls, so reading is easy, but I--” she needed to take a breath, to calm down-- “sorry. Sometimes I talk a lot when I get nervous. Not that I’m nervous! You just kind of...caught me off guard.” But he didn’t seem too perturbed by her frantic rambling and he looked like one of the nicer professors, unlike most of the ones who had permanent furrows in their brows. She looked down at the book in her hands. “Oh, um…” held it up to him, “it’s something Professor Beck lent to me. A-about the history of storytelling and how it influences modern literature and media. Do you, um, know her? Professor Beck? Are you in the lit department, too?”

Slipping his hand into the pocket of his trousers, Ben listened to her ramble with a patient smile on his face. She was one of those students. The anxious, over-eager, not yet self-assured children. Ripe for the picking. And his little gatherings, they were long overdue for a fresh face, for fresh blood. “I was only joking, I’m sorry for making you nervous.” He said with a laugh and apologetic shrug that he didn’t mean. “Or rather-- not nervous.” Ben corrected himself. Watching as she held up the book, his eyes flicked across the cover. It seemed… exactly like the kind of drivel Bitchy Fucking Beck would have in her personal collection. Modern literature and media-- what sort of study was that? Were her students analyzing movies? Or, he shuddered to think, TikToks? Disgusting. But, his expression remained politely intrigued, “Ah yes, Morgan and I are well acquainted. And no, I’m not a member of the literature department, but we work within the same college. I’m a professor of the Classics and not,” Ben let out a wry chuckle, “Literary classics. I teach Greek and Roman classics. I’m sure your book includes some references to the old mythologies and tales from back then.”

“Oh, no, it’s okay! Really! It was mostly my fault. I’m really bad at paying attention, sometimes. Especially when I’m reading a book.” Bex gave her best attempt at a reassuring smile, finding that innate part of her that needed to please adults surfacing again. She perked up a bit when he mentioned knowing Professor Beck. “You are? She’s great, don’t you think? I mean, I’m kind of struggling in her class, but it’s because I’m really bad at creative writing and critical analysis of literature, but I enjoy it! It’s interesting and I like learning new things.” She watched him eye the book before setting it down in her lap again, fiddling with the cover. “Oh, you teach the classics? That’s so cool. I’ve always been interested in studying them academically. I’ve read a lot of books on them-- like, a lot-- but I’ve never taken a class for it! And um, it sort of does, obviously! Story-telling was often used as the only means to pass on history and culture and it was such a large part of both the Greek’s and Roman’s society. I know it’s kind of typical, for people to enjoy Greek mythology, but there’s a reason it’s so popular. But, um, I don’t really have to tell you that, do I?” She chewed her lip anxiously. “Sorry, uh-- I’m Bexley, by the way.” Stood up, holding her hand out. “Professional rambler.”

“Nothing wrong with getting lost in a good book,” Ben said with a nod, “I’m guilty of that particular crime myself.” Among other, actual crimes. But, that was neither here nor there. Watching the way her eyes seemed to light up at the mention of Beck, Ben offered a reassuring smile. She was one of these foolish children who preferred fiction to fact, hm? But, as the girl continued to speak, perhaps, he thought, not. “Ah, regardless of performance, the pursuit of knowledge is a wonderful thing. That’s why we’re all here, right?” He said. Listening patiently as the girl’s words took on a meandering, if anxious, quality, Ben regarded her with a practiced eye. She was young, she hardly looked old enough to order a drink. There was a nervous anxiety that practically bubbled over from within her-- he could see it in the way she played with her book, how she bit her lip, the skittish way she moved. Interesting, very interesting. “Oh no, I’m always happy to hear what fellow lovers of the classics have to say.” He said and shook her hand firmly, a broad smile on his face. “Ben Campbell. Professional Rambler of the Classics. If you ever have the misfortune of attending one of my classes, I can assure you, I have you beat in the rambling department.”

“Oh, do you like reading books, too? What kind? Do you have your own library? Professor Beck has a huge library at her place. She lets me pick whatever I want to read.” Bex gave the professor a genuine grin as he took her hand to shake. He had a firm grip, and she remembered all the times her father told her a man could be judged by how firm his handshake was. She still didn’t understand what that meant. “I’m trying my best, and, really, that’s all I can do right now, right?” Even if that fact still made her feel poorly. She hoped her inability to keep the waver from her voice wasn’t a dead giveaway. She shook it off and readjusted. “Nice to meet you, Professor Campbell! And, well, I mean-- who wouldn’t ramble about the Classics? There’s a lot to say about them, and a lot to, you know-- know.” She wasn’t sure she was making too much sense anymore, but the lack of sleep was getting to her. She really needed to sleep. Rubbing her eyes, she looked around the empty hallway. “Have you taught here long? This is my first year at UMWC so I don’t know a lot of the professors. Or a lot of the staff. Or...students.” She knew Mina, and she knew some of the weird kids in Morgan’s class, and she knew Frank. But that was about it. She really needed more friends. “Sorry! If I’m keeping you, you can go. You probably don’t wanna be stuck talking to some awkward student who’s not even in your class.”

With an amused smile, Ben replied, “Yes, I do. I have a rather large collection of books at my home, as well as in my office. Most of the ones I keep here are related to my classes, but my personal library at home is a bit more diverse. Still, I’m rapidly running out of room in my collection. A pretty common struggle for your average bookworm, I suppose.” He said with a chuckle. “Of course! And I’m sure your professors understand that. What are you majoring, if you don’t mind me asking?” He asked. She knew Beck-- quite closely too, it seemed. But, she’d also said she wasn’t the creative sort. Hm. So how did she know her? “It’s nice to meet as well, Bexley.” He beamed. “I’ve taught here for the past ten years. First as an adjunct but I’m now an associate. Though I doubt you wanted to know that-- suffice to say, I’ve been here for some time. How are you finding your classes? I’m always interested in hearing what students think of the matriculation process.” He said before waving off her concern. “Ah, no, I’m done for the day. Like I said. I value what our student body has to say about the university.”

Bex’s eyes lit up at his words. “You have a library here?” she couldn’t help but ask, not thinking much of it, really. She wanted to see it. Books were her only escape for the longest time. It sounded stupid and cliche, but when you were locked up in a room for most of your life, adventure was where you made it. In hallways, in blanket forts, in books under the bed. She couldn’t help the curious glow in her eyes. “Oh, yeah, I totally get that. Most of the books I have at home are stuffed in my closet, but my dad’s library is pretty big. Though, he really only has law texts and old books on, like, world wars and stuff. I never understood the appeal of them, but I guess some people just like different things. I, uh-- I’m majoring in law. Well, pre-law, but, you know.” She shrugged. “Ten years? Wow, that’s a really long time. You must know this place well.” She wondered if he knew about all the hidden secrets White Crest had. He seemed so normal. But, then again, she seemed normal, too, didn’t she? Sometimes? “Oh, no worries! I don’t mind! Tell me whatever you want, I’ve been told I’m a good listener and I never mind learning more about people. But, uh-- classes are fine! They’re-- I was out for a bit, cause I was um...sick,” she scratched at the back of her neck, “but I’m catching back up, I think. It’s nice to know a lot of the professors here care so much about the students. Penn State felt very...different.” And yet she missed it. Missed the freedom. “That’s where I transferred from. I actually grew up here, but I don’t ever really feel like I did, since my parents sent me to private school.” And there she went, oversharing again. She bit her lip. “Sorry, that was probably more information than you wanted from someone who’s not even in your class.”

“Library is a strong word to describe my office, it’s just a wall with some shelves. But, it’s rather comprehensive, if I do say so myself.” Ben said with faux modesty. Always better to play the bashful professor than to yammer on about how much time and money and effort he had put into his collection. Particularly the money. There were first editions in his collection that librarians dreamed of. “I can’t say I understand the interest in the world wars either, but again. I’m a professor of antiquity. Anything beyond 6th century AD is too new for my tastes. It’s a wonder I can even use a smartphone.” He smiled at his own little joke. “Pre-law, that’s got quite the courseload. How are you finding it compared to Penn state?” He asked, shifting his weight so he could stand more comfortably, his body language relaxed and open as he listened to her ramble. “No, no, it’s quite alright. I grew up in town as well, but I went to college elsewhere, so I can understand that sentiment.”

“Wow,” Bex breathed, “I’m a bit jealous. I think it’s my dream one day to just have an entire room full of books. I...guess that’s really just a library, but they wouldn’t even need to be shelved. Stacks on stacks would be nice. I would shelve the nice ones, though. I’m not a heathen, I take care of my books!” In a way, Professor Campbell almost reminded Bex of Morgan. Less wiccan, though, and more scholarly. “Oh, really? What’s your favorite period? And, well, smartphones can be confusing, but really they’re just small computers. If you ever need help, I can probably show you. I had to show someone else recently how to use her smart phone cause she couldn’t figure out how to change the background wallpaper.” She swallowed, nodding maybe a little too eagerly. “Yeah, yep-- heavy course load. Lots of reading and citing and making sure everything is exactly word for word. My whole family is lawyers and they’ve all got degrees from Harvard, so you’d think it’d come naturally to me, but I guess I didn’t get the right genes. I’m trying my best, though, you know? And UMWC is...smaller than Penn, but I guess it feels...cozier? I liked the freedom I had at Penn state, but it was really high pressure. A lot of the kids in my program here just seem really bored, though. This isn’t a top school for pre-law so you have to get really high scores in order to even think about getting into Yale or Harvard or Princeton, so I think a lot of them are resigned to just going to second rate grad schools. Where’d you go to college?”

“Sounds like the dream of a fellow scholar,” Ben said, voice kind and understanding. She seemed young, impressionable. Eager to learn, eager to please. Interesting. How very interesting. “I’ve gone through the stacks of books phase myself, I know how that is. But, having shelves just really ties a room together. There’s nothing quite like seeing all the spines laid out, the titles staring back at you. It’s a wonderful thing.” He said with a nod. “I’m quite a fan of the first century of the Roman Empire. Marcus Aurelius, his works still hold to this day.” At the girl’s offer, he let out a small laugh, though internally he wanted to roll his eyes. He wasn’t inept. “I appreciate the gesture, but I think I’ll be fine. Thank you for the offer, though!” He said. As she continued to speak-- on and on, about her family, about her inane observations of what the campuses were like-- Ben continued to mentally measure and weigh her. This Bexley girl, she was new to the university, still trying to find her footing. She didn’t know many people, students or staff, she’d admitted that herself. She seemed as though she was struggling with that critical jump that all students experienced when they entered college. And who was he to withhold aid from a student in need? “Ah, I went to Princeton actually. For both undergrad and my doctorate. But, UMWC is still an upstanding school-- it’s no Ivy League, but I can assure you, faculty here are providing just as rigorous of an academic experience.”

“Well, I mean, that would be nice,” Bex sighed, “I don’t think I’d mind teaching all too much, but I’ve already got my future career all planned out.” Not that she was all too excited about it, and she was more than sure that it was getting harder and harder for her to hide that fact. SHe laughed it off and gave a smile. “I can’t wait to have my own library, it really does sound like a dream come true.” Her eyes perked up. “Oh, that’s a good one! The rise of the Roman Empire really is one of the most incredible things to read about. I’ve always wanted to go to Rome and see the remains of the old empire. Have you been?” She smiled up at him again, shifting in her spot. :Ah, right, of course. I just kinda-- like to offer to help. I like feeling like I can help, you know? And, wow, Princeton! That’s a pretty prestigious school. I think my parents really want me to go to Harvard. Did you like Princeton? And yeah, totally! I-I know this school is pretty great and there are a lot of wonderful professors, it just usually helps being at an Ivy League if you wanna get in somewhere like Harvard. Or Princeton. So I’ll just have to, you know, try harder. Which is fine! I can do that.” And hopefully not run herself too ragged in the process.

“As cliche as it is, I can’t help but quote John Lennon-- Life is what happens when you’re busy making other plans.” Ben said, shamelessly using the quote. It was very “motivational poster-esque” but it resonated in students, for one reason or another. “So who’s to say what the future holds? I never thought I’d be a professor either, but I fell in love with academics during my undergraduate degree. Once I figured out that I wanted to teach the coming generations, who all shared my passion? I never looked back.” He replied. “Oh yes, I spent the third year of my doctoral program across Europe, assisting in archeological digs. I must say, I was jealous when I heard they uncovered the tomb of Romulus last February. I would have given anything to see that.” Ben let out a sigh and gave a shrug. As she continued on, babbling away, Ben was beginning to put together a nice little picture of her life. Overbearing parents, who wanted her to be something that-- well, he couldn’t quite tell if she wanted to be that. But, there was a hesitation to her that seemed quite promising. “I enjoyed my experience there quite a bit-- the environment, my peers, the professors… All of them were incredibly influential on my professional journey. And I owe my success to the university.” He smiled, though it faded as she mentioned trying harder. Eyebrows knitting together, he replied, “You know, rest is a very critical part of growth. It never hurts to take a break from time to time.”

Bex felt her immediate reaction bubbling up her throat-- John Lennon was such a problematic man, but of course a white cis man would think his quotes were profound-- but she swallowed it back down, smiling sweetly. “Sometimes cliche is true, though. They’re cliche for a reason, right?” She didn’t like the implication of it, though. Was she so transparent? That she didn’t want the life her parents had laid out for her? She rubbed her arm absently. “I know that, though. That I should stop and enjoy life. But what I want is kind of irrelevant. My family has been lawyers for centuries and every daughter has always taken over the business. So even if I don’t wanna do that, I don’t really have a choice.” But her grievance was immediately dismissed. “Wait-- you’ve been on digs? Like real, actual, digs!? Where you found stuff and you got to-- you got to see it first hand? Which digs? Where were they? What did you find? Oh, god, I nearly cried when they found Romulus’ tomb! What an amazing discovery! Can you even imagine being there for that? Or the new tomb they found in the Valley of King’s? It always feels like we’ve discovered so much, but then we just keep finding more and it’s amazing.” She couldn’t help the sparkle in her eye or the shine in her voice-- this was her true passion and the worst part about being a lawyer was that it made it impossible to chase. “Wow, Princeton sounds amazing. I haven’t done a campus visit yet, but I’ve heard good things about Harvard. If I make it in.” She withdrew a little at that. “I-- I know. And I did! Take a break. Sort of. It was an unintended break, but a break all the same.” If being in a nightmarish dreamscape counted as a break.

