#don’t read too theologically into this i am only going by personal experiences | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

maxwell-grant · 3 years

Note

Have you read the short story Norvell Page wrote as a wedding present for a Big Name Fan about Dick and Nita's first meeting? Any thoughts on it? My main is that Page does not go where you expect him to based on that description.

I did! Actually it was one of the first Spider stories I read. And yeah, to an extent, it's absolutely not what you'd expect from something set in The Spider's world. And on the other hand, it's absolutely what makes the most sense for these two characters. Because, yeah, Norvell Page could have done what he usually does, and written some over-the-top action where Dick and Nita happen to meet during it.

But no, that wouldn't work. Because, for all the turmoil and chaos in The Spider, for everything that he and Nita go through, there are many times when, sturdier even than Dick's resolve is their love for each other, the deep understanding and affection that carries them through hell itself time and time again.

And so, when it was time to showcase how such a romance started, Page wisely deviated from his usual narrative style, and instead told a very, very intimate and personal story, a long and extended conversation between the two, and more importantly, between Page and the reader. Between The Spider, and You, peering into The Spider through the eyes of Nita van Sloan.

I think for a start, it's an interesting coincidence that this meeting takes place on a cruise ship, and it involves Dick rescuing Nita from suicide. I say this because Margo Lane's first meeting with Lamont Cranston, in the pulps, was stated to have taken place on a cruise ship, and of course, the first time we see The Shadow in the pulps, he's rescuing Harry Vincent from suicide, and both Harry and Margo are The Shadow's main supporting characters. I'm not saying it was intentional, but it's an interesting fact. And more so because Dick doesn't really rescue Nita.

Her scarf whipped in the wind on deck, and it blinded her... and a hand touched her arm, and a voice spoke to her.

"If it's intentional, don't let me stop you," the voice said, "but you're heading straight for suicide."

Nita looked then at the stop toward which, blindly, she was going, and it was a chain barrier beyond which was the sea. And she looked at the man who had stopped her and it was Richard Wentworth. And his words had been a shock to her.

"You wouldn't try to dissuade me from suicide?" she asked.

Wentworth's brows were tilted whit a hint of mockery, but his eyes were very grave. "Every man is master of his own soul, and hence of his body," he said. "And your eyes are wide open and awake. So it would be a considered action. I'm not sure, under those circumstances, that I would have a right to meddle in another's business."

Nita said, "I think you can help me."

Wentworth shook his head. "Only you can help yourself," he said, "but it may be that someone else could help you find the way."

The whole text is a great example of how wonderfully realized of a character Nita van Sloan is in ways so unlike the typical pulp or superhero girlfriends at the time, because the text is written from her perspective, and half of the text reads like an extended character breakdown of who Nita is as a character and person. And the other half of the text is almost entirely comprised of Dick Wentworth spouting philosophy and talking in-depth about his reading of her and what's upsetting her, talking about God and fate and so on. And like so many other attempts to explore serious theological/psychological/philosophical/etc concepts explored through pulp fiction, half of it is bullshit, and half of it is fascinatingly disturbing and thought-provoking bullshit.

"Self-contempt," Wentworth's words were very quiet now. "Is second only to self-pity among the greater sins. Self-analysis is a dangersous thing. You need so much charity. And any person who is advanced enough to think about himself at all is apt to be over-stern in his judgment of himself."

He said to her, "If you don't honor youself, who will honor you?" And, a few moments later, "There is conceit in ruling others, but none in mastering yourself." And, "There is no arrogance so great as self-righteousness."

Nita clashed with him violently, "You are being self-righteous in judging me!"

Wentworth laughed. "I am speaking only truism. It is you who judge yourself, not I." He was serious, then. "My dear," he said, "I would be presumptuous to try to teach you. No man can teach another. But one who has been along that same trail would be less than a man if he failed to mark certain signposts and certain places where there is water to drink so that another, traveling that same road, may know where another struggled and what he has learned. But, as no man can travel a road for another, so no man can teach another. You must work out your own salvation."

"That sense of separation between the inner and outer self," Nita rushed on, "between yourself and the world ... while you were talking, I could almost feel that difference disappearing. The feeling is gone now, but ..."

"All progress is three steps forward and two back," Wentworth said, slowly, "and this is good because thus all ground is three-times covered and triply learned."

And I should probably clarify by this point that, it's not so much Dick Wentworth talking in this story, as it's Norvell Page himself. In fact, he admits as much in another letter he had sent to his readers that he was prone to talking philosophy by this point.

There was a time when the burden of writing just one more Spider seemed too much to undertake. (After all, the magazine is in it's ninth year!) But I never feel that way any more. I know now that the Spider actually does help people; that there are those who appreciate his idealism even though it is expressed in violence.

Especially in the last half dozen Spiders, beginning with the 100th I believe, I have tried very earnestly to teach a little of the philosophy and faith, of which we all need so much in these days.

Here's the thing about The Spider: It's not that the character is mad. Well, okay, he IS mad, I don't pull these over-the-top maniacal cartoon meme descriptions out of thin air, but that's because he lives in a batshit insane disaster horror world where there IS no sane response other than joining the carnage to overcome it. It's not just that Wentworth who is a madman. It's that Norvell Page was a mad man, and Dick Wentworth was Norvell's Page alter-ego, by the man's own admission.

Friends have informed me that I moved about the company as one in a trance: there were some who were concerned about my health, so oddly did I behave. Of course, only my body attended that occasion. My mind was entirely engrossed in Dick Wentworth's big problem - back in my study on a sheet of paper stuck in my typewriter

I did not dream that night; in the morning I restlessly paced my floor thinking, thinking, thinking. I sat down at the typewriter, stared at the words and the keys. Suddenly, as if by magic, Dick Wentworth seemed to move of his own volition. My hands raised, my fingers literally flew over the keyboard.

No matter how ridiculous it seems, I will always feel that Dick Wentworth, creature of my own fabrication, guided me through that tough scene.

No two people can live together without being influenced by each other to some extent. So constantly has Wentworth been in my mind, it is as if we were roommates - partners in everything.

Page has talked about how close of a connection he feels to the character, about many ways he's emulated his mannerisms, even some pretty embarassing anectodes where he claims to have "accidentally" used the character's "indomitable will" to scare waiters or drawing connections between The Spider's cast and real people he's met. Others who met him remarked that he talked of the "Spider" characters as though they were members of his family, or drinking companions.

Even before I got into The Spider, I had heard of rumors that he used to present or discuss stories in his office by putting on a cape and jumping from desk to desk, swinging a yard stick in his hand, and I can't find any source that confirms it, but I don't doubt it in the slightest. A lot of pulp writers had really weird lives, and Page was no exception. He was a journalist who frequently dug into his newspaper clippings for grisly stories to incorporate into narratives. I mean, just look at the dude's eyes, he's seen some shit.

When he was 3, his mother fell down a manhole while they were walking down a Chicago sidewalk. Norvell, terrified, thought she had dissappeared and never quite got over the experience.

When he was a little older, according to some family members, his parents had tickets for the Titanic and escaped disaster when Norvell begged them to cancel the trip for reasons unknown.

Norvell again played a hand in the family's escaping disaster when, one Christmas the family home caught on fire. Candles on the tree had been left burning. He quite arguably saved everyone's life. Waking first, he threw his mattress out of his window, grabbed his infant brother and sister and ran screaming through the hall as he went back to jump to safety. His screams woke his parents who then jumped to the mattress themselves.

Norvell lied about his age and experience to the Norfolk "Observer", claiming to have been writing for Richmond's "Times Dispatch" and was hired there.

His father managed Thomas Edison & Hugo Wurlitzer's ad accounts, and had always encouraged him to write, envisioning him as another Poe, whom his Great-Uncle had worked with as an editor

It is rumored that, in NYC, while at the "World Telegram", he became involved in fellow editor Varion Fry's effort to rescue artists and scientists from occupied Europe. President of the American Fiction Guild, he edited their newsletter for some time. Among his closest friends were fellow writers Ted Tinsley and L. Ron Hubbard and Surrealist painter Max Ernst.

WRITER'S REVIEW 35.08: Norvell W. Page, whose bloodthirsty Spider novels would do justice to Ghengis Khan, demonstrated his bloodlust the other day by accidentally killing a sparrow.

He wrote until 1943, when he abruptly stopped without warning. He dissappeared, for all intents and purposes, from both New York, the arts world and the pulp world for good.

His wife of 20 years, Audrey, had died and this, along with the U.S. involvment in WWII, led to his returning to VA where he would go on to be an intelligence worker in the Truman, Kennedy and Eisenhower Administrations.

He died suddenly of a heart attack in August of 1961.

Surviving family members do not know where he is buried.

I think this is a story that Page might have told differently had he written it earlier in his career, before he got tired, before he underwent his depression and loss of weight that caused him to briefly stop writing pulps all together, in a time period before the World War had cast an oppressive miasma on the world. In a time period where most of the horrifying nightmares he infused into the stories were really just that, nightmares, that he didn't live long enough to see turn into prophecies.

Because that's another thing about The Spider that makes the character more than just a batshit vigilante: As over-the-top as the stories were, a lot of them also inevitably turned out to predict some form of catastrophe in real life.

Written with an eye to the horrors festering in Germany at the time, The Mayor of Hell now reads as an infernal vision of the Homeland Security Act.

The poisoned products found in The Red Death Rain and The Pain Emperor call to mind the Tylenol killings of the summer of 1982, and the hundreds of poisoned products cases that followed.

Bio-terrorism plays large in the Spider mythos, with bubonic plague in Wings of the Black Death, rabies in The Mad Horde, and cholera in The Cholera King foreshadowing the Anthrax scare of 2001. The same could be said of the terror gases from Kingdom of Doom and Green Globes of Death and the nerve gas attack in the Tokyo subways in March of 1995.

Masters of the Death Madness unfolds as a nightmare meditation upon suicide, which has become one of the principal weapons of modern terrorists. One scene involves suicide bombers.