“Indeed.” Ben said affably, eyes still analyzing her every move. The way she shifted in place, the way she rubbed her arm, the way her smile seemed a fraction less genuine than it had before. It seemed she wasn’t one for John Lennon. Suited him just fine, the Beatles were vastly overrated and John Lennon was a musician, what bearing did he have on anything that mattered? “I’m just a professor, so… please, you don’t need to take this to heart. But, life is meant to be lived, is it not? And what’s more important to life than choice? The freedom to live as you please and to live without wondering how things might have been different, it’s incredibly important.” He said with a firm nod before easing back slightly, his eyes losing some of their intensity. It seemed as though his mention of his field work had piqued her interest though, which was something else he made note of. If they met again-- and he would make a point of meeting her again-- he would have to bring that up. “I did. Truly incredible, the discovery they made there was absolutely groundbreaking. Literally, given how the dig went.” Ben joked. “History is absolutely like that. Just when we think we know it all, our ancestors surprise us.” Glancing down at his watch, Ben raised his eyebrows, as though startled by how much time had passed. “I’m sorry, I didn’t mean to keep you. It’s not everyday I meet such a remarkable student like yourself, though.” Reaching into his jacket, he withdrew one of his cards and handed it to Bex. “If you’re ever interested in talking more-- about archeology or the Ivy Leagues, please feel free to contact me. I also have office hours on Thursday and Fridays, my door is open to you.” He said with a bright, toothy smile.

Bex went still when he started explaining. It was the same things Morgan always told her, that her choice mattered, her wants mattered-- but it wasn’t as easy as all that. She had duties, she had responsibilities. Leaving that life just wasn’t an option. Her parents had made sure to drill that into her from a young age. This was her life, this would always be her life. She had no choice. Her eyes sank to the floor, she no longer felt brave enough to look him in the eye, even as he described his incredible experience of being part of a dig, being a part of history itself. It should have made her heart flutter to hear about it, but something inside of her told her to stop letting herself believe that one day she might get to have something like that, too. She nodded slowly. “No, it’s fine! You didn’t keep me,” she said, trying to keep the smile plastered to her face as she glanced up enough to take the card he was offering her. She stared at the neatly typed words pressed onto the paper. Benjamin Campbell. Professor of the Classics. His information was included below the title. “Remarkable?” she repeated, unsure if she’d heard that word right. “But I’m not even--” in any of his classes. But as she looked at him, she knew the offer was genuine. Her smile came a little easier this time. “Thank you. Really. For-- for this.” She pocketed the card. “It was really great to meet you, Professor. I’ll um-- I’ll see you around. I usually tend to read here most days so, you know.” She chewed her lip before grabbing her bag. “Thanks. A-again.” She needed to stop saying thanks, Mina would kill her if she knew. “I appreciate you taking the time to talk to me.” And then with that, she scurried off, the business card, and a million questions, burning a hole in her pocket. She couldn’t wait to talk to him again-- maybe things really weren’t as bad as they felt. Maybe she could have a good life here.

#chatzy #chatzy: ben #wickedswriting #classic blunder #ben #domestic abuse mention tw #//the mention is in the very first paragraph if people wanna skip

6 notes · View notes

bbq-hawks-wings · 5 years

Note

I want to express an unpopular opinion. I hope for your understanding, because such things don't like to listen. Why does everyone think that Hawks is a bird? I couldn' fit my logical arguments into the askbox :( (about how he sits on a pole "like a bird", supposedly likes jewelry and so on). Even his quirk is called Fierce Wings, not a Hawk, not a Red Bird. Do you remember the names of the quirks of Hound Dog and Tsuyu-chan? We haven't evidence to believe that Hawks is behaves like a bird.

I do believe very much he’s a bird, and if you would let me friend, I would love to try and prove it to you because I think the evidence is overwhelming. I’ll make a TL;DR at the end but I’d really like to take the opportunity to perhaps teach others at least one method for literary analysis since it can be a really dry and boring subject to learn in school but is SO useful not only for getting good grades but getting into colleges as well as interpreting both entertainment and genuinely important information like the news, history, laws, and scientific papers. Using fiction - especially such a rich, engaging one like HeroAca - is a great way to try it out without the pressure of a grade. I don’t have the qualifications to teach in any formal capacity, but as a “peer” tutor I hope I can be helpful.

I’m going to put everything under the cut from here because this is going to get LONG, but I promise the TL;DR at the end will be very easy to read. If you liked this sort of unofficial tutorial please let me know. I’d love to help make “academic” skills like this more accessible for those who might benefit from it and enjoy it, but it doesn’t make sense to put in all that effort moving forward if I’m garbage at it.

Before we get too into things, I want to lay out a few notes to keep in mind as we go.

I will only be using the official translations from Viz’s Shonen Jump website when available. Fan translations are more than close enough to casually enjoy and follow the story, but professional translators are paid to know and get various nuances correct and some of the trickier cultural background behind certain phrases (for example, the phrase “where the rubber meets the road” might make zero sense in a foreign language if translated literally, so an equal cultural phrase should be used instead) that give more exact information. Rarely is this too important, but sometimes it helps, plus it supports the source material.

If you’ve followed my blog for a while you might know I’m very fond of doing this kind of thing in my spare time and that I’m a huge fan of YouTube channels like Game/Film Theory, Overly Sarcastic Productions, Extra Credits, and Wisecrack that do this kind of thing with popular media as well. If you like this sort of content, may I encourage you to check them out after this to see how else you can apply these kinds of analytical skills to things that aren’t homework.

My writing style tends to meander, but I do my best to cut out the fat and only include relevant information so even though there’s a lot of information here, please know that I’m trying to be thorough and explain things to the best of my ability. If I seem to go off on a tangent, I’m trying to set up or contextualize information to explain why it’s relevant and then come back to the point. In other words, please be patient and bear with me as I go.

Now, to start, I want to explain at least my method for analyzing a text/piece of media. There is a set order and number of steps to take, and it’s as follows:

Read the material all the way through.

Come up with a hypothesis about something you’ve noticed when reading it. (In this case, it’s “Is Hawks actually supposed to be a bird?”)

Collect as much relevant information as possible and test the evidence to see if it supports the hypothesis we’ve made.

Step back and look at everything again with those points in mind.

Determine if we were right or wrong with the evidence we have.

If we were wrong, go back to step 3 to figure out what fell apart and see if we need to go back to step 2.

If that sequence sounds familiar it’s because it’s the scientific method! Aha, didn’t think we’d be pulling science into all this, did you? Don’t worry, we won’t be putting numbers or formulas anywhere near this discussion - the scientific method is just a way we can observe something and test if what we thought about it is actually true; and it applies to almost everything we as humans can observe - from the laws of the universe, to arts and crafts, to philosophy and religion, and so on! When you think about it that way, whole new possibilities can open up for you when it comes to understanding how the world works.

So with that set let’s (finally) begin!

Steps 1 and 2 are already done. We’ve read the manga and want to prove that Hawks is a bird. (We’re going to try and prove he IS a bird because in the context of the series there’s a lot that *isn’t* a bird and less stuff that *is* which will make our job easier.) So now, we’re onto:

Step 3 - collect data and see what conclusions we can get just from our evidence.

Now, to pause again (I know, bear with me!) there’s a few different kinds of information and considerations we have to keep in mind as we collect. There are four kinds of information that are important to know about in order to determine if it’s good data that will help us with the testing phase in Step 4. The kinds of information to keep in mind are:

Explicit information - this is information that is directly spelled out for us. For example, Hawks says, “I like my coffee sweet.” and his character sheet says “Hawk’s favorite food is chicken.” That’s all there is to it, and it’s pretty hard to argue with. This is the easiest type of info to find.

Implicit information - this is info that isn’t directly spelled out but is noticeable either in the background or as actions, patterns, or behaviors that can be observed. For example, Hawks has mentioned in at least three very different places his concerns over people getting hurt while he tries to get in with the League:

Chapter 191 when confronting Dabi about the Nomu he says, “You said you’d release it in the factory on the coast, not in the middle of the damn city!”

Chapter 191 again in a flashback with the Hero Commission he asks, “What about the people who might be hurt while I’m infiltrating the League?”

Chapter 240 when discovering how much influence and power the League has gained, “If someone had taken down the League sooner, all those good citizens wouldn’t have had to die!”

Hawks never says in so many words, “I never want innocent people to get hurt under any circumstances!” but the pattern of behavior and concern is consistent enough to form a pattern and clue us in that this is a key part of his character to keep in mind.

Peripheral information - this is information that isn’t directly to do with Hawks or maybe even the series as a whole but is still relevant to keep in mind for his character and the questions we’re asking. This may include extra content that isn’t the “series” proper, but is still an official source like interviews with Horikoshi, etc. but it can go even further. For example, while we try to prove that he’s a bird, we should have some knowledge about what makes a bird a bird, some specific and notable birdlike habits/behaviors/features, etc. This is just to show how wide-ranging we need to cast our informational net.

Contextual information - this will be important when we get to Step 4, but it’s good to keep in mind now. This is when we compare evidence against the broader scope of the series and consider the circumstances under which we find the information. For example, if I told you, “Harry kicked a dog.” you might think “What a jerk! What decent person kicks a dog?”; but if I said, “Harry kicked a dog while trying to keep it from biting his kid.” suddenly it re-frames the story. “Is the kid ok? Why was that dog attacking? Harry put himself in danger to keep his kid safe - what a great dad!”

I’ll go chronologically to make it easier to follow my evidence as I gather and give references as to where I found that information. I’ll go through the manga first, and then any peripheral sources that are either direct informational companions to the series (like character books or bonus character information sheets) and interviews with Horikoshi. Please note the categories these details fall into may vary based on opinion/interpretation, but I did my best to list them out for reference.

Chapter 185 - Explicit Type: Feathered wings - regardless of the specifics of his quirk it’s undeniable his wings are made up of feathers which is a distinctly birdlike quality. There are many mythical creatures and even dinosaurs that also have feathered wings, but this is our first big piece of evidence.

Chapter 186 - Peripheral Type: Large appetite - birds have an incredibly fast metabolism because flying takes so much energy. They’re constantly eating. Plenty of young men are big eaters, but it was specifically pointed out and works towards our hypothesis so we’ll keep it in our back pocket for now.

Chapter 186 - Implicit/Peripheral Type: Fantastic vision - Hawks senses the Nomu coming before the audience even is able to make out what’s headed their way. It could be implied his wings caught it first, which might be the case, but he looks directly at the Nomu and brings Endeavor’s attention to it. Birds have fantastic long-range vision, especially birds of prey that mainly swoop in from high in the air to ambush highly perceptive prey. Also good to add to the pile.

Chapter 192 + Volume 20 Cover - Implicit/Peripheral type: Wears jewelry and bright colors - birds are well documented to be drawn to bright colors and are known for decorating their nests with trinkets. Scientists actually have to be careful when tagging birds with tracking bracelets because they can accidentally make him VASTLY more popular with the ladies by giving him a brightly colored band to the point they can’t resist him! Male birds are also known for having bright, colorful displays for attracting and wooing mates. While Hawks isn’t the only male character to wear jewelry in the series, he’s the only one (to my recollection) that wears as MUCH jewelry so often both during and outside of work. It may not be obvious, but the illustration on Volume 20 is actually an advertisement for his line of (presumably) luxury jewelry. In other words, Hawks on some level is synonymous with style and flair to the point he can make money by selling jewelry with his name on it.

Chapter 20 Volume Cover - Explicit Type: Hawk emblem on the watch face - If the name “Hawks” didn’t give it away, he’s very clearly trying to align himself with more avian qualities if his merch has bird motifs. In other words Hawk = “Hero Hawks” and “Hero Hawks” = bird.

Chapter 192, 244, clear file illustration - Peripheral Type: birdlike posture. Chapter 244 isn’t quite released yet on the official site as of writing this, but when Hawks swoops in and beats the kids to the punch apprehending the criminals trying to subdue Endeavor, his hands are clenched in a very talon-like manner similar to a swooping eagle. When walking with Endeavor in 192, he holds his resting hand in a similar fashion. On the clear file illustration he’s not only perched on his tippy toes in a pose that has been famously called “owling” (remember that trend/meme, y’all?) but his wings are slightly outstretched to catch the breeze to keep from falling over which a lot of birds can be seen doing when they don’t have great purchase on a surface in a place that’s a little windy. The fact that he seems to gravitate to high places like birds are often seen doing might also be a noteworthy indication.

Extra sources:

Hawks Shifuku: Horikoshi describes Hawks as a “bird person” and says that his initial design was based off of Takahiro from his old manga.

Takahiro’s design:

Current character design: The banner image on my blog was commissioned from a friend of mine who doesn’t follow the series. When I showed her reference images of Hawks, you know what she said? “Oh! His hair is feathers!” Even his eyebrows have that fluffy/scruffy texture to them that his hair has. The markings on his eyes can also be seen on him as a young child in Chapter 191 which means it isn’t makeup meant to tie in a theme or look. He has those dark, pointed eye markings like many birds do. So on some genetic level he resembles a bird.

Step 4: Testing our hypothesis with the gathered evidence.

There’s already a lot of compelling evidence that already closely aligns him to birds which is promising. However, to really prove our point we should try to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt he is a bird. To do that this time around I’m going to see how the series treats people with animal-based quirks and see if it’s consistent with the way Hawks is portrayed.

You bring up Hound Dog and Tsuyu, and they’re fantastic examples. Let’s start with Hound.

He’s pretty straight forward - he’s like a dog. He has a dog face, has dog-like tendencies, and dog-like abilities. Superpower: dog.