Another scene chillingly presages the Jonestown massacre of 1978: a grand procession lines up to drink from a bowl of poisoned wine while surrounding gunmen pick off anyone who refuses to drink.

The modern reader will recognize the psychological and sociological effects of a citizenry living under the threat of terrorism, so chillingly evoked by Page: the grating loss of safety, the imminent threats lurking in familiar objects, the way security can no longer be taken for granted, the kind of skittishness that empties a building at the first sign of an unknown white powder.

The eeriest of all the modern terrorist parallels appears in a novel called The City Destroyer, originally published in 1936. It features a set piece involving the collapse of a fictitious gigantic building, supposedly the tallest in New York City, called “The Sky Building.” When it fell, it wiped out five city blocks and claimed 1,000 lives. And perhaps it’s worth noting a further parallel that occurred in the 1970’s, when Pocket Books tried to revive the Spider; they repackaged him in a paperback series, striving for an image of what was then cool and thrusting Richard Wentworth into a contemporary setting.

When Pocket Books reprinted and updated The City Destroyer in 1975, the collapse of the Sky Building was replaced with the collapse of the World Trade Center - Stuart Hopen's essay on The Spider

Regardless of how much reality Page was infusing into his stories (because, again, he took a lot of his material from newspapers) or how much he foresaw intentionally or not, writing The Spider definitely took it's toll on him, and as the magazine neared it's final stretch with him on the helm, certain parts did began taking a more philosophical or religious tone, as more of Page's own beliefs, more of Page's attempts to use it as a vehicle to do good, began to bleed through the page.

And ultimately I think that's also what the story of Dick and Nita's first meeting is about, sort of an extended analysis not just of Nita, who Page himself said was a character he conceived as "the epitome of womanhood" and everything he thought admirable about it, but also of Wentworth's own character, and the things Page wanted to get through in his time.

Religion crept deeper into the series with each succeeding year. By all accounts, Norvell Page was a man of deep faith and spirituality who just happened to be writing the exploits of a hero whose idea of mercy was a bullet in the brain instead of the stomach.

In the 100th novel, Death and The Spider, Wentworth battles Death itself - or so it seems - and on Christmas Eve, he is shot so badly while protecting the President from assassination that everyone believes he's dead - including himself.

Dead or not, he forces himself to fight on, sustained only by reciting the 23rd Psalm over and over again.

Nita laughed and accepted a cigarette. "I don't know how to thank you."

"Don't," Wentworth's voice was sharp. "I told you I am only a channel. Don't confuse me with the Source."

It stopped words on Nita's lips, and it gave here a new respect and a new and sudden attitude toward this man beside her, this man who could laugh and jest with everyone about him, and who could teach like a very oracle ... and who carried about him such a sense of dedication to high purpose. He might seem apart from the world, but he was utterly and completely of it.

Nita said, half-laughing, half-serious, "May I like you? And may I admire your ... adjustment?"

"Don't envy my adjustment," he grinned at her. "Have one yourself." He snapped flame to her cigarette with his lighter, and his lean, strong hand was steady and sure as his eyes, as his voice. He was speaking to her but he was looking at the lighter. "I have found my mission," he said quietly.

#pulp heroes #the spider #nita van sloan #pulp fiction #norvell page #it's pretty much impossible to talk about the spider without sounding like a pulp writer yourself

17 notes · View notes

dercolaris · 3 years

Text

The Tower

Fandom: Batman Arkham Verse

Characters: Edward Nygma, Jonathan Crane

Relationship: Edward Nygma & Jonathan Crane (Lovers)

Genre: Angst, Drama

Word length: 2140

Warnings: Religious content

Status: Complete

Short summary: The Riddler is visiting Scarecrow in his study and catches a glimpse into his lovers mind.

Enjoy!

The small brushes of the paintbrush timidly touched the barely visible details on the meeple, giving the imposing armour some individual highlights with the silver paint. Edward pushed the bulky magnifying glasses over his forehead and carefully turned the plastic around, studying each side with sceptical eyes. It didn't seem like there really was much work left to do. The tinkerer looked up from the figure and stared a little lost at his almost finished masterpiece in front of him. For the past two months he had dealt almost non-stop with the role-play game, eagerly learned the rules by heart and bought all the necessary add-on sets in order to be able to experience the adventure visually. The Riddler stroked his tangled hair. It had been a hell of a job painting all the small little objects himself. The black-haired man put his work on the table and stretched slightly, then rose from his stool. It was time for a well deserved break. The paint had to dry first anyway. Edward shook his hands out to relax them a bit and glanced at the clock in his workshop. Almost midnight. Time always flew by when he was absorbed in his work and not distracted by unnecessary disturbances every two minutes. The younger yawned heartily. A coffee would surely work wonders on him now. The tinkerer didn't bother to be quiet walking around the old house. He had no doubt that his partner would still be awake. Understanding Jonathan Crane's daily rhythm was an almost impossible task. Edward had tried often enough to memorize certain key points in the older man's daily life, but the longer he lived with the dark professor, the more the initial logic eluded his observations. Whenever the Riddler woke up from nightmares during the night, Jonathan was wide awake too. The inventor rarely saw his partner actually sleep or eat.

This only raised further questions. Questions, Edward hadn't yet had a plausible answer to. Anyway, there were a number of other things that puzzled him in dealing with the former psychiatrist and preoccupied him more than he wanted to admit. They had been living together in the old mansion for three months and every day brought out a new, interesting detail about the older man, which at the same time literally begged for further explanations about it. Already the first week in the own four walls was enough to show the black-haired man painfully that he actually knew next to nothing about his lover – despite one whole year of a stable relationship. The Master of Fear evaded a meaningful categorization and seemed to want to hold on to it, much to the displeasure of his curious partner. The tinkerer grumbled quietly as he washed his beloved coffee mug thoroughly in the sink. The formerly bronze gears, which served as a special handle, slowly faded to a matt grey. To his astonishment, the coffee machine had just finished running and was still full of hot, well smelling coffee. The Riddler poured himself some of the black gold, then hesitated a little. He stared at his distorted reflection in the cloudy liquid. For a moment, the inventor had the feeling that he was being dragged deeper into the broth and was facing an unknown abyss. Strange. The younger one broke away from this thought and left the kitchen with the mug, sipping the coffee lightly from time to time. Should he visit Jonathan for a moment? Mostly, the older one was busy day and night perfecting his fear toxin. The black-haired man shrugged his shoulders slightly and made his way to his partner's small study. When moving into the house, the former psychiatrist only insisted on being able to work as far away from his workshop as possible so as not to be suddenly interrupted by noise during complicated calculations.

The tinkerer took another sip of his coffee. In general, the Master of Fear was the definition of the word calmness itself, clearly enjoying the silence around them. Edward knocked on the sturdy study door, then waited a few seconds. He would probably have to wait an eternity for an answer or invitation, but the inventor respected the dark professor's privacy and gave him time to prepare for an unexpected visitor. After a while the younger entered slowly. The air in the study was unnaturally difficult to breathe. Even if Jonathan hadn't handled chemicals today, there was a constant, almost odourless haze in the air. The subdued light in the room also had visible difficulties penetrating the small particles. This didn't seem to bother the elderly in the least. The Riddler looked at his partner, who was probably brooding over a complicated text. The pitted forehead was furrowed and the bony fingers fidgeted restlessly on the yellow page of the book. Before the black-haired man could say anything, the former psychiatrist anticipated him coolly: "Can I help you with something, Edward?"

The person addressed winced slightly. Why did he still feel not welcome in this room? Despite the uncomfortable feeling, the inventor pushed the second chair at the table back slightly and sat down on it, then cast a cautious look at the text. The letters didn't look familiar to him in any way. The low voice of the Master of Fear rang out quietly next to him: “Please don't bother trying. The book is written in Hebrew.” The Riddler frowned. His partner placed a bookmark in the book and slowly closed it, revealing the cover. This was in a simple blue tone, but the gold letters seemed to be in Hebrew as well. Unreadable for the inventor. Jonathan sighed cautiously and said calmly: "The word Tanach is a name for the Hebrew Bible." The Riddler had to hold back a laugh. That had to be a really bad joke from his partner. Edward smiled a little and replied, slightly amused: “Why in the world are you reading the Bible, John? I thought you were a passionate scientist. Don't waste your time on theological nonsense.” The thin man literally froze into a pillar of salt. His eyes were half closed and fixed the letters on the simple cover. An unbearable silence returned between them. The tinkerer felt that something had suddenly changed in the room. Something started raging and reaching for them. Jonathan's body in total still didn't move, but the sinister professor spoke in his scratchy voice: "Your words in connection with this book can stir restless spirits, Edward." His heart was suddenly beating louder in his chest. What was going on here? Had the brown-haired man poisoned him again? The Master of Fear picked up a second book on the table and opened it, turning slowly to the desired page. A monstrous structure could be seen on it. The former psychiatrist stroked the picture and went on almost in a whisper: “The Tower of Babel. A presumed plan of mankind to reach the heaven of God without his help, which forced the almighty Being to confuse the peoples with different languages. They couldn't longer communicate with each other and were scattered all around the world in anger and hate about their failure. An impressive story of pure arrogance.”

Edward looked at the structure and gave a slight shudder. He still didn't understand what his partner wanted to point out. After a while the sinister professor asked without any emotion: “Aren't we all prisoners of this deceptive arrogance in the end?” The Riddler slightly scratched his three-day beard and replied insecurely: “Why do you call the behaviour arrogant, John? If people were able to build the tower successfully back then, weren't they entitled to be proud of it or what?” Scarecrow sank deeper into his thoughts. His fingers grasped the pencil with which he slowly drew his own building on the paper. After a while he said quietly: “Should we really be proud of it just because we supposedly can do things like the Tower of Babel? Isn't it more the case that we humans dare to tackle projects that sooner or later grow over our heads and throw us back when they ultimately fail? The construct of humanity is fragile. Way too fragile to even come close to doing justice to the word God.” The inventor thought hard about what had been said. He finally shook his head and hesitantly replied: “Why all these weird questions right now? They make me depressed just listening to them.” The sinister professor snorted in amusement. He took the mug next to him and took a sip of the coffee, warming himself on the porcelain. The Master of Fear ran his free hand through his straw hair, replied in a whisper: "I am only thinking critically about whether I am not creeping up on the same arrogance of the people of Babylon in my research and whether this arrogance will bring me down at some point, if I don't stop striving for senseless perfection in life."

Another minute of silence came between them. That was clearly a way too difficult topic for a harmonious evening. Edward looked almost concerned at the older man's petrified face. Pride. Arrogance. Perfection. These topics were not unknown to him either. The Riddler looked down at the picture again and replied meekly: “I don't think so, John. You're not trying to reach God or even be God. Or are you trying to do that?” The person addressed began to laugh softly. Again something in this room seemed to want to reach for those present. The former psychiatrist tapped the building on the paper a few times with the pencil and mumbled, barely understandable: “Who decides who is God and who is not? In the end, a god is only a supernatural being in the simple definition, who has a great and not scientifically describable transcendent power. For my victims, this may apply to me at a certain moment also, so we are faced with an insoluble dilemma.” The inventor gradually got a headache. He massaged his temples lightly and closed his eyes for a moment. These in-depth conversations with the former psychiatrist made him absolutely fearful. Jonathan loved to deal with his own impermanence and at the same time to consciously question others – in fact, he did not show any consideration for the poor souls he met on those days. The younger one sighed lightly, tried hard to put words together in a meaningful way. The gaunt man suddenly opened a drawer on his desk and took out a small box, carefully lifted the lid. There were innumerable pieces of broken glass in the box in different shapes and colours. The Master of Fear began carefully to pile the pieces on top of each other. He said calmly: “I often have to remind myself that I am only human, Edward. My existence alone serves no higher purpose and any interpretation is a disastrous mistake. Also in my body there is only a weak heart that will stop beating at some point. My shell is ruled by a cold soul and an irrepressible spirit that is looking for more in this bleak life. For years I have been hungry for knowledge without knowing what I actually want to know and every search ended in an unsatisfactory compromise of the all-encompassing ignorance of human existence when no answer can be found."

The tower grew taller and taller with every word spoken. The black-haired man remained silent even after this explanation. Only rarely did the elder give insights into his thinking and his motives. He appreciated it all the more when Jonathan volunteered to tell him what was going on in his mind. This didn't make the thoughts any less terrifying or disturbing. The next words, however, caught the younger one completely unprepared: “The Bible helps me to recognize my own humanity and to accept it grudgingly. The scriptures show where we come to our limits with our intelligence and where conjecture finds its place, no matter how confused and tumultuous it may be. Everyone has the right to believe what they want and scientists also have the right to believe, whether in current laws of physic or long-outdated theories. So it is not my right to stand over it in my inadmissible arrogance.” The tinkerer nodded slightly and stroked his beard again. It all made sense somehow, even if the choice of words bothered him a lot. He still had a question on the tip of his tongue: “I understand somehow what you want to tell me, John, but why do you know how to read Hebrew? Where the hell did you learn that?” The sinister professor smiled mysteriously and closed the book with the illustration. He put another mosaic on the erected tower and replied calmly: "Some questions don't always have to be answered immediately, Edward."

#DC #Batman #Riddler #Scarecrow #Edward Nygma #Jonathan Crane #Scirddler #Riddlecrow #Tower of Babel #Religious #Meaning #Deep stuff

12 notes · View notes

jewishconvertthings · 4 years

Text

Something I’ve noticed come up again and again in conversion-focused/prospective convert spaces is a fascination with orthodoxy. I think a lot of what drives this is the desire for universal recognition and to do things the “right” way. And, since Jews both inside and outside of orthodoxy tend to hold up orthodoxy as the gold standard for halacha and for conversion in particular, people who would never otherwise consider converting orthodox still end up seriously investigating the possibility and/or even attempting it. This becomes especially painful to watch when, for one reason or another (or several) the individual in question simply cannot convert orthodox without making life changes that are, frankly, not worth it or even impossible.

I say this as someone who absolutely, 100% went on this ride.

(This is a Very Long Post, so I’ve put it under a cut)

I am a queer non-binary person in a relationship with another queer non-binary person who is not Jewish and has no plans on converting. Now, at this point in my life, I present in a traditionally feminine way 98% of the time (and was assigned female at birth), the aspects of physical transition that I have accessed are not visible or are easily able to be masked, and for a number of extremely personal reasons I won’t get into here, I have also reached a point in my life where my ability to be attracted to cis men is not something that I automatically reject.

So on a pragmatic level, if I wanted to be orthodox I had two choices: (1) Stay with my partner who I love and have built a life and a home with, who supports my Jewish journey and observance 100%, who loves me no matter how I present myself gender-wise, and whose life experiences as a fellow queer non-binary person allow us to have a profound understanding of each other; or, (2) Leave my partner, and also most likely also make an effort to stamp out or at least conceal the queer and non-binary facets of myself.

I think it’s pretty clear that I opted to not take path #2, which left me with the decision to either pursue a Conservative conversion or accept being a Noachide. Fortunately, I happened to already have a Conservative community that I really loved and three Conservative rabbis for my beit din, each of whom I tremendously respect. Therefore moving forward with a Conservative conversion did not cause me all that much cognitive dissonance. To be perfectly honest, all told, I think my theological framework fits better within Conservative halacha anyway and there is plenty of space for me to exist and be respected as a queer non-binary person with a non-Jewish spouse.

But despite what I feel is an overall very good outcome to this problem, I still went through a whole grieving process for letting go of the idea of ever converting orthodox, and looking back I felt it was really important to interrogate why. I could of course take the easy way out and say that it was because I was sad to lose this particular shul as my primary community, but that’s not completely true. I still go there sometimes and enjoy it when I do, and also by the time it became clear to me that this was not a community I could convert through, it was no longer my primary shul. I’d already switched.

I could also say that it was because I deeply desired living and sharing community with a congregation where the majority of members took halacha very seriously and lived by those convictions. While I have deep love and appreciation for my Conservative community, the reality is that I am in the minority as someone who keeps a strictly kosher kitchen and one of a handful of people who make much of an effort to be shomer Shabbos. At the same time, I have found and built friendships with those who do take a more traditional approach to observance who also share other values of mine as well. So I have ultimately ended up in the exact kind of community I desired, even if it isn’t the numeric majority of the congregation as a whole.

There was also a very real period where I needed to sort out my understanding of what I believed about what Torah even is, and how I wanted to build my Jewish observance from that understanding. (Namely, that even though I can never say that I believed with perfect faith that the Torah was given directly to Moshe by G-d on Mt. Sinai in its entirety and in fact believe that most of the evidence points away from that understanding, I also felt it was important to essentially accept it as an underlying assumption for interpretive and halachic purposes. I have . . . evolved a bit since then, but honestly haven’t moved too far from that position.)

The point is that there were actual, real reasons other than just for the validity.

But if I’m being extremely honest with myself, while it was far from being the only reason or the “real” reason, it was nevertheless a not-insignificant reason for why I was disappointed and felt a loss. I understand the other pieces pretty well at this point, and so with the benefit of time and some emotional distance, I decided to examine this a bit more deeply.

I think the problem is two-fold. First, I think that the same intense beliefs and emotions that drive someone to do something as drastic as converting to Judaism to begin with also create a desire to do so in the most intensive way possible. Amongst myself and the many other conversion students and converts I’ve met, irrespective of our many differences, our passion for Judaism and our enthusiasm in Jewish engagement are near-universals. For better or worse, that tends to manifest as a desire for a high level of observance and for a community that shares that commitment.

Second, I think that converts of whatever background, but especially those of us who are marginalized in other ways, tend to be under a great deal of scrutiny from the rest of the Jewish community as to our motives and our processes for becoming Jewish. While I don’t doubt that this is painful for anyone, this can hit especially hard if you have experienced some other kind of serious invalidation, erasure, and/or rejection in other areas of your life.

So I think, after having sat with this a bit, part of that feeling of hurt and loss comes as a sort of echo trauma from having been erased and rejected as a queer non-binary person. The invalidation I’ve received both outside and inside the queer/trans community has been significant enough that the idea of stomaching more rejection, more invalidation, and more treatment as an interloper was a tough pill to swallow. Combine that with my genuine passion for Judaism and desire for an observant Jewish life and community, and you had a perfect storm of me reaching for a community that was, all told, not a good fit.

I eventually moved past that stage, and ended up quite happy in my Conservative community. So what’s the problem? Why am I bringing up such a painful topic if it turned out fine?

Here’s the thing: I’d seen other people ride this emotional rodeo before and so while I anticipated these feelings of rejection, I was afraid of experiencing them and tried to avoid doing so by being hyper-aware of the possibility. It didn’t work. Unfortunately, this was just something I had to figure out on my own. However, there was another effect I’d seen as well, namely that once people had processed the immediate sadness, there was usually a bit of backlash afterwards. I saw this especially with a particular friend who regularly expressed not just legitimate criticisms of orthodoxy, but lashed out angrily towards anyone who expressed an interest in orthodoxy or who happened to be orthodox and talk positively about their experiences. This was serious enough that it almost ruined our friendship.

I did manage to mostly avoid this latter effect because I actively built relationships within my orthodox community and maintained them even afterwards, and because I refused to make that rejection a personal thing. I also gave myself ample space from that community and have only engaged to the extent that I can do so in a healthy, comfortable way. But it’s worth noting that despite controlling my outer reaction, I definitely had to process and work my way through that same anger internally.