And in Tsuyu’s case - quirk: frog, just frog. She’s stated explicitly to have frog-like features, frog-like tendencies, have frog-like abilities, and even comes from a “froggy family.”

So with these two very explicitly animal-like characters the common theme seems to be “If they’re considered to be like a specific animal, they have to physically resemble that animal, act like that animal at times, and have abilities like that animal.” Let’s see if another animal-quirk character matches up and then put Hawks to the test.

Spinner’s quirk is Gecko. Based on our criteria, is he a gecko?

Does he look like a gecko, even vaguely?

Yes, he’s covered head to toe in scales, and his face is very lizard-like.

Does he occasionally act like a gecko?

Unclear. We haven’t really seen any evidence of this, but that doesn’t mean he doesn’t. For the sake of our argument, we’ll just say no and move on.

Does he have gecko-like abilities?

Yes! Though most of his abilities are limited to things like being able to stick to walls, it’s still gecko-like in origin and qualifies.

Spinner hits clearly hits ⅔ criteria and our standards seem pretty consistent, so let’s see how Hawks stands up.

Does he look like a bird?

Not all of his features may explicitly scream “avian” at first, but upon closer observation and with his clear previous inspiration this is a resounding yes.

Does he act like a bird?

Many of the mannerisms and behaviors he displays can just be chalked up to him being a little eccentric, but with the sheer number of them that also parallel birds in some way this is also a pretty convincing yes.

Does he have bird-like abilities?

While most of the emphasis is on his wings and what they can do, it does seem that he not only possesses things like heightened senses which could be attributed to avian abilities but he also very much possess high intelligence and incredibly fast reaction times which birds are also known for.

Even if we only gave Hawks a “maybe/half a point” for those last two, he still meets the 2⁄3 that Spinner did. So we have another question to ask: Does a character have to have an explicitly named “animal” quirk to be considered to be/resemble a specific animal? Let’s look at Ojirou and Tokoyami for reference.

Ojirou’s quirk is just “tail,” but he’s been described by his peers and classmates as a monkey and does seem to share some more monkey-like features. It isn’t lumped in with his quirk because the only notable monkey-like quality he possesses is a tail. He doesn’t have fangs or an opposable toe - he just has a tail. For quirk classification as far as hero work goes, that’s the only important thing to note.

Tokoyami, on the other hand has an entire literal bird head, but nothing else. He has a beak, feathers, and even in illustrations of him as a baby he had fluffier feathers on his head. Even with only those details, he just screams “bird!” However, his quirk is classified as “Dark Shadow” because that’s what sets him apart for hero work.

Back at Hawks we see his quirk classified as “fierce wings” but like Ojirou and especially like Tokoyami, the emphasis on his wings is what sets his abilities as a hero apart. Otherwise, he’s just a guy who looks and acts a LOT like a bird.

But astute observers may have noticed I’ve left out a detail that’s more or less a nail in the coffin on the whole matter, so let me ask a question: Tsuyu in particular has something else of note that solidifies in our minds that she is, indeed, a frog - she explicitly calls herself a frog. Could we say the same about Hawks?

Chapter 199 - Explicit Type

Bingo. Hawks has known himself for as long as he’s been alive. He knows his habits, his impulses, his family/genes, and so on. If he calls himself a bird, are we going to call him a liar? In fact, he calls himself a bird not once, but twice!

That’s pretty much it. With the evidence stacked to that degree, I’d be hard pressed to NOT believe he’s a bird.

That was a long amount of text to get through, so if you’re here at the end thank you for sticking out with me to this point. I really appreciate it. This is more or less the process I use when analyzing anything and everything whether it be HeroAca related or not. Maybe it’ll help you if you’ve struggled with literary analysis, or at the very least I hope you got some enjoyment out of it.

TL;DR If Hawks looks like a bird, walks (acts) like a bird, is based on a bird (character), and calls himself a bird, he’s probably a bird.

#hawks bnha #bnha hawks #hawks #hawks mha #mha hawks #she writes #let's talk hawks #bnha meta #bnha spoilers #mha spoilers #manga spoilers

366 notes · View notes

muchadoloo · 4 years

Text

Hold Me By the Heart: A Peek Into the Story

Hold Me By the Heart by: muchadoloo

Description:

It was Cara who unwittingly laid it out for him.

“You hand the kid off a lot.”

The comment didn’t seem antagonistic, just thoughtful. Something about him must have screamed confusion because Cara, ever-so-observant, continued.

“Like I said, it could be a loose lead…I didn’t think it mattered at the time, just an observation. But it must be a lot on the kid, not knowing who wants him or where he belongs.” She shrugged and sipped her canteen. “Don’t get me wrong, I get it. That kid’s got a bounty over his head. Someone’s gotta protect the little guy. You can’t just stay in one place. Hell, you can barely hold him for long. I just figured the constant movement… Must be a lot.”

Din felt like someone had doused him in cold water.

———–

Or, the story where the child has separation anxiety and, go figure, refuses to be separated from Din.

Inside the Story: An Extensive Analysis

The Beginning

I started writing Hold Me By the Heart after finishing the Disney+ series. Though I absolutely adored the show, the characters, and the cinematography work, I kept questioning the developmental psychology and realism regarding Din’s relationship to the child. The more I watched the show, the more I noticed how often Din left the kid on the ship, asked a random bartender to watch him (only for the kid to wander outside with his bone broth in chapter four), gave him to other people, and rarely held the kid for a long period of time. Though I understood Din’s choices (e.g. as a bounty-hunter and Mandalorian tasked with protecting the child, there isn’t much time for nurturing), I began to wonder how Din’s way of life, the kid’s past, and both of their developmental stages would/could clash or deepen their characters? Thus, Hold Me By the Heart was born.

The Process of Writing Din Djarin

I rewatched The Mandalorian at least ten times (maybe more?) and I found myself fascinated with Din Djarin as a character. Though there is much about himself that he hides from others, there is even more that Din hides from himself. In particular, his emotional state, desires, and wants. It’s my belief that humans, more often than not, are not just their rational brains or cognitive make-up (thank you, Enlightenment). Though we’d like to think we’re purely rational creatures, I believe we’re, more often than not, directed by our loves and desires. Basically, we all have a chief love or desire that directs our hearts unconsciously. In literary or character-development terms, this is what experts call ‘the motivation’ or ‘the character’s goal.’ In every story, a character has some goal that’s motivating them throughout the storyline. What’s fascinating about Disney+’s The Mandalorian is that Din’s ‘hero’s journey’ is constantly shifting and as such, so are his desires. At first, Din is motivated by base needs (Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs) such as: food, fuel for the ship, security, etc. Basically, he’s just trying to survive. However, the introduction of the child literally reshapes and changes his desires and motivations. Now, as a side note, Din’s morality is insanely grey and his understanding of ‘what’s right’ in a situation changes based on the situation, rather than a strictly moral code. Thus, Din doesn’t really bat an eyelash when he breaks the Guild Code. Actually, he first begins to diverge from the Code when he asks the Imperial Client, “What are you going to do with it?” He’s never asked that question before — no one does. Thus, this moment shows us how his moral compass is altering, but alas — I digress.

In a story, the main protagonist’s desire is almost tied to their greatest fear. For instance, Din clearly loves the child and is attached to him (desire), but he’s also terrified of what he’s feeling. He doesn’t know how to be a father or be attached to anyone. Moreover, before the child, I doubt Din ever had to examine his emotions or desires closely. However, the child’s distress and separation anxiety trigger’s Din’s own anxiety. Here, is one area where Din isn’t competent: fatherhood. Din can barely take care of himself and now, he’s tasked with caring for a child. Thus, in Hold Me By the Heart, Din vacillates between keeping the kid at a respective distance and nurturing the child. The kid’s presence reminds him of the internal change and revolution Din is going through. In the story, Din’s desire to keep some distance (or, to put it better, not get too attached) has less to do with the child and more to do with Din’s own feelings. It’s easier to push something or someone away than deal with how their presence is changing you as a person.

When I began writing Hold Me By the Heart, I really wanted to capture Din’s character well (I’m sure there’s glaring flaws though). More than anything, though, I wanted to put his chief desires on display — his relationship and growing attachment with the child. As the series shows, Din rarely (and I mean, rarely) explains, names, or even presses into his feelings. Rather, his emotions seem to surprise him often (case study: his sorrow over the droid’s self-sacrifice). Din’s emotional world is not only foreign to him, he’s also unaware of how often his emotions seep out through his actions. Thus, I wanted to capture this behavior in the story. For instance, Din rarely names his love for the child. Rather, other people have to name it for him and it’s almost like an eureka moment for him like, “Oh, so that’s what I’m feeling!” When someone else names it, he never corrects them. Now, just for the record, Din isn’t emotionally incompetent or dumb. He’s just never needed to assess his internal world. He was raised in a strict warrior culture that focuses on strength and physical capability. The internal values (e.g. courage, bravery, honor) of the Mandalorian system is defined by their physical expressions of said values. In other words, they show what they value, rather than spend time assessing it. Moreover, their values are inextricably tied to their role as warriors. A Mandaloran shows that they are courageous through battle. Thus, Din is extremely action-oriented and active. He isn’t a static character, but rather, he’s always on the move.

Thus, I wanted to strike a tension between Din’s Mandalorian upbringing and the demands of parenthood. Because Din operates on Maslow’s lower base needs, he rarely thinks about higher ones such as: self-actualization, emotional health, etc. His context shapes him to focus heavily on survival. So, when the kid is placed in his care, Din focuses on the base needs. He makes sure the child has a comfortable place to sleep; he feeds the kid. He keeps the baby safe. Unfortunately, with the presence of the child’s separation anxiety, Din realizes that the child needs more. The kid demands the full involvement of an engaged physically and emotionally present adult.

The Process of Writing the Child

One of the things I realized about the Disney+ series is how often the series showcases fluff between the child and Din. The fluff is so good and needed, but unfortunately, the show fails to portray the difficult realities of adoption, attachment, and development. In the series, the child is a source of innocence and cuteness in, an otherwise, violent context. Though his innocence is endearing and warrants so many heart-eyes from me, I think the child needs more nuance. The babe can eat frogs and throw a fit when Din attempts to leave. He can suck on the metal ball from the ship and have nightmares. He can be Force-sensitive and still operate as a baby would. In other words, all of us —including the cutest of children— are products of complicated stories and live in complicated narratives. Moreover, adoption isn’t as easy as — “here, I have a working ship and some (constantly depleting) money. I can protect you from danger and, since you’re just a baby, you’ll be happy and grow up healthy.” Rather, adoptees have rich and complicated stories that they lived into (and still live into) prior to their adoption. As a writer and psychology nut, I really want to face these realities head on. In Hold Me By the Heart, the child struggles with separation anxiety, abandonment issues, and object permanence. The presence of the issues are not meant to be some weird fetish of sorts or act as entertainment factors for readers. Rather, the kid’s issues are real, present struggles that impact his development. So I really wanted to contrast the child’s innocence with his trauma and, by doing, articulate that both realities CAN exist in one person.

Moreover, I’ve grown more and more curious about the child’s origin story. Though the babe could have been born into a loving family and was simply taken away (and that’s trauma too), I truly believe the kid has more experiences of being stolen over and over again by random hunters. This reality creates an attachment insecurity, primarily because the child doesn’t know who his consistent guardian is. Moreover, as a baby needing care, he doesn’t know who he can rely on to care for him.

A Brief Word About the Plot

Originally, I’d planned to contain the story to four elongated chapters (like a short story). However, the more I wrote, the more I realized how impossible it is to write about the complexities of separation anxiety and wrap up such a story in four chapters. To do so, for me, would result in a rushed or under-developed storyline. Thus, the story, as of now, keeps expanding.

Moreover, I realized that for Din to grow as a human being and a father, he needed to brush shoulders with other people for more than 10 minutes. As a character, Din is so zeroed-in on his goals, he doesn’t really see people (at least, enough to get an inch-deep into their stories). However, knowing that Din would never stay in one place for long of his own volition, I needed to throw a wrench in his plans. Hence, his injuries and the ship’s damages. Though Din would definitely push through an injury, if his ship were trashed, even he’d recognize he couldn’t go anywhere. Hence, the chapter where he drops into Dantooine (and Maisy’s turnip garden).

Now, before I wrap this up (if you’re still reading, God bless you; you’re a literal saint), one last word about the presence of OCs in the story. Many readers have commented on the nature of the OCs in many fanfics and how, usually, they’re not a welcome addition (same, honey, sameee). Thankfully, a lot of y’all actually seem to like the OCs in Hold Me by the Heart, which is incredible. Here’s my two cents and promise as a writer — I do not believe in filler OCs or OCs that do not enhance the main plot. Period. I honestly believe you can smell a filler OC (or, one that takes the focus away from the main story) from a mile away. In Hold Me by the Heart, I really try to be careful to keep the main thing the main thing, which is Din and the baby’s relationship (I mean, that’s what we’re here for). So, usually when the OCs are in a scene (and, let’s say, the child isn’t present), I try to keep the focus on Din and the kid’s relationship even then. Though Din definitely needs to interact with others to learn more about being a parent, I never want those interactions to take away from the main paring. We’re here for papa Din and baby-bean, so let’s keep them as the focus.

A Note for the Fans

I’ve had the immense privilege of chatting with many of you through AO3 in the comments section, and I cannot stress my thanks enough. You all are, no lie, THE REASON this story has continued. I just had a small idea for a fanfic, but y’all believed in it. Honestly, I’ve only written four chapters (as of now) and y’all have showered the story with kindness and love. Your belief in the story and profuse compliments have meant the world. Please continue commenting and I hope to keep responding. I love interacting with y’all and gleaning from your analyses.

Thanks for all of your support!

XOXO

#ao3 #the mandalorian #holdmebytheheart #hold me by the heart #din djarin #baby yoda #the child #fanfic #mandalorian fanfiction #fanfiction #what are these tags #mando #pedro pascal #star wars #mandalorian fanfic

4 notes · View notes

margridarnauds · 5 years

Text

greenwitchpinkcrystals replied to your post “It turns out that every time I see “Danu” listed as an “Earth...”

Why

So, first off, let’s get this out of the way: This is not meant to affect ANYONE’S religious or spiritual practices. If you have a relationship with any of the Tuatha dé that doesn’t fit a given analysis, I’m not going to be the one who says “No, that’s wrong.” That’s YOUR relationship and your belief system, and I’m not going to touch that. That is NOT my place.

What I’m talking about is purely on an academic level, reading the original medieval texts, and I will say that what I’m about to say, while I think it LEANS towards what I believe the academic consensus is, is not holy writ either. I fully admit that, if it came down to assigning myself to EITHER anti-nativist or nativist, I would probably class myself in with the anti-nativists, AKA The Party Poopers of Celtic Studies, as you’re probably going to find out soon.

On a more simplified level, there are three figures from Irish Mythology who I do NOT like discussing simply because they tend to elicit very strong reactions from people when Commonly Accepted Truths are questioned: Bríg, the Morrigan, and Danu. All three of them tend to activate my fight or flight response when they’re brought up (and, most of the time, my option of choice is FLIGHT.)

Point 1 (AKA “In Which Rachel Rants About 99% Of The Over-Generalizations of the Tuatha dé Into a Given Function”)

it’s nearly impossible to concretely assign almost ANY of the Tuatha dé to a function. They aren’t really...a PANTHEON like that, if you look at the texts. They’re an ever-shifting cast of figures loosely tied together by a sprawling body of texts, poems, and genealogies who, while they MIGHT have had a pre-Christian past, are being primarily used as literary figures. And it’s nigh impossible to tell where the one begins and the other ends, especially since the Tuatha dé SHIFT depending on the text (and sometimes even in the same text!)

One of my favorite examples is Lugh. Generally regarded as one of the best figures of the Tuatha dé, the hero of Cath Maige Tuired, master of all skills. A GOOD GUY, right? Except...in Sons of Tuireann, he brutally manipulates the deaths of three men simply because he decided that he wanted to have his cake and eat it too. And in the Dindsenchas poem Carn Ui Neit, where he kills Bres. And in How the Dagda Got His Magical Staff, where he kills Cermait for sleeping with his wife. And the main text where he’s a Shining Hero, Cath Maige Tuired, is generally accepted by scholars these days (most notably John Carey and Mark Williams) agree that the text primarily comes out of a 9th century context and is meant to be basically a bolster for the literary elite in light of the Viking invasions (the Fomorians come from Lochlann “Land of Lakes,” which can either mean “Norway” or “Norse occupied Scotland” in a medieval Irish context). It’s not that Lugh is NOT a pre-Christian figure, because the figure Lugus with Gaul is...pretty indicative that there’s SOMETHING, but we have no idea WHAT. And, really as far as the Tuatha dé are concerned, there are probably...less than five figures I would SOLIDLY say we have any evidence for worship for and an idea of where they MAY have fit. Give or take one or two depending how I’m feeling on a given day. (Obviously, some people, even on the more skeptical side of things, can be more or less generous than me; I’m just a naturally very suspicious person. The ‘less than ten’ thing should not be taken as any indication of a consensus here.)

Basically, they couldn’t even agree on how these guys were supposed to behave, much less give them a FUNCTION. Their powers, what and who they’re associated with, etc. all is variable, and it’s impossible to tell which figures were genuine pre-Christian figures and which ones were literary figures who were invented to serve the purposes of the time. (Also, there are some figures who are highly associated with the literary elite but who...don’t pop up in any of the folktales that adapt the same stories, which leads me to suspect that their MAIN association was with the literary elite and they didn’t have any real influence out of that. See: Bres. I WANT my special boy to have been a Big Figure who was worshipped and respected, but the evidence, to ME at least, strongly suggests that he was a figure strongly associated with the literary elite who was tacked on as a villain to Cath Maige Tuired.)

So, my tl;dr here is that, really, it’s hard to assign a “mother goddess” or “Fertility goddess” to the Tuatha dé because, simply put, there is no way to assign that kind of specific function to almost ANY of the figures of the Tuatha dé. How they’re depicted really depends more on what the individual scribe wanted to convey rather than consistently associating them with ONE thing, and even in cases like Cormac’s Glossary, which DOES give a FEW of them functions, it’s....shaky at times, as we’re about to deal with. There are figures who ARE mothers, but it’s hard to really say that they’re...THAT associated with it. Generally speaking, the designation seems to be given to female figures in the text mainly because...they couldn’t think of anything else to apply to women? Ditto for “Fertility”. (See: Bríg. There is no reason to assume that Bríg had ANY association with fertility, and yet it’s a claim I see regularly trotted out.)

Point 2 (AKA “Okay, but what about DANU? Who IS said to be ‘Mother of the Gods?’”):

Even by the usually-shaky standards of Irish Mythological continuity, (D)anand (not Danu in any of the medieval texts) is...strange, as far as her background. Not in a “There are like ten layers of literary stuff lightly sautéed on top of a Pre-Christian background” way, but in a, “Holy Shit, they REALLY created a goddess out of nothing, didn’t they?” way. The tl;dr is that, INITIALLY the Tuatha dé Danann were...the Tuatha dé. Just “Tuatha dé.” Which translates out very, very roughly to “God-Tribe.” Which WORKED but also, unfortunately, was the same term used for the Israelites in the Bible, which caused Confusion understandably.

And, well. I’m going to let Mark Williams explain the rest, since he’s the man with the PhD (Also, if you have ANY interest in how our current conceptions of the Tuatha dé have been formed, I HIGHLY recommend this book. It’s a VERY solid, accessible book that doesn’t bog itself in academic jargon and instead tries to create something that can be read and enjoyed by anyone, and unlike me, he’s very open as far as the possibilities):

This tangle indicates two things: first, the origins and developments of the mysterious Donand are not fully recoverable, and secondly the idea that Irish paganism knew a divine matriarch named Danu cannot now be maintained. The compilers of ‘Cormac’s Glossary’ may have been quite correct that there had once been a goddess called Anu or Ana associated with the Paps mountains, since it beggars belief to think that the pre-Christian Irish would not have associated so impressively breasted a landscape with a female deity. On the other hand it is suspicious that so important a figure as the glossary’s ‘mother of the Irish gods’ should go unmentioned in the early sagas, teeming as they are with former gods and goddesses. This raises the possibility that Ana/Anu may have simply been a local Munster figure, less familiar or even unknown elsewhere in Ireland.

Michael Clarke foes further, and suggests that the lofty description of Anu/Anu in ‘Cormac’s Glossary’ may itself owe more to medieval learning than to pagan religion, and result from a monastic scholar musing learnedly on the goddess Cybele, mother of the classical gods...He also quotes Isidore, Irish scholars’ favourite source for the learning of Mediterranean antiquity, who describes Cybele in striking terms: “They imagine the same one as both Earth and Great Mother...She is called Mother, because she gives birth to many things. Great, because she generates food; Kindly, because she nourishes all living things through her fruits.”

This, as Clarke notes, is so close to the Irish glossary entry that it is hard to avoid the suspicion that the ‘personality’ of the goddess Ana-’who used to feed the gods well’-has been cooked up in imitation of the classical deity. That Clarke’s analysis may be right is suggested by a distinctive oddity in the ‘Ana’ entry: While traces of the activities of divine beings are constantly detected in the landscape in Irish tradition, nowhere else is a natural feature described as part of a divinity’s body. This is rare even for the better-attested gods of classical tradition, with the signal exception of the great mother-goddesses of the eastern Mediterranean, of whom Cycle, the ‘Mountain Mother’, came to be the most prominent. Ana/Anu is simply not on the same scale or plane of representation as síd beings like Midir or Óengus, and it is telling that the Paps of Ana were imagined (by the early thirteenth century at the latest) as a pair of síd-mounds, the separate and unconnected dwellings of different otherworldly rulers.

(Ireland’s Immortals, pg. 189-190)

So, just as much as it’s hard to assign a function to MOST of the Tuatha dé, it’s even harder to really....SAY whether Ana actually existed prior to a certain period of time. She definitely wasn’t called “Danu;” that form of her name is never used at that point.

Was there a figure who was “Mother to the Gods?” I don’t know. Maybe there was! Maybe she was the Great Mother Goddess of the pre-Christian Irish! I’m not going to claim to KNOW one way or another until we invent time machines and I can properly go back in time to shake an answer out of Cormac in person. But it’s impossible to know and the evidence is scant at best, definitely not worthy of the press she gets. I wish I could tell you. I really do, even if the answer was something that I personally wouldn’t like. But then, we wouldn’t have a field, either.

#greenwitchpinkcrystals #long post #irish mythology #i tried to make this as short and succinct as possible and i still failed #whoops #danu #celtic mythology

13 notes · View notes

hamliet · 5 years

Note

How does one start writing meta? How do you do it so confidently? I can never tell if my ideas are correct. Like "Oh am I overanalyzing it" or "What if I'm wrong" are constant thoughts when I try to write. You have a literary degree or something of that nature right? So you /know/ what you're talking about. I just read lots of books and want to talk about it, but without pretentiously overanaylzing or forcing my ideas on others.

Well, so here’s the thing. Some of the people who write the best metas, the metas I am in awe of who teach me about writing metas, don’t have degrees in lit or writing. Literature is subjective by nature and therefore more accessible, and you definitely don’t need one to write meta! (And have them be kickass awesome metas too.) And some of my metas looking back are honestly overanalyzing, and some aren’t XD

I think the more you write metas the more practice you will get, and the better you will become. (I hope...) It’s okay to overanalyze, but I think it’s good to just be... self aware. So like when I think I might be, I will admit to it, but there’s nothing wrong with overanalyzing either. And learn from your mistakes because you will get things wrong, and that’s okay. But I think the best way to learn how to do meta is by reading and writing meta.

Know that literature thrives on discussion and be open to changing your mind. As long as you’re open, you can still be blunt (because tbh the field of literature will literally take points off your essays if you use “seems” and “might be” too much; a professor’s catchphrase was “you can never be too blunt”). It’s okay to be confident. But just be open to changing your mind and when people disagree, be respectful. Because we’re all in it to understand the story better and articulate why something in it matters to us, and so that’s fine. Approaching it as participating in a discussion in which everyone’s voice matters is the best way to write, I think. If you keep your analysis to the text and keep it away from “people who think x” then you’re not forcing anything on anyone.

Everyone’s got insecurities about writing. I hella do. But it’s okay to do it scared, and to take time feeling it out. I would love to read more metas, if you write them!

#ask hamliet #meta #Anonymous

10 notes · View notes

data-is-my-favorite-android · 6 years

Text

Ashburn’s Arc: Meta Analysis of the Entire Season (and Predictions)

I must be insane to sit here and labor for hours over another meta, but I can’t help it. I can’t get these characters’ arcs out of my head. Like, the writing blows me away and I’m really excited (and maybe a little nervous) to see what happens next. But one thing is for sure: Michael Burnham and Ash Tyler are the two common threads throughout this entire season, and their relationship is Important To The Plot.

Buckle up, friends, cuz this one’s a loooong one.

You may see that I just said that Ash Tyler is one of two common threads through the entire season, implying he has been important from the beginning.

“But data, Ash Tyler as we know him didn’t show up until episode 5, how can that be true?”

Yes, well, much as we hate to admit it, Ash is also Voq. And Voq has been around from the beginning. While Voq and Ash aren’t entirely the same, they are connected, meaning their arcs are intrinsically intertwined together. And while this may seem counter-intuitive, that fact actually might be good news for ashburn.

Before you riot, let me explain.

This season opened with two ships, a Federation one and a Klingon one, facing off. Aboard both ships, we saw two captains interacting with two important subordinates. In the case of the Shenzhou, the pair was captain and first officer, but also surrogate mother and adopted daughter. Aboard the Sarcophagus, the relationship was between captain and chosen successor, messiah and devout follower. It isn’t hard to see the parallels. The parallels deepen further when Goergiou fights T’Kuvma and Voq fights Michael. At the end of the struggle, both captains are dead, leaving two grieving people behind to pick up the pieces. Michael is imprisoned immediately, while Voq is cast out later. Both are desperate to prove their worth and honor the memory of their fallen loved ones.

From a writer’s perspective, setting up these kinds of parallels between characters can go one of two ways:

1) The two become adversaries. Molded by similar circumstances, they diverge in response and become mortal enemies destined to fight until one of them is vanquished.

2) The two, while initially adversaries, become allies. They meet with the intention of fighting, but find common ground where they least expected it and go on to work together to overthrow the real enemy (whatever that might be). This is also fertile soil for the star-crossed/unexpected lovers arc.

Listen, everything that happens in a well-written story carries a kind of narrative momentum, a series of weights that pushes the Story Arc one way or another. I’ve taken the liberty of noting important moments in the story and their narrative weight as it pertains to ashburn. I’m using a pretty simple system, awarding points for each positive and negative instance, but tbh some of these moments carry more narrative weight than others. For now, let’s break it down like this: ones are for buildings block moments, twos are for scenes or lines carrying important themes, and threes are for Narrative Events that carry a lot of clout. I may have missed a few, or you may disagree with how I’ve weighted them, but here’s what I have presently:

For the parallels set up pre-Ash Tyler, I’m giving a weight of +3. This is a time-honored and well-established literary trope that carries a lot of narrative importance. This could have been a -3 (indicating an unhappy ashburn ending), but circumstances further down the line make me believe that it’s a positive thing.