I raise all of this for the following reason:

I haven’t seen anyone talking about this much, and what I have seen has not been constructive or compassionate. While I don’t think reading about my seemingly typical (even cliché) experiences as someone who was not a good fit for orthodoxy trying to shoehorn myself into it for understandable (but ultimately futile) reasons will spare anyone the emotional ride of having that experience, nor do I think it will likely help anyone avoid having to experience it themselves to be sure, I do think that it may help with a couple issues. First, I think it may help outsiders who have observed this trope have a bit more compassion for those going through it and be able to offer some better responses than derision or telling folks to just get over it. Basically, realize that these are growing pains, and try to be kind and mature about it.

Second, I think it may help people who are on the verge of going through that experience and/or who are in the middle of it to understand that it is A Thing, that it is not an inherently bad thing, that they are not bad people for having to go on this emotional journey, that it is reasonable for them to have hard feelings about it, and that the only thing they really do need to be careful of is how they treat the people in their communities and not take this out on them. Ultimately, if you are unable to convert orthodox for reasons outside your control (or even just realize that you inherently don’t have the right worldview for orthodoxy/have an actual desire to live an orthodox lifestyle) there are usually other ways of meeting your community and observance-related needs and it is best to start exploring them sooner rather than later.

Collectively, I think I would challenge conversion students and liberal converts who are considering an orthodox conversion to seriously consider if there are other ways to meet your spiritual and community needs. If so, why pursue orthodoxy? You really do need an honest answer to that question, even if it takes a bit of soul-searching to get there. If it’s about universal recognition, you need to stop immediately and reconsider. (Understand that there basically is no such thing. Then understand that this means that you will have to build an internal Jewish identity that is unrelated to how random people without community decision-making power view you.) Finally, I’d ask that you try really hard to separate the larger trends and systems within orthodoxy from individual Orthodox Jews you happen to encounter.

And of course, I would challenge folks to leave passing judgment on any given conversion student’s process and motivations up to their sponsoring rabbi.

244 notes · View notes

himbowelsh · 4 years

Note

18 with winnix for the kiss prompts please!

sha-la-la-la my oh my, looks like the boy’s too shy 💋 (accepting!) 18. kisses where one person is sitting in the other’s lap

this definitely... escalated far past where you wanted/needed it to go, and turned into more of an exploration of their post-war relationship, when winters joins nix in new jersey... i had fun with it, but oof, did it ever kinda spiral. there’s definitely kissing towards the end, though, so i hope you enjoy!!

To be fair, Nix never promised him an enjoyable night.

His first pitch was “a party”. Dick, who’s had enough experience with the sort of parties that go on in Nixon, New Jersey, replied that he had paperwork to catch up on. It was a good excuse because it wasn’t a lie. Nix brooded for a solid thirty seconds before popping back up, smile bright, to declare, “an evening affair, then, and you’re my date. You have to be, since I need one, and I haven’t got anyone else.”

Dick raised an eyebrow. “What about that girl, the one with the — the red hair —?”

“Hah,” replied Nix, in a flat tone that suggested his redheaded girlfriend was ancient history.

“One of the lobby girls, then.”

“Hah.”

“Blanche?”

“Hah!”

“I’m sure your mother would be honored to go with you.”

Nix had to grip the edge of the table to keep from falling down, laughing.

By the time he regained his composure, Dick was pretty much resigned to accompanying him for the evening. He’s never been able to say no to Nix anyways, even during the war. Being home — Nix’s home — and seeing him in his element — for better or worse — just makes it harder. Something about Nix in the bustling atmosphere of the New Jersey social scene is beguiling, electric, and a bit haunted. Like watching a film noir, Dick can never look away.

He doesn’t expect to have a good time. Nix’s parties are not designed to be good times for people who don’t smoke, drink, or gamble. Nix was kind enough not to remark on the novel tucked into the inside pocket of Dick’s suit jacket as they strode up the walkway towards the roaring party. Loud music blared from open windows; lights and laughter twinkled from beyond the spacious French doorways. It was only nine o’clock, but Dick could feel exhaustion creeping up on him already.

“Come on,” Nix encouraged, guiding him into the townhouse with a proud hand on his elbow. “Let’s set you up on a nice sofa and find a Shirley Temple. Extra cherries, just for you.”

The one thing Dick will credit Lewis Nixon’s parties for — they’re never stingy with the cherries.

Now, three hours into the affair, he sets aside his most recent soda and scans the crowd. As the hours wind away, the raucous group has started to thin out. Either the partiers are headed somewhere else, or all have appointments to keep in the morning, because they show no signs of lingering into the early hours. Dick can be grateful for that much, at least. Those types of parties typically end with him dozing on a stranger’s sofa until he has to steer a very drunk Nix into the back of the waiting car at 3am. Dick has suffered through enough late evenings to never want to see another one again — though, time after time, he ends up coming out for Nix.

It seems like a quiet one tonight, though, thank goodness. The music has faded to a lull, someone thrumming out a thoughtful tune on the piano. The rowdiest partiers have taken leave, and all that’s left are Nix’s regular companions— the home’s owner, another Ivy League man Nix knows well, along with several of his mistresses; a few other Nixon Nitration folks Dick vaguely recognizes, and their dates; Nix’s sister Blanche, leaning languidly over the piano in a shimmering silver dress; and Nix, sprawled in a chair, top buttons of his shirt undone and hair disheveled.

He looks utterly debauched, and something about it thrills Dick. It’s nothing he hasn’t seen before, of course, but Nix in his sanguine element is magnetic. He’s like a panther — sleek and relaxed, dangerous under a veneer of nobility. No matter how much he’s had to drink, Nix’s dark gaze is always piercing; he always seems to know something the rest of the room doesn’t, and sometimes it plays on his lips like a hidden treasure.

He’s smirking like that now, and the smirk’s trained directly on Dick… and he can’t look away. It’s impossible. Even if he wanted to, Nix reels him in with that penetrating gaze. It’s all Dick can do to sit up straighter, pretending he is comfortable in this rakish crowd, the only one sober and the only one out of place.

“Speaking of saints,” Nix says at once — loud enough to cut in on whatever theological ramble his Yale buddy was in the middle of, “here’s one now. Sitting in front of us. Dick, come here. Show these fellows what a true Saint Augustine looks like.”

Dick would rather do anything else… but he’d cross a mountain for Lewis Nixon. Crossing the length of a trashed ballroom is only a bit more challenging. He comes to stand at Nix’s side, clearly uncomfortable, while Nix’s friends take him in as though seeing him for the first time this evening.

“You know I’m not Catholic, Lew,” he tries to quip, to break the tense mood. Nix’s hand catches his, squeezing lightly, and Dick’s own unease only grows.

“Neither am I, but we’re pretending for tonight. Gives all the sinning a bit more zest, you know?”

“Sure.” Dick’s hand comes to rest on the back of Nix’s chair, unconsciously craving something to do. One of the host’s mistresses, with bright red lips and sharp eyes, doesn’t miss it.

“Ohh,” she hums, like the word is a wave she must ride to the shore. “Don't say it, Lewis. This is your handsome date?”

Something about the way she says it has Dick’s shoulders tensing in instinctual alarm. Maybe Nix has had far too much to drink, or can read this crowd too well; he doesn’t even flinch at the implication.

“Afraid so,” he replies, a hand creeping up Dick’s sleeve. “Nice enough to hang around all night, even though he’d rather be back home pouring over... productivity reports. Employee reviews? Staff... surveys?”

“Something like that,” Dick says.

“Something like that.” Nix’s hand runs up and down Dick’s arm, blatantly fond. It takes everything in Dick’s power not to tense up.

None of the assembled crowd seems bothered by such a display, however. Nix’s friends exchange knowing looks, smirking around lit cigarettes or crystal glasses. One woman languidly kicks her heels onto her date’s laugh, shaking her head. From the piano, Blanche runs a hand over her glossy hair, gaze sharp on her brother and his companion. “He’s out of your league, Lewis,” she chimes. Her smirk is catlike, voice like molasses dripping onto spring grass. At times, she looks dangerously like her brother, and Dick isn’t sure how to handle either of them.

Nix’s grip settles around Dick’s upper arm. “Isn’t that the truth?”

When Dick looks down, Nix is looking up. Something about his whiskey-bright gaze knocks the breath from his lungs. It’s too… soft, too tender. Too intimate for this party, to exist among strangers. Nix’s grip on his bicep is firm, and Dick has no desire to pull away. He doesn’t get the chance to question — not even a flicker of uncertainty, a breathless what's he doing — before Nix gives a tug, and Dick all but tumbles into his lap.

He regains his balance like a newborn colt, to the bubbling laughter of Nix’s audience. His cheeks flare, bright red; Nix’s touches, usually so welcome, now linger on his skin like a hot iron. He’s straddling his best friend’s knees, Nix’s arm wrapped around his to steady him, and it’s all Dick can do not to leap back to his feet to salvage whatever slim slice of dignity remains.

“Nix,” he says, voice low in warning.

“Relax, Dick,” he answers, equally softspoken. “It’s all a game. Don’t you see? None of it really matters.”

It matters to me, he wants to say... because Nix has never held him without it mattering, has never caressed him without every sensation engraving itself permanently into Dick’s memory. Nix has never… not mattered to him. Some part of Dick, an small yet insidious murmur, wonders when he became insignificant to him.

The way Nix caresses his face is anything but meaningless, though… as is the way his dark gaze lingers on his lips, simmering for so long that Dick can feel its heat. Nix’s thumb grazes the corner of his mouth, and instinctively Dick draws back.

Something hurt flashes in Nix’s eyes. Dick cannot feel guilty. He doesn’t want this — can’t Nix understand that? Not here, not now, not putting on a show for an audience. Not when Nix is whiskey-soaked and careless, so far gone that Dick could get drunk off the taste of him. If this is a game, Dick doesn’t want to play.

“Father isn’t around for you to give a coronary, Lewis.” Blanche’s voice echoes as though from the other side of a tunnel, practically bored. “Save it for the next family dinner, at least.”

Gradually, Nix’s grip on Dick’s waist loosens. His touch pulls away from his face, finding Dick’s hand instead. He raises it to his mouth and lets it linger there — a sweet mockery of a kiss — before releasing Dick entirely.