Tyler shows up. When he meets Burnham for the first time, he doesn’t reject her immediately. Instead, he says “I prefer to assess people in the here and now”. I’ll come back to this and why I think it’ll be important in the future. So he greets her with an open mind. +2

He goes on to sympathize with her when she doesn’t know how to feel about Sarek. He accepts her duality (a human who is culturally Vulcan) and helps her realize that what she’s experiencing is “being human”. +2

Michael wants to initiate a relationship and does so by being honest about her feelings. +1

Michael nearly kills a bitch when Mudd kills Tyler and sacrifices herself (temporarily) to bring him back. +1

Tyler tells Michael he’s “not going anywhere” as they contemplate their budding relationship. +2

On Pahvo, Tyler tells Michael she deserves better than jail and that he personally puts her needs above the many. +2

Aboard the Sarcophagus, Michael tells Tyler “no one gets left behind” and promises to come back for him. +2

Tyler says that after everything that’s happened to him, he’s still happy because it led him to her. +2

Michael listens to Tyler’s experiences and doesn’t judge him, instead telling him he deserves peace, to which he responds that he found peace in her. +2

Tyler nearly suffers another breakdown. He says he can handle it, even though he’s clearly struggling. He asks Michael to trust him. -2

Tyler kills Culber. -3

Tyler pledges to protect Michael. +2/-2 depending on how you look at it

Tyler tells Michael he loves her, and she says she loves him too. +3

Tyler talks about Michael as his tether. +2/-2 depending

Tyler freaks out on Mirror!Voq. -2

Tyler tells Michael he wants to be human for her and that he’s been holding on for her. +2

But then Voq takes over and he tries to kill her. -3

Michael spares him, even though she knows he’s Voq. +1

Tyler asks about Michael with the few seconds of time he has as himself in med bay. +1

Michael refuses to see Tyler. -1

Sarek tells her there is grace in loving your enemy. +3

Sarek tells Michael not to regret loving somebody. +2

Tilly tells Michael that how she treats Tyler now says something about who she is and who they all are as people. +3

Tyler and Michael meet and argue. -2 but also +3 in the long run if my predictions are correct.

As you can see, despite some of the negative major events, there is a net positive momentum behind their arc presently.

Star Trek Discovery has been all about mirrors and echoes this entire season. Looking back at Ash and Michael’s interactions and some of the other big events so far, I can see a lot of potential to take the loose ends of their relationship and tie them back together. Here are some thoughts (that may not be organized that well, sorry!):

I think we’ll see another moment like the one with Ash accepting Michael when they first meet, except the roles may be reversed. This echo may have already been satisfied by Tilly’s intervention in the mess hall, but there might be a more significant moment where Michael assesses Ash “in the here and now”, putting his past transgressions aside and accepting him as he is.

I also think there’s something important about Tyler’s acceptance of Michael’s duality and sympathizing with her confusion around her father and her human emotions. We may see Michael begin to pivot toward accepting Tyler and his complexity like Tyler did for her. Also, Michael struggling with her emotions, specifically those around being angry, but wanting to love, have some narrative significance that I think we may see in the future. I’m seeing seeds here that I could very well see the writers planting for later use.

Ash is now the one more likely to go to prison than Michael, which is an interesting reversal of the previous situation. There may be another moment where Michael does for Ash what he did for her on Pahvo and state that there is something unjust about the situation and she doesn’t want him to be imprisoned. This could just be Ash’s arc playing out in a logical way, but it feels more like a foil of Michael’s trajectory.

Sarek explicitly telling Michael that loving “the enemy” is special and good seems like A Big Giant Plot Point. Telling her to never regret loving someone is crazy important, especially coming from a Vulcan. Michael could have gotten that talk from someone else, like Saru or Tilly. But the writers chose to have her emotionally closed-off Vulcan surrogate father deliver this information. While he may have had other reasons for saying some of the things he said, there’s no denying that he directly stated that there was grace in embracing an enemy. That wasn’t a mistake; it was designed for Maximum Impact.

Tilly also gave A Big Important Speech to Michael about Starfleet values as they apply to Tyler. We’re getting lots of cues from the writers that reconciliation, while difficult, is coming, and lots of confirmation that what Michael and Ash have is special and worthy of protecting.

Now here are my big predictions. Bear in mind that I could be crazy wrong on some of these, but I’m taking a swing at it and seeing how I do:

1) Tyler won’t die. There are a few reasons why I think this. We’ve already had a lot of deaths. There’s been a shit-ton of attrition on the show of not only primary and secondary characters, but also faceless masses of war casualties. Enough people have died in this conflict. At this point in the game, the writers need to give us big emotional wins. Losing Tyler is not an emotional win. Lorca’s death was somewhat shocking, but he was a different character than Tyler; he was unrepentant to the end while Tyler is clearly remorseful. To me, this kind of writing signals a coming redemption arc.

Now, if Ash and Michael had reconciled during their argument this last episode, I’d be more worried. A common trope used in television is the whole lovers making up shortly before one of them is killed (usually in a heroic sacrifice). The crude narrative logic behind this might be summed up like this: one partner in the relationship did something wrong but was forgiven quickly and didn’t have to suffer enough for their actions; death becomes their punishment. Also, it’s a way of giving the audience one last feel good scene before a character dies and creates character pain for the surviving partner. It’s stupid and cheap, but it’s a common enough sight in media. But that isn’t what happened here. Tyler is remorseful and wants to atone for his sins, but it’s going to be a long road. Michael didn’t let him off easy, either. His character has been set up to have to do emotional work; the writers need to show him doing that work. He needs to live to follow through on that.

So what will happen to him? I can’t be sure. I see a few more options, though.

I’ll start with the two least likely but still possible ones.

The first is that he’ll somehow remain with the Klingons. This could be either as a diplomat to build bridges between the Federation and the Klingons -or- as a traitor to the Federation. Voq was set up to be the unifier of the Klingons, and Ash has Voq’s memories; it makes sense that he might inherit his “fate”. It also might echo L’rell’s words to Voq about building bridges between her family’s houses. Of the two possibilities under this subheading, this seems the more likely. It’s possible that Tyler, feeling spurned by Michael or the Federation and disgusted with the war crimes they are threatening to commit, defects and joins the Klingons. But Tyler has thus far been unwaveringly loyal to Starfleet, and he currently has a lot of people in his corner helping him through this tough transition in his life. He knows there are good people around him, and honestly I don’t believe he’d be so petty that he’d betray the Federation because Michael won’t accept him. I do think we’ll see him speaking in defense of the Klingons when he learns of the inevitable war crimes Georgiou is pushing to commit, though.

The second scenario is that he’s incarcerated. This is entirely possible, given his unique situation. However, Starfleet may consider him an asset better left in the field, where he can be used as Klingon intelligence while still being observed in a controlled environment. Also, the Federation may feel it wrong to imprison him for circumstances outside of his control and they may think it inhumane to subject him to tests and experiments without his total consent and cooperation. If he does go to the clink, I think he’ll eventually be brought back to Discovery because, like Michael, he’s an important character and an important resource.

The third possibility is...??? Something happens that necessitates his continued presence on the Discovery or makes his exit impossible. And I’m not going to even begin to speculate how that happens, tbh.

2) Michael and Ash’s relationship will continue in one way or another (either as friends or lovers) as long as Ash is still aboard Discovery. That doesn’t mean it’ll be easy for them, but there’s a lot of narrative gravity pulling them together. But a few things need to happen first:

-Tyler needs to show that he can find his way without Michael as his tether. He needs to be willing to put in the work for himself and he needs to show through his actions that he isn’t relying on Michael (even if he still looks to her as a beacon).

-Michael needs to see Tyler doing something (perhaps protecting her, as he promised he would) in such a way that she realizes the man she knew is still there. Last episode the writers specifically called attention to Tyler’s eyes; Michael said all she could see was Voq when she looked into them. I’m going to go out on a limb here and say that in the season finale they’ll be in a tight spot together and Tyler will do something brave or gentle or whatever and she’ll look into his eyes and see him, the man she loves.

3) I also think there will be a moment between them where Michael has to decide to trust Ash and take his hand (figuratively or maybe even literally). Or maybe it’ll be Ash doing something dangerous or reckless and Michael rescues him by taking hold of him, who knows. But I think the “Will You Take My Hand?” of the title may have something to do with them. I actually think we may see several iterations of this question during the episode, but I’m hoping that Ash and Michael reconnecting is one of them.

Ultimately, I think it makes sense for Michael and Ash to continue to be a driving force in Discovery because their relationship is a metaphor for so many things that are key aspects of the overarching story line. They represent the different sides of the war, the possibility for respect and love between enemies, the truth that patience and understanding in the face of adversity can build bridges between people. And remember when I said two people with parallel character arcs can work together to overthrow the real enemy? The real enemy here is fear, and the violence that comes from fear and ignorance. The Klingons were afraid of losing their cultural identity. The Federation is afraid of being annihilated. Fear is the enemy. Michael is afraid of Tyler because of what he is, and Tyler is afraid of losing touch with who he was. To defeat the enemy, they’re going to need to move past their fear and differences and start again from a place of compassion. Their reconciliation would represent a larger trend, one that embodies the optimism of Star Trek and promotes the ideals of the Federation.

And that’s why I think there’s hope for Ashburn yet.

#star trek discovery #ashburn #ash tyler #michael burnham #meta #predictions #really hope i'm right

55 notes · View notes

saveloadreset · 7 years

Text

Interpretive Lenses

We have a lot of fun with theory and analysis when it comes to Undertale, it’s true, but we’re often very bad at it. And I feel like part of it is a lack of awareness of different kinds of critical lenses that can be used to look at a text*. I wanted to talk a little about them.

*Text in this scenario means any work of fiction or media.

We have a tendency to be very absolute on tumblr. This is a ‘bad’ take on something, this is a ‘good’ take on something . . . Many times, what causes a lot of our different interpretations of a text isn't mistakes. It’s not bad analysis. It’s that we came to the text with a different perspective.

In literary analysis, different perspectives are deeply valued takes on a text. Different, even widely different, understandings of a single piece of media are seen as a way to better grasp the whole. To illustrate this . . . Think about it like so . . .

Two people are given two pictures. They are told they are two dimensional sketches of a single object. One of the people looks at their copy . . .

This is clearly a sphere, they say, and pat themselves on the back for their deep insight.

But the other one hears this and goes; “No. It’s OBVIOUSLY a box.”

Each of them understand intrinsically that their picture is accurate. Perhaps, if they look at each other’s pictures, they might conclude that the picture is faulty. That they’re looking at something else entirely. Perhaps they think they’re part of some gaslighting experiment, or otherwise believe the other person’s perspective is totally wrong.

The truth is more simple than that. Both are correct. The image is of a cylinder.

This isn't to imply that all takes, all observations of a piece of media are equally worthy of consideration. This method presumes both sides are arguing in good faith and are well-informed, which is not always the case. But if they are based on fact, there are things that we can take from that to understand the text.

There are all kinds of critical lenses that you can use to apply to a piece of fiction to learn from it. Each way to look at a text is a ‘lens,’ and each has its own strengths and blind spots, because that’s the problem inherent with perspectives.

In academia, we are taught to look at problems from multiple angles, to use many lenses, and open ourselves up to the idea that a single piece of media can mean more than one thing. We look at things in a feminist lens, in a marxist lens, in a lens focused entirely on story archetypes (I’m looking at you, Hero’s Journey!), ‘death of the author’ is part of another critical lens that chooses to throw aside author intent and reside wholly in the text, a historical lens in which we care about nothing MORE than author’s circumstances and the situation in which the text was made and many MANY more.

I’mma bring this back to Undertale for a moment. What do you think my primary critical lenses are, when I try to evaluate Undertale? Primarily, my understanding of the text is kinda historical in that it focuses on the context in which the game came out, including the kickstarter and its promises, with special consideration for the limitations and tropes of videogames, with a dash of information . Textual analysis takes a close second place, with information gained by hacking a distant third, usually used to emphasize what we already suspected through textual evidence.

This lens suits my purposes, because my primary goal is to try to suss out intent. To try to understand the world not as Toby wrote it, but as Toby intended it. Ultimately, we must recognize that this is an attempt in futility. My lens is not his, and it shall never BE his, but with effort I hope to get a general grasp, in order to have some idea of what will happen in the next game with Gaster and (hopefully) Chara.

By and large though, Undertale theory is PURELY textual. This lens serves the general community very well! Because generally speaking, we don’t care much about predictions. We want to understand the world. The goal is to develop a broader, developed world out of the snapshot we have been given in order to create a platform for an array of diverse fanworks.

And to that end, the opinion of the author does not matter. Only the text that we have in front of us does. This lens is effective for the purpose it has been used. And regardless, my own perspectives would not be possible without a great deal of textual evidence!

What kind of interpretative lenses do you like to use to understand Undertale, or other media you consume? I’m curious!

#save analysis #undertale

31 notes · View notes

mild-lunacy · 7 years

Text

The Continuity Axiom Strikes Back

For what it's worth, even though I admit I was wrong, it seems a bit ironic that the main arguments people have against TJLC still ring false to me. Possibly because they haven't evolved with the times. Quite the opposite: there's many signs of the same old fannish polarization we see in society at large in response to divisive social or political issues. I guess saying 'well, that wasn't what they were going for after all, but good points!' doesn't quite give people that certain... schadenfreude. So the arguments I do hear are, 1) Moffat and Gatiss are bad writers; 2) Moffat and Gatiss should simply always have been taken at their word. There's also 3) we're reading too much into things and indulging in confirmation bias. One is perhaps a little subjective but largely obviously incorrect (look at the awards, if nothing else), and two is objectively ill-advised, since they've said they lie and cannot be trusted multiple times. Personally, I've always had a particular sore spot for the argument that boils down to 'Moffat and Gatiss are bad writers', and I take issue with those who argue against or otherwise mock the idea of canon Johnlock without both understanding and loving the show first. Even so, I realize it can be difficult to understand both perspectives at once. I just think it's important to integrate if there's any desire to engage with the different sides of the Johnlock fandom, and honestly the Sherlockians at large at this point.

The core of the issue cognitively might be summarized by the TJLC interpretation of this quote by Moffat: he initially said they wanted to do the show not just to update it but to correct everyone else, to say 'Now this is the way it should be done'. This ties in with all the hype-- and the hope-- about the BBC LGBT report and the way the BBC hyped Series 4 as 'making history', though I personally was taking a break from fandom at the time and in any case, always take such things with a grain of salt (at best). My point is that there's certainly been circumstances aside from 'confirmation bias' that lead people to think something a bit bigger and more exciting than... Sherlock's origin story and journey to being a 'good man' was going on, which culminated in TFP, as @ivyblossom described. That is (more or less) what I currently think Mofftiss were *going for* with that quote, but the fact is that Gatiss admitted he's interested in 'flirting with the homoeroticism in Sherlock', and they certainly followed through with that on a large scale. I think that it's a bit of a case of po-tay-to/po-tah-to, honestly. When you build a character growth arc where the main character is being 'humanized' by his relationship with his colleague/best friend/conductor of light/family, *and* you add many classic romantic tropes and rampant queer coding and subtextual homoeroticism... what you have is a love story, pure and simple.

Regardless of intent, it exists and is valid at least as much as an accented pronunciation of the same word would be equally 'valid'. In Sherlock's case, I would argue they'd gone far enough (too far) with the subtext and tropes, and indeed the romantic reading became the primary, most fully correct textual reading. At this point, I imagine this situation got out of Moffat and Gatiss's control... which is a huge challenge for any writer, and one that they didn't really address (in part because of a penchant for self-indulgence, I think), but this still doesn't make them *bad writers*, per se.

Obviously, I'm not saying this in self-defense or to 'prove' explicitly romantic canon Johnlock at this point. Besides, I do think that critique number three makes a good point, in that plenty of meta *was* reading too much into things, but you can say that about any type of meta, of any flavor. For example, I realize I tried way too hard to deny the surface reading of HLV, which... I clearly should have integrated more closely instead, if the Mary storyline resolution in TST is any indication. And many, many people enjoy speculation and pattern-matching and playing with metaphors or symbolism, but don't make a hobby of analyzing either their own thinking or other people's, perhaps understandably. Many fans who had donned the 'conspiracist hat' haven't been as vigilant as we could be about other people's analyses, never mind our own work. Anyway, overall, I still think any truly competent literary/media critic of BBC Sherlock I've ever seen would have to acknowledge the queer/romantic subtext in it at some point, even if they disagreed or simply wouldn't care about it becoming explicitly textual. So just as a total lit nerd, it's unfortunate that people can now continue to think that being dismissive and heteronormative is somehow a superior mode in analysis. And it's also unfortunate that 'bad writing' continues to be a one-size-fits-all approach to excusing one's lack of understanding of the show's deeper layers, more or less.

Basically, my point is that I still believe that Moffat and Gatiss are good-- or at least intelligent, often complex and certainly fundamentally competent-- writers in many ways. They do have their own preset ideas about what they want and don't always communicate those ideas to the broader audience effectively. And I have to further qualify that by saying that the thing I object to is dismissive thinking and 'explaining' stuff that doesn't make sense in the text with the offhand response that 'the writers suck'; I don't mean you can't simply have that as a subjective opinion, obviously, or critique the lack of follow-through in the writing. I definitely need to admit that they can be sloppy and leave plot holes when they lose interest in following up on the details, or introduce significant plot elements that they try to build and build without slowing down and integrating properly. I think @girlofthemirror's postmortem on what went wrong in Series 4 definitely speaks to this issue of too many 'spinning plates' in the plot and no room to breathe, particularly starting with Series 3. Just like Sherlock, they can get arrogant and try to be too clever for their own good. Worse than simple plot holes fixed by mild retcons, like Eurus shooting John with a tranquilizer, or the genre-related writing choices that @plaidadder took issue with in TFP, there's the truly unfortunately executed stuff like Mary's arc or that baby. Including a baby as a plot device to keep John and Mary together and then basically doing nothing else with it is inexcusable. Even with all those caveats, Moffat and Gatiss are so good in other ways that I really don't think you can hand-wave all analysis with 'it's just incompetence', surely.

Even if that has gotten much more battered after Series 4 and TFP, I haven't given up or decided TFP means the old continuity is destroyed, really. I think it's important to read for assumed continuity even when it's hard; perhaps *especially* when it's hard. If you have difficulties finding the textual pattern in characterization or the plot arcs that makes sense, it doesn't necessarily make sense to assume that it's automatically the writers' fault, basically. Even if there's problems in the writing (as there almost always will be), the chances are that there are more preconceived ideas and more incorrect conclusions to prune in one's own analysis. If you're invested and interested, then the best thing to do next would be working to dismantle your own preconceptions of the show. I've already done it once when I accepted canon Johnlock, but that doesn't mean it's the only time. There may well be multiple times. It does get easier, once you gain some emotional distance, assuming you're still interested at that point (granted, most people aren't). If you agree insofar that Authorial Intent matters in analysis (not an automatic thing by any means), then it makes sense to assume that the writers have some kind of *goal* or purpose to the characterization, especially given that it progresses in an apparent growth arc.

This is basic stuff. One should always assume that the writers have something to say in literary/media analysis, no matter the quality of the text. This is necessary in order to then be able to say anything coherent about 'real' or 'apparent' interpretation of the text in the first place. Further, one needs an understanding of the goals if one wants to judge the work as artistically successful or fundamentally 'well-done' or consistent on the larger scale or not.

That has always been the best claim to fame for TJLC: that frame exposed the logic in the show, while other types of analysis focused on their favorite bits of characters and dismissed everything that didn't fit as plot holes and pointless fluffery. For example, this definitely applied to Mary Morstan fans: she was seen as already redeemed and her marriage with John was unproblematic because Sherlock said so (and while she was more or less redeemed, it was only in TST, and their marriage continued to be plainly portrayed as quite troubled until the end). Anyway, in order to make sense of the show, we all picked at bits and pieces and disregarded what's inconvenient to some extent, but canon Johnlock did that the *least*.

Essentially, I'm saying I have a bone to pick with people who take this opportunity to accuse TJLCers of sloppy thinking, denialism, projection, fetishizing queer ships and so on, while offering only sloppy thinking themselves in return. The fact is, many TJLC-friendly meta writers have long challenged people to challenge *us* on our own terms, but of course no one did. It has definitely long been difficult to integrate this show for most viewers, from Series 3 on into TAB (which confused many), and finally into Series 4. Many non-TJLCers (including critics in the media) have said Series 4 jumped the shark and/or disregarded internal plot and character continuity, same as what happened with Series 3 except worse. In general, TJLC-friendly analyses are really the only ones I've seen that have presented a unified view that offered a cohesive and understandable reading of the entire show after Series 3. Here I'd also include many implicit or platonic Johnlock readings like Ivy's or stuff like this old meta of Skara's on TSoT, for example. The tricky thing is that (to the best of my current understanding), Mofftiss were essentially trying to write a near-classic love story without making it about sex, as Moffat once said. So a lot of people (rightfully) found that romantic and expected an explicitly textual romance. Regardless of whether it's actually *become* a genre romance, though, the romantic frame is inherent in the intensity and drama of John and Sherlock's relationship.

It builds up, too. Taken separately, there are platonic explanations for most Johnlocky things, but together these things create a sense of continuity, to the point where I can easily read an implicit romantic resolution after the end of TLD simply because of all this context. For example, think of Sherlock leaving the wedding early in TSoT. You *can* interpret that non-romantically and have it work for quite a while, so you'd still understand the show and Sherlock's feelings, as Skara once demonstrated. Even then, this only works if you essentially still fully accept that John is the most intense, most important, most passionate relationship of Sherlock's life. But then there's HLV, and the classic, epically romantic trope of Sherlock coming back to life for John, which would be 'just' epic friendship, except this is after his friend's wife shoots him again... in her wedding dress. If you have any understanding of narrative tropes in fiction, it's hard to miss the romantic tropes at work here, and we know Steven Moffat does. Except that's not enough, and we have Sherlock's heartbroken expression when he tells John he's 'abnormally attracted' to dangerous people (like himself and John's wife, naturally). And this kind of paralleling between John's obviously romantic love for his wife and his feelings for Sherlock goes on repeatedly in Series 3, and all this mirroring and subtext and acting simply... goes on and on. It would take a real and ongoing mental effort-- and/or a personal commitment to implicit or open-ended romantic relationships in stories-- to be aware of all this and resist the natural conclusion.

At a certain point, 'romantic' or 'platonic' becomes a question partially of your own internal definitions for interpersonal relationships and partly of your judgment of Moffat and Gatiss as show-runners and/or 'old white men', both of which have nothing to do with the show. The important thing for predictions would probably be determining Moffat and Gatiss's own definitions, and that was always going to be a difficult endeavor. We made some guesses, like using Moffat's interest in The Princess Bride and the fact that he wrote the most romantic episodes, such as ASiB, but there's only so far one can go with that. I'd say most people made the choice initially based on their own preferences for where they wanted the show to go, given they understood the text as it stood in S3. But the people who just said 'they're bad writers' simply didn't do any of this work; they dismissed the importance of the underlying question itself. Fundamentally, I think thinking critically about the text and reading it closely is always positive and to be supported, particularly in an environment that *exists* to celebrate and focus deeply on said text, such as fandom. A lot of people in fandom project onto the characters or use them for their own purposes, within or without the TJLC community. That's just how fandom is. But that's certainly not *all* we were doing, and thank god for that.

#fandom meta #sherlock meta #the great divergence #series 4 #writing #narrative #sherlock feels #tjlc #analysis kink #reader response #sherlock spoilers

17 notes · View notes

kellydiels · 5 years

Text

what's missing from mainstream success formulas detailed in books by Ryan Holiday and Peter Thiel

***

this is from my most recent Sunday Love Letter. If you’d like to subscribe, you can do that here.

***

Right now I'm on a reading jag. I'm reading books waaaaaaaay outside my worldview. It's really useful; and it's not purely a literary counterintelligence exercise. Every thoughtful human might have insight I can learn from. Even an incomprehensibly rich libertarian tech founder/investor who campaigned for the devil might have things they can teach this inclusive feminist culture maker. In other words, I just finished Zero to One by Peter Thiel.

I also read Conspiracy by Ryan Holiday (about how Peter Thiel conspired, successfully, to bankrupt Gawker Media; it's a rollicking good read) and Trust Me, I'm Lying, also by Ryan Holiday. Add to this mix, Anti-Fragile and Skin in The Game by Nassim Nicholas Taleb, and basically I've been bodysnatched, send help.

Here's what's interesting about these books (which seriously, I did learn really useful things from): what's missing. What's not said.

In Thiel's book, for example, he writes a lot about the big thinking and big projects -- the space program that landed a rocket on the moon! -- that created huge technological leaps in our world. He sincerely values miracles (he thinks 'technology' is a synonym for miracle); he values nonconformists and people who've never fit in or been welcome in the mainstream world; he thinks something is systemically broken in the American culture and cultural imagination; he wants to create a culture where we invent things that make our world better. In this way, and in many others, I see so much common ground between my own culture making aspirations, my lefty feminist community members and colleagues, and Thiel. True story.

But when Thiel waves at and celebrates the last 30-40 years of intense, near-miraculous technological progress and productivity, he's leaving out something crucial -- and it’s what Anand Giridharadas writes back into the conversation in his book Winners Take All (it's really good, read it!):

"All around us in America is the clank-clank-clank of the new...But these novelties have failed to translate into broadly shared progress and the betterment of our overall civilization." (1)

'...three and a half decades worth of wondrous, head-spinning change [have had] zero impact on the average pay of 117 million Americans." (4)

"...the system -- in America and around the world -- has been organized to siphon the gains from innovation upward, such that the fortunes of the world's billionaires now grow at more than double the pace of everyone else's..." (4)

I can see why people who mostly read books about success and business and The Good Life that are authored by the "winners" of our cultural lottery/system could sincerely be seduced by them.

I was -- and I came equipped with a systemic, counter-cultural, feminist analysis!

[side rant: Holiday's reading list on his website is revealing and disheartening. He’s underestimating himself and starving himself of the innovative insights that come from people who literally live outside the box. Someone please get him to pledge to only read people of colour and women for a year, stat. It seems to me that he’s intellectually receptive and a conscience-driven person (the early editions of Trust Me, I’m Lying notwithstanding) and reading excellence far outside his life experience and worldview would take his insights to a brilliant new level --

Holiday also spends some time in Conspiracy scanning the books in Thiel's home to get an understanding of his influences; it's an admission that who we're reading is what we end up thinking --

It’s so bizarre to me that so many of the people who value innovation and who *know* it comes from the weirdos and nonconformists overlook or devalue (often simply by overlooking) the intense brilliance that’s found in counterculturals and people with marginalized identities -- wisdom and insights that come from being on the margins and seeing our culture and social patterns in a way that people in the centre otherwise can’t]

It's really easy to not think about things that aren't being thought about.

One of the tasks of culture-makers, I think, is to constantly assess what brilliance and wisdom is missing -- and needed -- and reinsert who and what's missing back into our cultural narratives.

Because often what's missing is us.

And all the insights and wisdom we have to offer.

Absent from the narrative about how wondrous business is and the amazing things start-up culture has created in our world is a discussion of how sexual abuse and harassment and systematic exclusion are a feature, not a bug, of that same culture -- and how those biases get built right into the algorithms and platforms of the tech (miracles!) we're supposed to worship. (The book Technically Wrong is brilliant on this front.) Thiel, for example, talks about the traits of successful founder's but doesn't connect the dots to how a founder's bias (this is A Thing: Founder's Bias) gets built into the very products that are now structuring our brave new world.

That's because Thiel’s unit of analysis is business and founders.

He may be concerned with The Common Good, and probably I'm a fawn prancing in a meadow with butterflies because I believe he sincerely is concerned with it, but because his unit of analysis is founders/business, he's looking at the conditions they require to create their version of that good...so that it facilitates more of their particular type of Common Good manufacturing.

It's a tragic, deeply political, narrowing of scope. You can't see what you're not looking for.

Ryan Holiday does this, too, in Trust Me, I'm Lying.