Dick pulls away, regaining his posture and his dignity. The eyes of the room are all on him now, as surely as they were on the jazz singer earlier in the night. He can’t take their weight, or their curiosity. Keeping his eyes fixed firmly ahead, he brushes himself down and murmurs an excuse to Nix. “Just going to get some air.”

Nix doesn’t try to stop him.

Stepping out into the cool night is like being released from prison. Dick braces himself against the stone railing of the townhouse’s balcony, gazing at the gravel drive only a few feet below. He could jump it, if he really wanted to — easier that than going back inside and leaving out the front door, wrangling Nix away from his clan. They’re not so far from home — he could walk it, in an hour or so. The fresh air would do his head good. At least in the dark, no one would be able to see him, to wonder and scrutinize…

His mind has gone to a strange place now, and is twisting itself in tangles. Recognizing his own impossible daydream, Dick sighs, slumping forward. A hand finds his hair, rumbling it. For a long moment, he only breathes, focusing on the autumn air filling his lungs and the crickets chirping in the night, to drown out the storm raging inside.

His nerves are too taut not to notice when someone comes up behind him… but the scent of perfume is familiar, so he doesn’t jump. She sidles up alongside him, inhaling softly in the night air; she blows out the same way Nix does, from deep within her chest. When Dick raises his head, Blanche is not focused on him at all, but looking ahead down the driveway.

“Planning your escape?” she asks lightly. Her mulberry lips curl upwards, without the chore of looking at him. “I don’t blame you. That was painful, in there.”

Dick arches an eyebrow. “You felt it too?”

She has a drink in her hand, but the glass is empty. As Blanche’s attention drifts to it, she seized upon the olive, still speared and languishing inside the glass. With delicate, manicured fingers, she plucks it out and scrutinizes the tiny fruit.

“You can’t let him bully you, Dick,” she says after a moment. The scent of wine may be heavy on her breath, but her words are perfectly sober. “He doesn’t mean to, but it’s instinct around these people. They all like to show off, and he’s proud of you.”

Dick’s brows furrow. He’s not some brand new car, or a gold-plated watch. “Why?”

“Because you’re nothing like them.” Blanche’s dark gaze flickers up to him; for the first time tonight, Dick feels entirely seen. Her lips purse, like she’s fighting back a smile, but something in her eyes reminds him of loneliness. “You don’t belong in this set… and that’s nothing against you, darling, only what you know as well as us. My brother prizes you so highly; he’s proud that you’re here, that you’re with him, that you give him your time and agree to accompany him to these parties, even though you’d much rather be doing anything else.”

Dick’s lips purse. Blanche waits a moment, as though expecting him to protest… but he has nothing to say.

“Rich little boys love their toys. You need to remind him that you aren’t one.” Her fingers drum against the rim of her glass; each clink-clink-clink pierces Dick’s nerves like shrapnel wounds.

“He doesn’t mean anything wrong by it,” he protests, because he knows Nix well enough to understand that.

“Of course not. If he didn’t care about you…” Blanche’s words trail off, along with her gaze. She drifts back out to the driveway, painted lips pursing like she’s considering something far away. After another silent moment, she glances at Dick once more. “Last chance to run.”

Dick smirks. “I’m considering it.”

Blanche sighs into the night, pushing her folded arms off the railing and stepping back. Dick no longer feels inclined to stand out in the darkness, alone. As she steps back into the well-lit hallway, he follows her.

When they reenter the lounge, Nix is holding court, in the middle of an animated story Dick’s heard before. “— of course, I couldn’t have known there was a cat involved, otherwise I’d never have set foot in the apartment. So I sit down on the couch and the damned thing launches at me, yowling like a bat out of hell —“ He cuts off, mid-flail, gaze landing on his sister and companion. “Ah. Was wondering where you too made off to.”

“Nothing untoward,” Blanche drawls, slinking back towards the bar. “I offered, but Dick’s too upstanding.”

Nix locks onto Dick, and again, his gaze is painfully warm. Dick feels the same way, like a furnace is burning under his collar. Uneasily, he lowers himself onto a settee at the far edge of the room, back to the door so he won’t be tempted. So long as he’s in Nix’s sightline, his presence counts… but he doesn’t have to make himself the object of a crowd’s fascination again.

Nix understands, in that easy way of his. His lips curl up in the slightest smile, before he turns back to his audience. “As I was saying…”

His story winds on for a little while longer, before he grows bored with it. By then, the crowd has grown equally bored with its malingering, but still too languid to get up and do something about it. One of the women slips behind the piano and tries to start up a dancing tune, but no one bites. Her song devolves into something slower, more thoughtful. The host pours himself another drink from the bar, and doesn’t offer to serve anyone else; his mistresses chatter in an undertone, lipstick stained crystal glasses sitting beside them. Nix reclines back in his chair, perfectly debauched. His hair is a ruffled mess, bow-tie undone and hanging loosely around his neck. The top of his shirt is still open, carelessly displaying his collarbones and a flash of dark hair across his chest.

You’ll catch a chill, a voice in Dick’s head that sounds too much like his mother chides. He’s seized briefly with the inexplicable, intense urge to cross the room and lean over Nix to close the shirt himself. It passes, of course, and he politely averts his gaze.

Perhaps he’s doing too good of a job not looking at him. “Dick,” Nix finally says, from right behind him. “Ready to go?”

A wave of relief washes over him. He hasn’t wanted anything so badly since his discharge papers. “Let’s go,” he replies, rising to his feet.

They pay polite goodbyes to their host; Blanche waves them off with an eyeroll for Nix and a blown kiss for Dick. Then, finally, they leave through the front door, and slip into the night.

While they drove here themselves, Nix is in no state to command the car. Dick is already prepared to take the wheel, when the valet steps up with keys in hand. “Do you require a ride home, Mr. Nixon?”

Dick’s surprised gaze swivels towards Nix, as if to ask do we? (He’s still so unused to the world of chauffeurs and butlers, and every encounter leaves a foreign, coppery taste in his mouth.) Nix dwells on the offer for a moment with lazy-eyed disinterest, before shrugging and gesturing the valet towards his car. “Why not? Roy likes to be generous. Let him do us a favor for once, huh?”

Dick, who has never personally done Nix’s friend Roy a single favor, just nods.

Nix’s car is sleek and expensive, a top of the line Plymouth Deluxe in glossy black paint and felt seating. Dick has sat in the passenger’s seat enough times that sliding into the back feels like a mistake, something to double back and correct before he manages to embarrass himself. Nix slides in right behind him, not giving him the chance. The scent of car freshener can’t disguise the stuffy air in the back of the car; there’s not much separating the back from the front, but the forward row of seats stretch up, practically creating a barrier to separate both ends of the car in half. Dick hears the driver slide in up front, but in the darkness, it’s hard to see.

“Turn on the radio, will you?” Nix requests as the car stirs to life. Obligingly, the driver turns a few knobs; what threatens to become an awkward silence immediately finds itself drowned out by a staticky love ballad.

“And when I kissed you, darling It was more than just a thrill for me It was the promise, darling Of the things that fate had willed for me…”

The timing is astonishingly poor. Dick slumps back against the seat, all but defeated. At his side, Nix chuckles.

When Dick looks over, it's impossible to catch his eye. The night is too dark, and these roads aren’t well-lit; shrouded by shadows, Nix’s eyes are two black holes, drawing all trace of light into them and holding it hostage. Dick catches a flash of something pearly, which must be the jagged cut of Nix’s smile; the silhouetted shoulders rise up and down, in what isn’t quite laughter.

After a moment, Nix goes still. Dick can’t see, but he knows he’s being watched.

“Well?” Nix finally says. “When are you going to tell me what an idiot I am?”

Dick turns his head, looking out the window nearest to him. “Never occurred to me, Nix.”

“Maybe not to say it, but you were thinking it. Come on, Dick.” A smooth-palmed hand finds his in the darkness. Dick allows it. “I knew I screwed up the moment you pulled away. Knew it as soon as I saw your face, really, but damn me if I know how to stop… come on, that’s what I bring you to these things for. To keep a leash on me.”

Dick thinks Nix’s social circle picked up on that, at least.

He doesn’t realize how tense he’s gone until Nix’s thumb strokes along the back of his knuckles; his hand, Dick realizes, has gone stiff as a corpse’s, gnarled with tension. When he looks down, he’s suddenly ashamed. He tries to pull away, but Nix holds fast.

“I’m sorry,” he says, sudden and sincere.

“You didn’t do anything,” Dick replies. “If I didn’t want to be there —“

“You don’t want to be there. You come to these awful things for me, even though you can’t stand it, and you’re a fish out of water the whole time. I’m being cruel to you. Downright uncharitable! And you know the reason why.”

Dick’s gaze is drawn back to him again. This time, as a flash of light passes through the car, he glimpses Nix’s face — eyes bright with drink, devastatingly earnest, his lips curled downwards and jaw tense. He’s handsome without trying… and cruel, too. More careless than he realizes.

Blanche’s words echo in his ears: rich little boys love their toys.

“It might be a game to you, Nix,” Dick says softly, “but it isn’t to me. Whatever show you were putting on in there… I don’t want to be part of it anymore.”

Nix is silent for a long moment. The air between them is thick as curdled cream. “I understand,” he finally says. “I… I get it, Dick, christ. I’m sorry.”

“I know.” Of course he knows. Doesn’t Nix realize he doesn’t have to put on a show for anyone, just do Dick will stand by his side? Doesn’t he realize the whole reason Dick goes to these parties, time and time again, is for him? Because he’d shatter the entire world and piece it back together, fragment by microscopic fragment, just to make Lewis Nixon happy?

“It’s never been a game to me, Nix,” he says softly.

In the darkness, Nix’s hand finds his again. This time, Dick squeezes tight.

He doesn’t know exactly how they come together, what magnetism pulls them or the way their bodies fit together. His shoulder presses up against Nix’s; his fingers find the threads of Nix’s hair; Nix’s thigh is a solid weight as it drapes over his own, his skin is warm, and suddenly Nix is practically in his lap.

It felt better this way. Dick likes the cover of darkness, is painfully grateful for it, just as he is of the way his hand fits over Nix’s hip. He likes holding him so much more than he likes being held… and something in the sigh Nix breathes against his lips suggests he likes it this way too.

“It’s not a game to me either, Dick,” he murmurs. “You matter too damn much”

The distance between them closes on its own will. Nix tastes like whiskey and coffee and August twilight; his lips are smooth, gliding over Dick’s own as though he’s wet them a dozen times since their conversation began. Their embrace is tender, but the hand gripping Dick’s shoulder is desperate. When Dick sighs against Nix’s lips, he utters a soft noise, almost like a whine. Dick’s fingers run along his scalp, soothing the dissatisfaction away.

“I much prefer this,” Dick mutters. “It suits us both better… privacy.”

“If it suits you,” Nix replies, “that’s all I need to know.”

It’s not perfect, and it’s not quite laid to rest… but they make it home at a reasonable hour, and Dick holds Nix in the privacy of their own home. He couldn’t ask for anything more.

#winnix #my writing #richard winters #lewis nixon #blanche nixon

35 notes · View notes

dailyaudiobible · 3 years

Text

07/23/2021 DAB Transcript

2 Chronicles 8:11-10:19, Romans 8:9-25, Psalms 18:16-36, Proverbs 19:26

Today is the 23rd day of July welcome to the Daily Audio Bible I’m Brian it is a joy and a privilege and an honor to be here with you today around the Global Campfire as we come in and take the next step forward together. Right now, this part of the year, this part of the month, we find ourselves in the book of second Chronicles. We’ve been reading for the New Living Translation this week, which is what we’ll continue with today. Second Chronicles chapter 8 verse 11 through 10 verse 19.

Commentary:

Alright. So in the book of Romans we had been discussing the law, its role, its function, its revealing of our failures and how it showed us what sin was and we’ve basically been talking about sin since for the last couple of days. And we get a really good picture of what we would…what we would call the now and the not yet, which is something that's described about Paul's writings, where there is a now. And, so, Paul was very confessional about his own struggles. Now he does the things he doesn't want to do. And he does the things that he doesn’t want to do, and who…who can free him, and only Jesus can free us. But we have this kind of squatter, sin, who has no claim, but if we obey then we become a slave. And, so, we always have this choice. And, so, it's essentially Paul's conviction that sin will get us in the end, in this mortal body. In other words, we will die in this mortal body, but sin has no claim to our Spirit and day by day we are being transformed into the likeness of our Savior. In fact, it's the same Spirit that raised Christ from the dead that's with in us. And if the same Spirit that raised Christ from the dead, raised Christ from the dead than we can expect the same things, that we will experience resurrection as well. So, that's kind of a summary of what we are reading today, but let's just put it in Paul's own words. “Christ lives within you. So, even though your body will die because of sin the Spirit gives you life because you have been made right with God. The Spirit of God who raised Jesus from the dead lives in you. And just as God raised Christ Jesus from the dead. He will give life to your mortal bodies by this same Spirit living within you.” And, so, Paul’s saying this is a…a current state of reality for us, but we’re in the in between. This is a process, and this is where we are. Our bodies in a sinful world are going to wear down but our Spirits will be renewed every day. And ultimately the not yet will be the now and we will be restored to complete perfection as it was intended to be. Paul says it like this, I quote, “yet what we suffer now is nothing compared to the glory He will reveal to us later for all creation is waiting eagerly for that future day when God will reveal who is children really are, for we know that all creation has been groaning as in the pains of childbirth right up to the present time and we believers also grown even though we have the Holy Spirit within us as a foretaste of future glory for we long for our bodies to be released from sin and suffering. We too to wait with eager hope for the day when God will give us our full rights as his adopted children, including the new bodies he has promised us.” Okay. So, that's the not yet. That is what we are hoping for, a time when sin is no more, and death has died, death has been swallowed up in victory. So, essentially if we had a boil down what we've been saying over the last few days it is that sin is a thing and sin, even though we are free from its claims to us is something that we can still choose to obey. We can still choose that kind of slavery if that's what we want. We’re just not perpetually in that state. It doesn't have a claim to us anymore. We died to it and we’re resurrected spiritually. We have right standing before God. We have been grafted into his family. We can call him Abba, Papa, Father, Daddy. We don't have to be afraid. I mean, I have a little boy, his name is Ezekiel. He’s gotten really popular around here this year for reading Daily Audio Bible Kids and he’s doing a great job, but he’s a little boy and he does things that are wrong from time to time, and he does things that he knows are wrong from time to time. And if he has to come and confess or acknowledge because something's been discovered that he has done, something that he knows is wrong he doesn't come to me in terror. He’s not afraid of who knows what I might do to him. He comes and he knows he's done wrong. So, he already knows it was wrong. He's already learned. He may have punishment. He may have consequences that have arisen out of his own actions, but he doesn't have to have terror. He's my son. I am his poppa, his abba, his daddy, his father. So, we may wrestle with the things that we struggle with that we’re trying to medicate or soothe or fill or whatever. We may choose things that ultimately separate us from God or are sinful but we don't have to live in terror of our Father. We need to run to our Father, confess our ultimate and utter dependence and kick the squatter out of our lives. This may be theological, even technical in some ways, but this is the good news. God wants you back and will never stop wanting that for everyone. And, so, let's carry that forward into this day and into this weekend.

Prayer:

Holy Spirit, come. May we rest in the knowledge that You really do love us, that maybe we exasperate You at times because of our foolishness, but You really love us deeply, individually. You know our stories. You know who we are and where we've come from. And, so, we come to You. There is no other place to go. Even when we choose things that are destructive in our lives, help us Holy Spirit to rapidly recognize what's going on and rapidly return to our source of life itself. We pray this in the name of Jesus. Amen.

Announcements:

dailyaudiobible.com, it’s home base, it’s where you find out what's going on around here.

And it's where you find the Prayer Wall and pray for one another around here. That's in the Community section. And of course, all this can be accessed on the web at dailyaudiobible.com or using the Daily Audio Bible app by pressing the Drawer icon in the upper left-hand corner. So, you can find the Prayer Wall in the Community section.

You can find resources that are available in the Daily Audio Bible Shop.

If you want to partner with the Daily Audio Bible you can do that on the web or in the app as well. On the web there's a link on the homepage. In the app there’s is a give button in the upper right-hand corner. Thank you. Thank you humbly and profoundly for your partnership as we continue our journey, the voyage of a lifetime across a year and through the Bible together in community. If that is life-giving to you than thank you for your partnership.

If you have a prayer request or encouragement, you can hit the Hotline button in the app, the little red button at the top or there are a number of numbers that you can call depending on where you are in the world. In the Americas 877-942-4253 is the number to dial. In the UK or Europe 44-20-3608-8078 is the number to call. And if you are in Australia are the lands down under 61-3-8820-5459 is the number to dial.

And that's it for today. I’m Brian I love you and I'll be waiting for you here tomorrow.

Community Prayer and Praise:

Good morning Daily Audio Bible family God bless you God bless the Hardin family and the reading of the scriptures. I am Lauralee. I am 16-year listen her. I am 16 years old…17 years old in Christ and I'm just calling. I came to work to this morning and got news that Adrian Lubetkin died last night. Father your word says it's appointed to man once to die and then face judgment. We have prayed for Adrian, that her own understanding about death would be changed in the last couple weeks, that you would perform heart surgery on her. And I have great faith because I saw you do it for my dad. I witnessed it, I saw it. So, I have great faith, that even though I didn't see it that you answered our prayers for Adrian according to your will because you don't delight in the destruction of the wicked and you want everyone to be saved. So, we asked and I trust you that I will see her and that you performed a miracle because you are God of miracles and You're good and You love your creation. I pray that You have made her one of Your very own and we’ll see her later in the name of Jesus. Thank you have a good day.

Hello DAB family this is the Disciple that He loves in Ohio. I've been listening for years now but have never called. I just desperately need prayer for my daughter. She's 15 and has been battling depression since she was 11 or 12. She has such a good heart and at times I just see glimpses of the person she's supposed to be but she's stealing and lying and is so far away and she just says all the time that she doesn't see a point of living and she wants to die. It just breaks my heart. I've prayed over this girl and loved her and asked angels to protect her her whole life and it just, I'm just worried. I'm afraid I'm going to lose her. She talks about dying and wanting to be dead all the time. I'm doing everything I can to get her the help but she just seems like she's getting worse instead of better. I just ask that everyone can come against the spiritual powers of wickedness and that are taking over her and that she would turn back to God and she would be healed over depression and her suicidal ideations. Thank you so much. I love you.

Hi this is Micah in Awe in Kansas City MO. I wanted to pray today for people today that are struggling with mobility issues. Shandra from Maryland you really touched me with your encouragement. And I tasted just briefly what it's like to be immobilized for…for about six months. I was on a knee scooter and kind of hurt to use my other foot to push the knee scooter but I still was able to. And I remember thinking of how…how much of a struggle it would be for someone in a wheelchair and how inaccessible certain places were like just different stores and I wanted to make a change but I just never did but I still want to and today I'm asking all of you out there whether your mobile or immobilized to pray for people that feel or are physically immobilized and not able to get around to where they want to go and feel like they're trapped. Let's pray. Lord today I ask for people all over the world not just DABbers, not just listeners, but everybody who struggles with immobilized…that are immobilized that you can help them feel free even when they are trapped, that you can help them with quality of life and joy when they can't do the things that they once were able to do. We ask for assistance with machinery and equipment that can help them, like if someone wants to get out on trails, some sort of like wheelchairs type bike or something. I don't know what it is but Lord you know what can be done. And I ask for changemakers, like…like make me a changemaker in the mobility area, that these people can have better quality of life and freedom Lord. But we know that our real freedom is in you Lord. Set them free internally and give them great joy. In Jesus’ name I pray. Amen.