I have such a complicated imaginary relationship with Ryan Holiday. Again, this could be me frolicking in meadows with talking rabbits and charming insects, but I sincerely believe that he's grown and matured and is anguished by the state of our media and our culture -- part of which his book played a role in devolving (his most recent version of TMIL makes his regret pretty explicit). A few years ago, however, I hated this book and, by extension, him. I saw a twenty-something white man who lacked an understanding of social inequity and consequences publishing and profiting from a manual on how to manufacture outrage and manipulate the media. I saw that as a tutorial on how to manipulate people and our society. Which it is.

[Side rant: Using manipulative, disempowering tactics to influence the audience in order to sell shit is everything I oppose in my own work on The Female Lifestyle Empowerment Brand. So I have super strong feelings about this book. And Launch by Jeff Walker. Even though I have no doubt Walker's a lovely person, I think the encouragement to use mental triggers against consumers is profoundly damaging to people and our larger cultural context; I also think it conditions the sellers and entrepreneurs to dehumanize other people in the name of profit. Which cannot be good for us.}

The book carried a warning, sure but it felt like Machiavelli’s disengenous warning about The Prince (Holiday references the same warning in Conspiracy so perhaps I’m correct to connect the dots). Back to my point. Holiday seemed to be warning us that media is corrupt and the system by which journalism functions needs to be fixed...but what that does, helpfully for his profile and the book’s sales, is justify deliberate media manipulation, not correct it.

His logic appeared to me to go like this: no, you don't have to feel bad about manipulating a broken system. It's corrupt. So go ahead and exploit those weakness for profit and pleasure.

The villain in Holiday's book was the corrupt media. By making it a villain, no one has to feel bad about whatever bad things they do to the villain.

Making the media system the focus of the book conveniently erases who gets hurt by wanton media manipulation: us.

Holiday's book basically helps its readers not feel bad about profiting from fuckery and deliberately fucking with their end user.

You know, people. Our society. Our democracy that NEEDS the fourth estate.

By leaving media consumers -- us, the general public, our society and our democracy -- out of the book and out of the equation, and focusing on ‘the media’ as a villain, his blueprint and tactics seem savvy and achievable. Though outrageous, the apparent do-able-ness of his advice (in the earlier editions of his book) is a function of what's left out of the book: the real victims. The damage it inflicts on people and our society.

Women in corporate spaces, for example, are acutely aware of how many women are not at the boardroom table (or on the reading list. Ahem). When my biracial daughters walk into a room, they count how many people of colour are present. How many white people or men do that? Does Ryan Holiday? Or Peter Thiel?

(I didn't scan for textual or physical absences until recently. I'm a person of a mostly dominant identity. I've rarely had to.)

When we don't account for what and who are missing, it's easy to get seduced by rah-rah-cis(!)-boom-bah narratives and formulas for success and want to replicate them.

It's really easy to get dazzled by the superhuman feats of invention -- PayPal! Tesla! Space-X! Facebook! -- and notice and celebrate the way they're tangibly reconfiguring the world and creating huge amounts of value (capital) and totally fail to miss the fact that this is not shifting the material conditions of most humans.

All the money and capital being created in the USA by start-ups-cum-institutions did not increase the salaries of most Americans. It did not improve our democracies or the quality or safety of our public spaces. (Temple and church and school shootings. Police shootings of unarmed black people. Pipe bombs being mailed to political figures in the weeks before an election.) Knowing how to manipulate the media for fun and profit did not improve the quality or strength of our fourth estate. Instead, it contributed to a context in which the president of the United States can declare war on the media -- a pillar of democracy -- and the 'truth' becomes whatever ranks highest on Google's first page.

All of this to say: definitely read outside your experience and world view AND read every context, every room, every group, every book (and book list) for who and what is missing. It changes everything.

It makes our tactics and formulas and reflections for creating cultural change better.

And I think that's what we need to truly make a better world, for all of us.

***

this is from my most recent Sunday Love Letter. If you’d like to subscribe, you can do that here.

***

#WeAreTheCultureMakers #feministmarketing #peterthiel #ryanholiday #technicallywrong #trustmei'mlying #conspiracy #gawker #winnerstakeall #a seat at the table #culture making #feminist books #books #Ryan holiday #Peter thiel #feminist marketing #technically wrong #AnandGiridharadas worldchanging #anand giridharadas

0 notes

inkingaboutwords-blog · 6 years

Text

Lesson 2: Editing

1) Foreword

Hey there crew! A couple changes this month: I reordered devices before forms, because it makes more sense that way. I won’t be taking submissions to workshop from here on out, because I just don’t have time to (this platform also isn’t great for interactivity, and that’s really showing, but I’m going to continue to press on with this approach to get the content done so that I can transfer it to something better next year and hopefully that experience will be more interactive and more digestible for people.)

This lesson is pretty heavy (will probably be the heaviest one) because it’s focused on identifying different formats, and there’s a LOT of technical terms to cover regarding that. Two things I want to make clear in regard to that:

I use the words ‘form’ and ‘format’ interchangeably. Just want to make sure that doesn’t confuse anyone. Form is the more correct term, if you’re wondering.

You really, really don’t have to perfectly memorize the correct term for everything to be a poet (this applies to devices as well). It will help you a lot when discussing poetry, and a little when analyzing poetry, but what’s really important is just that you understand the concepts even if you can’t put a name to them. I’m not doing this to make your work more academic, just to give you tools to improve the way you want to.

Anyway, that’s me for the month. Hope you enjoy the lesson.

Mostly sincerely, Vex

---

2) Index

1. Foreword

2. Index

3. Lore

3.1 Syllables

3.2 Words

3.3 Rhyme

3.4 Stress

3.5 Foot

3.6 Meter

3.7 Stanza

4. Devices

4.1 Substitution

4.2 Triple construction

5. Forms

5.1 Kelly Lune

5.2 Collom Lune

5.3 Gwawdodyn

5.4 Rispetto

5.5 Descort

6. Skills

6.1 Editing

7. Suggestions

7.1 DIY

7.2 Edit Some Poems

7.3 Edit Backwards

7.4 Write Scansion

7.5 Try New Formats

---

3) Lore

3.1) Syllables

In English, a syllable is a set of letters that form a single sound in a word. Meter uses syllables to measure the rhythm of a line. A few poetic forms, such as the Kelly Lune, constrain the number of syllables on each line, and though poetry sites tend to explain forms in terms of syllables, it's rare that this is the intent of the form (if a site gives you a range ie "this line should be 10-13 syllables", then this is a misreading/misexplaining of the form's meter)

It's worth noting that you've probably been taught that a haiku counts syllables per line, but that's incorrect. More on that when we cover haiku.

Rarely, a word may vary in how many syllables you pronounce it with due to divergence between how it was originally said, and how it's commonly said. This is true for words such as "". Technically, this is only really true if you're pronouncing words wrong, but do what you want cause a pirate is free. (Also get used to breaking rules! You need to be comfortable with this to be a poet)

3.2) Words

Similarly, some forms may describe the number of words on a line. The Collum Line is one such example. Many of the forms not measured in meter are designed to be accessible to new poets.

3.3) Rhyme

Rhyme is a repetition of sounds. There are many types of rhyme that we will cover in a later lesson. The most basic form, where two lines end with the same sound, is used to define many formats. We're covering this now because this lesson is about being able to understand formats.

3.4) Stress

Stress is a measure of which sounds in a word are more emphasized. Stress is important because we use it to build rhythm in our works, which affect their flow when performed or read. To denote the stress of a line, people commonly use a notation called scansion. In the simplest form, a stressed syllable is marked as ‘x’ and an unstressed syllable is marked as ‘/’.

e.g. x / / Syl la ble

Further reading: The wikipedia page covers more complex versions.

3.5) Foot

A metric foot is a single measure of a pattern of stresses in a line. Sometimes scansion will have lines broken into feet using ‘|’ (this can also denote a pause in the reading if two are used ‘||’)

e.g.

x / / x / / x / / x / x / Syl la bles | and such sounds, || Will not know | what rhyme | a bounds.

The first three feet in this line are known as dactyls, while the last two are trochees. Here’s a list of what feet are named: Trochee: stressed - unstressed Iamb: unstressed - stressed Spondee: stressed - stressed Pyrrhic: unstressed - unstressed Dactyl: stressed - unstressed - unstressed Anapest: unstressed - unstressed - stressed Amphibrach: unstressed - stressed - unstressed To determine the name of a meter using these feet, just add ‘ic’ to the end. (trochaic, iambic, spondaic, pyrrhic, dactylic, anapestic, amphibrachic)

3.4) Meter (or Metre)

Meter is a way to describe the flow of a line being spoken, written, or read, and create an intentionally concordant (or rarely, discordant) rhythm in how it is delivered. A “base meter” describes the most common meter in the line, verse, or poem you’re talking about. A “mixed meter”, like in the example above, contains different feet in the same line - these are often used at the end of a stanza to break an established pattern for impact. Sometimes a mixed meter line is simply the result of a poet needing to use a particular word (meter is less often the most important factor in word choice). When a metrical foot repeats in a line, a prefix is used to signify how many times the foot has repeated. 1 = meter 2 = dimeter 3 = trimeter 4 = tetrameter 5 = pentameter 6 = hexameter etc. (It's not common to go over 6, since that's a loooong line, but if you feel like fucking shit up, go ahead)

3.7) Stanza

A stanza is a grouping of lines. Stanzas are further categorized according to how many lines are in them. 2 = couplet 3 = tercet 4 = quatrain 5 = quintain 6 = sestet 7 = septet 8 = octave

Most formats group lines for rhythmic structure, but stanzas often are written in a way that gives the stanza structure in other senses. This is an emergent property of the format. Consider a narrative poem in a format with four quatrains followed by a couplet. It would be unusual to split the sections of the narrative in a way that didn't relate to the stanzas of the format. It makes sense to use the first stanza as a setting, the middle two as the conflict, the last quatrain as a climax, and the couplet as an anticlimax. Thus the rhythmic structure informs the narrative structure.

---

4) Devices 4.1) Substitution (or Inversion)

Substitution is where an unusual foot appears within an otherwise normal meter. This is described above as ‘mixed meter’ in the section about meter. (When speaking of the device, it would be proper to call it substitution, but in describing the meter of a line ‘mixed meter’ makes more sense.)

A great example comes from a Shakespeare line you’re probably familiar with:

x / x / x / x / / x / To be, | or not | to be, || that is | the ques | tion

In this we see ‘the ques’ is an iambic foot within a trochaic meter.

4.2) Triple construction

Now commonly known as ‘The rule of three’, triple construction involves using three of something. It doesn’t sound like much of a literary device, but it has a big impact in writing. Supposedly this is because three is the smallest number of things required to form an identifiable pattern, making it easy for readers to recognize, and allowing the most people to get the pleasant feeling of seeing where an intentional poetic device was used.

Examples of triple construction that we’ve already discussed today include tercets, dactyls, anapests, amphibrachs, and trimeter. It also occurs very often in parallelism, which we covered in the last lesson (in fact, the example I used, “I came, I saw, I conquered”, is probably the most famous instance of triple construction ever). ---

5) Forms

5.1) Kelly Lune

The Kelly lune is a format created by Robert Kelly in an attempt to make an English version of the haiku that was more conceptually consistent with the original form of haiku than the commonly accepted 5-7-5 format. The form still lacks some of the constraint of an original haiku. The Kelly lune is defined as a tercet of 5-3-5 syllables. It has no other restrictions.

5.2) Collom Lune

A variant of the Kelly lune reportedly created through a misremembering of the constraints defines the format by words instead of syllables. It’s still a tercet, but the Collom lune has 3-5-3 words.

5.3) Gwawdodyn

This form is an example of formats described by rhyme. The area where the Gwawdodyn originated has many quatrain-based formats, and you’ll note the similarity they have to the Limerick. It involves a quatrain that has three 9 syllable lines (the 1st, 2nd, and 4th) that all rhyme, and a 3rd line of 10 syllables with an internal rhyme that either rhymes with the end of the 3rd line, or the middle of the 4th.

So either --------A --------A ----B----B --------A or --------A --------A ----B----C ----B---A (worth noting C could also rhyme with A)

5.4) Rispetto

A rispetto is a form that is defined primarily by its meter. It involves two quatrains of iambic tetrameter. It also has a rhyme scheme of abab ccdd.

5.5) Descort

This is both the strangest and hardest of the forms we’ll cover this lesson. It is not defined by its meter, syllables, words, or rhyme, but rather by its inconsistency in all those things. In a descort, each stanza must have a different number of lines, and each line must have a different number of syllables. A rhyme must not occur in multiple stanzas. Some sources I’ve seen report that each line also must have a different meter from each other line. I’m not sure this is following the original definition, but it certainly is in the spirit of the format. One poet from the time and place the format was created is known to have written descort poems where each stanza is in a different language. ---

6) Skills

6.1) Editing

Following up on last month’s lesson in drafting and analysis, now we’re going to get into the hard work. For my 2nd draft, I like to start by ensuring every stanza is in the correct order. Usually a beginning and an ending stand out evidently (though I find I often have multiple suitable endings and have to choose one - the others will be later reworked to suit another space in the narrative). If you don’t have obvious contenders for the beginning or ending, or if you feel what you do have isn’t strong enough, make a note to come up with something better.

The ending is typically the most evocative or contemplative line. If you plan on performing the piece, it’s a good idea to ensure an audience will recognize it as an ending or you’ll get scattered applause (more about this later when we cover performing). Usually the reason an audience might not recognize an ending is because the piece doesn’t contain a strong narrative for it to conclude, so they are unsure if more is coming. We could go deeper into this, but for brevity, let’s just say if you have this problem just test the piece with friends until you get it right.

The beginning is more versatile, so whatever suits the piece or your preference is likely fine. Strong beginnings tend to set up a context for the narrative, or an unusual perspective on a well-known topic.