Hey DAB family this is Sam in Seattle. I haven't gotten on to do a voice recording in a while but have kind of posted on the DAB friends and I’ve been keeping up there. I am coming to ask for prayer for people that are involved in family court. It's torturous. It's downright disgusting the things that are happening and how people with mental health conditions are allowed to use the court system to inflict wrongdoings upon the people that they have abused before or people that have been charged with domestic violence or assault on people, right? They are allowed to use the family court system to attack people's character, their jobs. So…and I…I've heard a lot of single parents on here before, you know, asking for prayers considering their kids and custody things. I even know there's somebody down South from me, I think you're in Kent, maybe you're in Tacoma, but a man that has been going through a lot of custody stuff too. So, I just…I want to ask for prayers for people that are involved in family court and the children…the children that are getting abused through this. Thank you.

Good morning Voice the bass player calling in from northern Nevada and I wanted to call and pray for Joe the Protector Who called to pray for someone else and…but mentioned that he started a new job recently and he's…he's having problems with other guys on the job not being believers. And, so, I pray for…I’m praying for Joe, that…that he could just keep a good heart, a good amount of positive thinking and thinking of the Lord and His goodness during his workday. But he also mentioned that he has three daughters or four daughters I think he said and none of them are walking with God. And I can relate to that because I have four children also and there's only one that I would consider to be walking with a Lord Jesus. And, so, I wanted to pray for all the people out there that have kids that are…that are not saved. You know, our children are the biggest blessing that we have from the Lord. A pastor friend of mine said having children is like having your heart outside of you walking around. And it's true. So, Lord Jesus I just pray for everyone who has children that need to be saved, that need to know you, that need to have their hearts changed by the Holy Spirit. I pray for all of them in Jesus’ name. And everyone have a great week. God bless.

1 note · View note

irandrura · 3 years

Text

Terra Ignota

Over the last few weeks, I read Terra Ignota. I read all of the three published books so far: Too Like the Lightning, Seven Surrenders, and The Will to Battle.

Every review of Terra Ignota I have ever read is wrong. Or rather, every review of Terra Ignota I have ever read takes an extremely different perspective to my own, to the extent that I genuinely don’t understand how the author could have concluded that.

So as not to keep anyone in suspense, my perspective on Terra Ignota is that they are surprisingly trashy books, in a world that doesn’t make very much sense, but that doesn’t matter because the heart and soul of these texts is over-the-top soap opera drama. I think they are probably bad, and they outright offended me at several points, but nonetheless they drew me in enough that I wanted to keep reading. There is merit in that.

If you’re the sort of person who cares about spoilers, this is your only warning.

As I said, I don’t understand most of the reviews I have read of these books. I simply don’t.

I don’t understand the view that the writing itself is poetic and beautiful. Palmer has some good phrases from time to time, but overall I don’t find the prose particularly amazing. This is a very subjective point, so I won’t belabour it.

I don’t understand the view that the books are a masterful triumph of worldbuilding. From my perspective, the worldbuilding is actually kind of half-assed, and more importantly, Palmer does not seem to actually care about worldbuilding that much. It isn’t her priority. Reading the books I found myself constantly asking “How does X actually work?” or “Y sounds totally insane, could you explain how it makes sense to me?” or “Z seems like it clashes with X, please resolve this contradiction for me?”, and Palmer never answers those questions for you. If I want some more explanation for why, say, a global transportation system serving billions of people is run without oversight, from a single private residence, looked after by a man well-known to be suicidally depressed… nope, I’m not getting that. If I want some context for how hive-switching works, or how it interacts with crime, not happening. Even minor questions: in The Will to Battle, our heroes talk to a band of criminals involved in human trafficking, and I immediately wanted to know what human trafficking means in a world where borders have been abolished, geographic nations have been abolished, and every place on Earth is just a short taxi ride from every other place. This is the sort of question Palmer does not answer or even acknowledge.

And I don’t actually buy that she’s interested in the questions that I see raised when the books are spruiked to me. Are you intrigued by the question of what the world would look like if every individual could choose their own government, their own law code, unconstrained by geography? I’m intrigued by that. It sounds interesting. But this is not a question that Terra Ignota is actually interested in. It seems like it should be interested in it, and I read enough breathless expositions of how cool the hive system is that I expected Terra Ignota to be interested in it… but it’s not. If you’re interested in, say, the question of whether a permanent exit option would make absolute dictatorship more humane, as in the Masons, then I agree that’s interesting – but it is not a question that the text of Terra Ignota takes any interest in. The big worldbuilding questions raised by the hives are all window dressing.

I don’t understand the idea that Terra Ignota is a brilliant depiction of utopia. I want to acknowledge straight off the bat that I may have a bias here, because Terra Ignota’s world is premised on the, well, genocide of people like me, or at least the forcible suppression and exile of people like me, but I don’t think it’s only the fact that I’m openly in defiance of the First Black Law. Rather, I note two things here. Firstly, it’s hard to see whether Terra Ignota’s society is actually utopian because we spend so little time in it. We do not see how ordinary people live in this world, or what makes it wonderful. What Terra Ignota spends most of its time on is the scheming and backstabbing of the dozen most powerful people in the world, and everyone outside that little circle barely exists in the text. (Abigail Nussbaum noted in her review that Terra Ignota’s world never really feels like it has more than a few hundred people in it, and I agree.) It’s hard to convincingly argue Terra Ignota is a utopia or a dystopia, because we never meet the whole population. We meet a small handful of amoral nobility as they play out a space opera Game of Thrones. That’s certainly entertaining, and I give Palmer credit for making it fun to read, but it’s not really an investigation of utopia. Secondly, where we do see glimpses of the world outside the parlours of the ruthless rich, it…honestly seems rather conventional, and rather like the 21st century. People work fewer hours a week, taxis are much more efficient, movies have smelltracks as well as soundtracks, they go to the Olympics, apparently the Oscars endured the collapse of all nations and religions… but there is little in this world that seems radically different to our own. It’s all minor, incremental bits of technological progress. They’ve eliminated poverty, which is good, but I usually expect something more radical from utopia than that. What do people actually do in Terra Ignota that’s different to what any upper-middle class American might do today? Other, of course, than not go to church, call everyone singular they, and wear tracking devices.

I don’t understand the idea that these books deal with deep philosophical or theological themes. Like the hives themselves, it’s all window dressing. The narrator Mycroft is obsessed with the 18th century, and so is a bizarre anachronistic brothel that somehow every major world leader attends (cf. worldbuilding being weak, the world only feeling like it has a few hundred people in it), but they don’t do very much with this. Mycroft imagines Thomas Hobbes occasionally butting in, but his imaginary Hobbes has little to say beyond "Hi, I’m the guy who wrote Leviathan!” The characters reference Diderot and de Sade and Voltaire, but usually only on the surface level, and when they do try to go deeper, they often get the references wrong. The same for the theology. My point is not that Terra Ignota is bad: just that it isn’t really that interested in the political philosophy or the theology. It uses 18th century thought as an aesthetic. Deism, miracles, proof of God’s existence, how gods might communicate, etc., are not the questions that occupy the text. Ada Palmer is not a theologian.

But all that said, I enjoyed Terra Ignota.

I want to emphasise that. I enjoyed Terra Ignota! I am not saying that it’s bad! I’m just saying that it was not what everyone told me it would be.

Terra Ignota is a book about a bunch of very powerful, very horrible people, who all apparently go to the same brothel and are interested in the same wacky theories about human nature and God and so on, lying to and betraying each other. I think Palmer is really interested in the characters. Mycroft, our pretentious narrator who by the end of book three is genuinely losing his grip on reality and writing hallucinations. Jedd Mason, the madman who believes he’s God, but is probably just the delusional product of a radical set-set experiment. Caesar, the iron-proud absolute dictator seeking to do his duty by his ambitious, power-obsessed hive. Dominic, the sadistic sexual predator who nonetheless worships Jedd with fanatical devotion. Carlyle, the kind and compassionate philosopher-in-residence who inevitably gets tortured and abused. Ojiro Sniper, the freaky sex doll who nonetheless seeks to become the Brutus to Jedd’s Caesar. Apollo Mojave, the dead-but-still-influential space wizard who sought to cause a world war for stupid reasons. And so on. The characters are generally well-drawn and interesting enough that I want to see what happens to them.

I should emphasise Palmer’s achievement in making me want to know what happens to these people, especially because they’re all so unsympathetic. Carlyle and Bridger stand out as the most truly sympathetic characters in the novels, but by book three, the former has been captured, tortured, and now limps along, dead-eyed and broken-spirited, in the train of one of the resident sadists, and the latter has quite reasonably gone “Screw this” and used his immense psychic powers to delete himself from the book. But most of the core characters in this drama – Mycroft, Saladin, Jedd, Sniper, Ganymede and Danae, Madame d’Arouet, etc. – are mad, evil, both, or otherwise extremely unsympathetic. It is to Palmer’s credit that I want to know what happens in the war anyway. The most sympathetic of the political leaders in the text, Vivien Ancelet and Bryar Kosala, spend most of their time fruitlessly begging for peace. While they, perhaps alone of the leaders, have genuinely laudable intentions, it has been clear from the first book that neither will be permitted to achieve anything notable. The only people to barrack for, in Terra Ignota, are those noble if compromised few who seek to avoid a war – and who we all know will fail.

Book four, it seems, will finally be about the war that the first three books have been setting up, and even though I frankly want all three sides to lose – the Jedd faction, the Sniper faction, and Utopia are all deeply unpleasant, albeit in different ways – I am sure I will find it extremely entertaining to see how this all collapses.

Do I recommend Terra Ignota? I don’t know. If you want detailed, thorough worldbuilding, sincere contemplation of deep philosophical questions about theodicy, politics, and human nature, or a stirring vision of a possible utopia… no. Do not read it for those things. It does not have those things in it.