Once you have two locations, the rest of the poem can be constructed as a journey from one to the other. Start by placing the best work in your draft between the beginning and ending in whatever order suits it, then go through and mark spots where it is difficult for a reader to jump from one thought to another. These will most often be between stanzas, but consider carefully where this also might occur between lines. Once the gaps are identified, you can fill them in with things that will make that transition easier (in a later lesson, we’ll look at how this relates to memorizing). Throughout this process, you’ll likely find lines that sound janky, or ones that speak about things a bit removed from the overarching narrative. I mark all of these lines, and occasionally stanzas, to be deleted (though not all of them will be, some will just be improved).

The sad truth is that to allow your poem to reach its potential, you often have to cut out something you really want to say about the topic because it doesn’t fit the narrative well enough. Don’t be scared to cut those - the narrative will deliver your message so don’t cheapen it with clutter. Cutting lines isn’t forfeiting your right to say them, you can still put those thoughts into a draft for a separate poem.

Once you have a poem with a solid narrative, you can start digging into the finer details to polish them up:

Check your syllable counts and stanza sizes. Even when writing open verse, consistency benefits a piece by introducing intentional repetition to the rhythm. It will also set you up for the next step.

Work out the meter of each line, and use that to decide where the impact will be. Meter is a mechanic you can use to emphasize anything you wish. The more consistent an existing pattern (in this case, the base meter of your work and how often you apply it to a line) is, the more powerful it is to break it using mixed meter or an unexpected change.

Consider adding more devices. Your first draft will have devices you came up with and thought were clever, but it will also have lines you wrote just to support those devices. Often these lines can be adjusted to contain more devices. For emphasis, it pays to pick the devices already used in the best lines of the poem, and try to use those particular devices elsewhere.

Consider removing devices. Sometimes they can be too heavy-handed in one area (I see this most often with assonance), or they overshadow or obscure the actual messages in the words (and this with metaphor). If you feel you have those problems, try to distribute the devices more evenly throughout the piece (it’s worth noting that this may not necessarily mean removing devices. It’s possible to achieve the same effect by spreading that heavy-handed use of devices throughout the whole work. If you can manage this, it will REALLY pay off.)

Further watching: Paper People by Harry Baker for an example of said pay off for using assonance heavily but consistently.

---

7) Suggestions

7.1) DIY

Have a try at making your own format. Remember that the rules around meter, syllable, and rhyme are only the mechanical side of a format. Most poetic forms were created in a particular context with a particular purpose, such as to entertain, to tell oral history, to court, etc. The context you write your form for may give it narrative or syntactic rules as well.

7.2) Edit Some Drafts

Take something you wrote for lesson one and try the editing steps above. Make a checklist to ensure you try each step. Note down additional steps your own process requires.

7.3) Edit Backwards

Take the same first draft and swap the beginning with the ending, and see how this changes the end result and also the editing process.

7.4) Write Scansion

Find a poem you like and determine the meter of each of its lines. Identify the base meter, and name all of its stanzas and meters. Write down the rhyme scheme if it has one. It’s much easier to read meta-information about poems if you practice identifying it in existing pieces. Don’t just do this for a classic poem, try some songs you like too.

7.5) Try New Formats

Try out the formats we covered today. They’re all pretty easy and interesting forms to write.

#Poetry #Learning #Education #Wellington #Wellington NZ #Aotearoa #Poetry in Motion Wellington

0 notes

luckydreamsublime-blog · 6 years

Text

Decide to buy an essay online economical

Order essay online only from leading US and UK writers

Students are overwhelmed with their homework tasks, function and they have no time for their private personal life. A few of them could not have enough writing skills or they cannot express their notion in a writing way. You might recognize yourself in one particular of these conditions. In this case, you will have to study this article from starting for the end. Then we're going to introduce you the most effective writing service that will modify your educational life. On our service, you may pay for an excellently written essay and invariably be calm. If you're trying to find a economical essay online writing service that may in no way let you down, then you are in a right location. Our consumers entrust us for our multi-year work in this region. Or perhaps you're curious why such services exist, then this info is just for you personally. Currently, humanity seeks to get the good quality education.

Pay for an excellently written essay

You nonetheless can not think that it is actually quite uncomplicated to pay for essay online? Is it actually like this? Who's going to create it as opposed to you? We have some info for you to create it clear. Initially of all, we have a group of professional writers. They all have top academic education, MBA. Some of them completed medical college, some of them left law college or home business college. But all of them are true specialists. It is easy to trust them due to the fact they may be a part of our service. They can handle each process. All you need is to spot an order for any form of writing work it doesn't matter if this is an admission for college or you are going to have a scholarship within the University. Each and every writer always stays in touch with the customer. It provides you the opportunity to appropriate something and coordinate the complete process. If you're not completely happy with a paper you've received then you have the appropriate to request for revision in the event you want and see the revision without having further charge. And it is actually totally legit to buy essays for money.

High-quality critical essay help online

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7AS-F1vWvxE

You know, that the critical analysis essay is your definition or interpretation of some piece of art, book or film. The crucial evaluation needs two things critical writing and vital reading. We produce vital aid essay online to create it less difficult for everyone.

Proven methods to buy college essay paper

When you're going to buy college best application essay you have to be sure in its quality. As have we pointed out prior to our professional writers understand how to produce a college most effective application for you personally. You of all persons realize that it is not trouble-free to buy an essay paper for a reasonable cost and identify skilled essay paper writer for your process. But our service hires only the most effective writers. And we're honestly attempting to produce our service much better everyday. Just about every of our writers has to create his/her degree, take English test and make a trial writing for our service. We will do our utmost to locate one of the most suitable writer for just about every consumer. Thereafter, you make speak to together with your writer to go over the details of one's paper. You can easily ask your writer or make some additions at any time. What's this about? You know that sometimes there's a long time if you ultimately communicate with the writer, as a result of intermediaries; here you might have a opportunity to make contact with him/her straight and buy college essay paper easy.

Tips on how to order essay online

Your life will be easier in the event you just make essay order online and loosen up. You are going to be asked to feel a detailed order form with each of the recommendation and specification. We are certain that there's no spot for misunderstanding due to the fact we're trying to comply with your guideline precisely. In the end, you are going to get an definitely custom essay order. Our editing service will care for your paper, so you will get best essay without the need of errors correct on time.

Personal student essay writing

A considerable amount of students have fears once they commence to think about their future life. And it truly is well-known that the very first issues may commence through the student essay competition. It may result in some issues for the reason that generally cases students have no concept proven methods to develop a perfect college admission. Here come our professional writers. They all went for the colleges and they all know what colleges want in the future students. Student essay writing won't lead to any troubles for you personally if you happen to order essay online.

Analysis essay writing service

Just about every student gets an assignment to create literary analysis essay at least as soon as a studying. Have you an thought what does it mean? Most likely you've attempted to google it, but nevertheless, you will have now thought what does analysis essay writing mean. Analysis essay writing calls for fantastic writing abilities and writer�s ability to believe critically.

In the event you consider that it really is unnecessary then you are wrong. But typically you even do not know where to start process analysis essay and what to complete with it. For those who get analysis essays to write, you could make an effort to handle it and test your self. Almost everything you will need can be a small support and right here you can get it. Our writers can cope with any type of perform, even if it seems impossible to you.

We understand that there are a lot of parameters if you look for high-quality academic paper writing service. Safety is excluded concern for us. That is definitely why we use only legible solutions to protect individual identities of our consumers. You can actually make sure that your privacy is extremely protected and it is going to by no means get to the third celebration, even when it's our partners.

academic coursework

It is advisable to pay a visit to our site to know several exciting and valuable information about a complete selection of solutions we supply for our clients. If you happen to still hesitate, study the feedback of our prospects. And we realize that today you will discover the major level of custom writing services, which compete for the focus and try to come across as lots of as you can consumers. So, we invite you to our company and we hope that it is going to be an incredibly productive cooperation.

0 notes

bdub86 · 7 years

Text

blackfoxx

The white male style of debate is to antagonize you until you snap. Then they win by default, because they make up their own rules in which being upset automatically invalidates your argument. The key is also to argue about things that they have no stake and experience in, so they dont snap first. Of course in the event that they do snap first, its of course passion, not anger…

White people are like little kids who make up new rules and obnoxious powers to keep themselves from losing….

At the end of it all, they are happy that you are so civil and can debate things rationally and clearly without getting upset. Everyone shakes hands and thanks everyone for being able to discuss “conflicting” viewpoints. Because after all everyone needs to hear the opposing side to truly be sophisticated. Even if you’ve heard that side all your life and it completely devalues you as a human being.

What i hear is that the mark of civilization to white people is being dehumanized and taking it like a champ.

They also have little to no concept of power dynamics in these ‘sophisticated” discussions.

sentforwho

Why I stopped indulging people who followed this argumentative “format”

controlledeuphoria

This is so real and applicable to every dinner party I’ve ever been to

eviltessmacher

This is a particularly aggressive form of Sealioning.

Sealioning is the name given to a specific, pervasive form of aggressive and willfully intentional cluelessness, that masquerades as a sincere desire to understand.

A Sealion is someone who, when confronted with a fact that they don’t care to acknowledge, say, the persistence of systemic racism in America, will ask endlessly for “proof” and insist that it is the other person’s job to stop everything they are doing and address the issue to their satisfaction.

The purpose of Sealioning is never to actually learn or become more informed. The purpose is to interrogate. Much like actual interrogators, Sealions bombard their target with question after question, digging and digging until the target either says something stupid or is so pissed off that they react in the extreme. The other major reason why people hate Sealioning is because responding to it is a complete waste of time.

It’s an insidious trap. Responding to questions asked reasonably is, of course, a natural thing for people to do. I like to do it myself; educating others is generally pretty entertaining, especially if they are receptive to learning. Dismissing those questions can appear condescending or rude, especially if you actually are condescending or rude.

Of course, these questions are not asked because the person asking them genuinely wants to know the answer. If they did, they would do their own digging based on your statements, and only ask for obscure or difficult-to-discover information. This is the “debate principle”. It is best explained thusly: When you go to a debate, you educate yourself on the topics at hand, and only request evidence when a claim is either quite outlandish or unflinchingly obscure.

No, these questions are asked to make a responder waste their time. It works, too; I’ve responded to Sealions before, answering all their questions and claims for evidence, only to be greeted by even more willful ignorance. It’s a way to force people into responding to questions phrased neutrally but asked in bad faith.

The name “Sealioning” comes from a most splendid webcomic, “Wondermark”, by David Malki.

It can be found here: http://knowyourmeme.com/photos/873260-sea-lioning

Sealions are just “asking nicely” but they are asking questions that have been asked and answered fully many times, and are unwilling to so much as open a new tab to look up the answer, nor will they recognize the validity of your sources, your experience or expertise no matter what you do. It is impossible to satisfy a Sealion.

Make no mistake.

Sealioning is a specific form of harassment. You may not explain their inquiry has already been address. You may not cite a source. You may not refer to a previous answer. You definitely may not ever point them to a link. You must spend all your time and energy responding as much as you can to every little details of every innocent, polite little question they ask. Sealioning isn’t a sincere attempt at anything. It’s a calculated technique to grind an opponent down.

digitaldiscipline

If any of my followers feel like you’re being sealioned, I can play elephant seal and help destroy them.

mightyviper

Not only is this a thing, it’s actually something various hard right groups are teaching their members to do. It’s essentially just never backing down no matter what, never admitting someone else is correct, and always try to force the argument onto the path you want to go down. So I’ve found the best way to combat it is:

A) Call them out on their inability to admit they were wrong. This sounds pretty simple, but it’s very easy to get dragged into whatever they say next instead of just pointing out that you’ve proven their first point is bullshit yet they’re still yakking on.

B) They try to box you into a corner? Box them back. If they won’t accept a link, laugh at them for failing to understand it/read it. Call them out for trying to veer the conversation in another direction without yielding the point. Specifically state that you see their cheap tactics and find them weak and a sign of a poor debater.

C) Never let them move onto the next question. Demand they answer yours instead. Why should they get to set the terms of the debate? Why is it always them who deserves explanations?

D) Suggest that they’re arguing in bad faith. That they don’t really want an answer. And if they say no way? Then point out that someone arguing in good faith would do all the things they refuse to. They’d read links and evidence. They’d agree on at least *something*. And failing that, they’d walk away. Good faith arguers will reach a certain point and then just say agree to disagree. But these guys? Won’t. They will not leave it alone no matter what. That’s the hallmark of a sealion trained to demoralise us.

And when they indirectly admit that, you call them out on it.

Then you don’t leave it alone. Hound that fucking sealion until he honks for mercy.

prettyarbitrary

I can understand why ‘discourse’ turned into a bad word, because this is how we’re taught in academia. It’s debate, argument as a game. When you’re kicking around literary criticism in a classroom, the stakes are (or at least seem) so low that to get really worked up about it is just silly. In that context, when somebody loses their composure, it’s easy to see it as grounds for disdain. And even more, you’re actively taught to keep your cool, because if you get emotional then it will cloud your ability to think clearly and you might find yourself descending into ad hominem attacks and other crud that’s foul play in a formal debate.

What they failed to drill into us was that when you take that behavior out into the real world with you, apply it to issues that actually have lives hanging in the balance, it becomes oppressive and abusive.

I look back to realize that this used to be me, and all I can do is hope I didn’t hurt anyone too badly and be thankful I grew some good sense. But that didn’t happen through people engaging with my antics. Doing that only meant you were playing the game with me (god, what a snobbish mentality that was). No, I had to learn better through shutting up and listening to peoples’ stories and coming to understand that to them, it wasn’t a game at all. That unless all parties agree to the rules, you’re not having a debate, you’re just being an asshole by arguing with a stranger who didn’t ask for it. That peoples’ safety, health and happiness are not issues that are up for argument.

So yeah. If you find people who argue this way, tell them to go read some books and educate themselves before they come back and try to talk with you. Or if this sounds like you, consider rethinking your approach and doing something useful with all that critical analysis you’re so proud of, like turning it on the problems they’re facing to help find ways to make their lives better. And maybe driving off the occasional asshole who still thinks they’re in debate club.

0 notes