But it does have a scene where the prime minister of Europe body-tackles the Olympic president through a plate glass window and they land in a pile of people having sex mid-orgy, while the media broadcasts it worldwide.

And that’s excellent.

2 notes · View notes

princess-of-france · 4 years

Note

I’m interested in your take on Angelo & Isabella w/ personality parallels (also just your opinion on Angelo especially tbh because I feel like I under-analyzed him when I read the play bc I was just. Well, found him scary :P) because obviously w/ your production you’re pretty deep in and I don’t see a lot of MFM content

Oof, this is a loaded question.

I’m happy to answer it, but I think I should make a disclaimer that—as you point out—my opinions of Angelo are skewed by my experiences as an actor inside a specific production. I’m also not an English scholar; I’m a theater artist. My lit crit skills are dodgy at best (as @lizbennett2013 knows all too well), and I don’t believe there is a single way to interpret any character in drama, especially when you’re dealing with heightened text. All I can do is give my honest appraisal of Angelo as I have encountered him dramaturgically through cutting our script, rehearsing Isabella, and seeing his iterations in other productions.

So! Angelo and Isabella. Two sides of the same coin. I really think they are.

Let’s get the obvious stuff out of the way first: Angelo is scary. He just is. His sexually motivated exploitation of authority continues to be one of the most transcendent aspects of this ever-timely play. However you stage it, however you trim the text, whatever charismatic actor you slot into the role, Angelo is a capital-T-Terror and there’s no getting around it. Coercive, manipulative, hypocritical, ruthless, misogynistic, fraudulent, and cruel, he basically spends the entirety of MEASURE FOR MEASURE committing crimes and then soliloquizing about how painful it all is for his bargain-price conscience. You’ll never hear me say he doesn’t deserve his reputation as one of the most reprehensible tyrants in all of Shakespeare.

But.

Of the three defining qualities I see in Angelo—ideological dogmatism, rhetorical prowess, and professional pride—there’s not one of them that is not blisteringly prominent in his antagonist, Isabella. Despite the fact that she’s a Catholic republican (“Butt out of people’s lives, Big Government; God will judge us when we die!”) and he’s a Puritan[ical] bureaucrat (“My job is to regulate people’s lives because purgatory is a myth!”), they have far more in common, cognitively, than not. Understand: I’m not saying that Angelo is not a piece of shit for how he behaves throughout course of the play. Nor am I implying that Isabella is somehow culpable for his masturbatory exercise of power over her. My girl has flaws, but she’s unquestionably the hero of M4M. What I’m trying to articulate is that Angelo and Isabella were born with the same psychological toolkit, which they elect to apply towards radically different purposes. (Think Parseltongue and “It is our choices that show who we truly are, far more than our abilities…”) This shared intellectual arsenal is what makes their pair of scenes in Act Two so iconic. We basically get to watch them play out Newton’s Third Law in real time: for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction… As far as rhetoric goes, neither Isabella nor Angelo can overwhelm the other. For every argument she makes in favor of mercy, he punctures it with legalism. For every judicial explication he provides, she dissolves it with morality. One minute, we’re nodding our heads along with Angelo as he explains why Christian values should have no place in a court of law; the next, we’re on our feet cheering for Isabella to convince him to factor human integrity into his role as a public servant. I can’t read 2.2 as anything other than the blueprint for every screenplay Aaron Sorkin ever wrote. It is the ultimate courtroom drama.

Just look at the play’s opening act. Angelo’s hasty promotion aside, both he and Isabella begin the story at the lowest rung of their respective vocational ladders: he’s a would-be Chief Justice, she’s a would-be Prioress. Deputy/nun. Politics/religion. Different spheres/same ambition. And, in like true zealots, both Angelo and Isabella express their commitment to their new duties in terms of self-flagellation:

“You may not so extenuate his offenseFor I have had such faults, but rather tell me,When I that censure him do so offend,Let mine own judgment pattern out my deathAnd nothing come in partial.” (Angelo, II.i.29-33)

“And have you nuns no farther privileges?[…] I speak not as desiring more,But rather wishing a more strict restraintUpon the sisterhood, the votarists of Saint Clare.” (Isabella, I.iv.1, 3-5)

It’s also worth mentioning that our first introduction to these characters features them scurrying along in the wake of an authority figure they respect.

Act 1, Scene 1: Angelo wants to know the extent to which he can wield his law degree at the pleasure of the Duke of Vienna (the Duke himself!).

Act 1, Scene 4: Isabella wants to know the extent to which she can practice self-denial for the glory of God and the approval of Mother Superior.

They are both drawn to gravitas, to figures who represent order and authority. They are also drawn to discipline. He’s a non-drinking, non-smoking Precision. She’s a gluttony-abhorring Bride of Christ. Let the rest of the world eat cake. They will be eating their sins and purifying their souls, thank you very much.

At the risk of descending into the flaming pits of cliché, I’ll also touch on those three qualities I mentioned earlier, because who says the TPE (Three Paragraph Essay) is dead?

First up: ideological dogmatism.

[Side note: I may be a crappy historian, but I do recognize there’s a historical paradigm at play in this text. Vienna needs to be a Catholic city and Angelo’s Protestantism needs to be allusive because Shakespeare presumably valued all his limbs and didn’t relish the idea of rotting in a Cheapside prison. If he’d lived in a “free press” kind of sociocultural context, he might have endowed his religious figures with a bit more Opinion. I digress.]

In the M4M-centered episode of Isaac Butler’s phenomenal podcast, “Lend Me Your Ears,” he interviews JohnPaul Spiro (Assistant Director of the School of Liberal Arts, Villanova University), who does a wonderfully unfussy job of summing up the Angelo/Isabella ideology parallel:

“In much the same way as our era is filled with political zealots—as well as, to a certain degree, religious zealots—what you’ll find when you look closer is there’s a small number of very loud people who are dominating the discourse. And a lot of people are in the middle and would rather not have to take sides. Claudio, he seems to be monogamous, he seems to want to just live a very simple life, he’s not really concerned with theological things. And when pressed on theological things, his point is: ‘I don’t really know. No one really knows what happen when you die, so I’m scared.’”

Because religious extremism lies at the heart of the rhetorical warfare between Angelo and Isabella, I think there’s a misconception that M4M is a Play About Religion. But the ONLY characters who canonically go to the mat about the finer points of theology are…wait for it…Angelo and Isabella. This is an early modern text brimming with religious figures (Sister Francisca, Friar Thomas, Friar Peter, even the phony Friar Lodowick), but not a single one of them gets on the pulpit about ANYTHING in the course of the entire play. Sister Francisca’s role consists of bemusedly listening to her youthful novitiate describe her desire for stricter prohibitions at the cloister. Friar Thomas, a sycophantic priest whose parish coffers are probably lined with Vincentio’s gold, spends his one onstage scene nodding his head sympathetically as the Duke over-explains why he is disguising himself as a monk. Friar Peter, the poor Jesuit roped into delivering the Duke’s messages, forgoes moralizing and instead uses his limited dialogue to try to help two disenfranchised women receive justice for their abuse. And Friar Lodowick, of course, is nothing but an alias for a cowardly sociopath who wants to run the world without being held accountable for his mistakes. Nothing evangelical about any of that.

But Angelo and Isabella? They can’t shut up about religion.

Isabella wants Angelo to temper his punitive Weltanschauung with morality, ideology, Platonic ideals, metaphysics…in short, all of the intangibles that can’t be used as evidence in a court of law.

“Why, all the souls that were were forfeit onceAnd He that might the vantage best have tookFound out the remedy. How would you be,If He, which is the top of judgment, shouldBut judge you as you are? O, think on thatAnd mercy then will breathe within your lips,Like man new made.” (Isabella, II.ii.97-103)

Angelo, in turn, wants Isabella to recognize the futility of Catholicism as a proper tool for creating heaven on earth because Catholicism permits withdrawal from the world and the abdication of earthly responsibility (cf: nunnery). Instead, he argues, what God actually needs is for people to actively toil in their communities to criminalize, punish, and eradicate sin.

“I show [pity] most of all when I show justice,For then I pity those I do not know,Which a dismissed offense would after gall,And do him right that—answering one foul wrong—Lives not to act another.” (Angelo, II.ii.128-132)

They take up the two sides of a theological debate that predates Christianity: ethics vs. justice. And that conflict is itself inextricably tied to the timeless political debate of non-intervention vs. regulation. And the thing is: even when Angelo and Isabella realize the irreconcilability of their respective schools of thought, they KEEP ARGUING ABOUT IT because extremism is just that: extreme. Angelo and Isabella may be major players in M4M, but they represent the radical minority of their world. They are the “small group of very loud people” and literally everyone is a moderate next to them. Ideology, not desire, is the bedrock of their personhood. When confronted with a person of an uncompromisingly polar viewpoint, they behave as if it might be possible to change the viewpoint of that person because the alternative is to admit defeat. To tragic effect, they hold their ideals more sacred than human life. For Angelo, that ideal is the law (i.e. integrity of action). For Isabella, it’s chastity (i.e. integrity of the soul). They are dogmatic in their beliefs, inflexible in their opinions, and inalienably convinced of their own “rightness.” They are austere, incisive, independent, articulate, and sharp. They are disgusted by the depravity of the world around them and determined to transcend it. What differentiates them is the content of their convictions, but they rate the value of that conviction equally.

So, yes, M4M is a play acutely interested in how religion shapes the law and human behavior. But I would argue that it is really only about one thing: power.

Which brings me to rhetoric.

Angelo and Isabella are lawyers. Both of them. High-powered, quick-thinking, weakness-sniffing, self-righteous litigators. Sure, Isabella may not have the paperwork to prove it; she was conceived by an Englishman in the early 17th century. But much in the same way that it’s obvious to everyone with eyes that would-be nun Maria [von Trapp] is a born music teacher from the first scene of The Sound of Music, so is it evident from Isabella’s first moments onstage that she is a born lawyer. She was, quite simply, born to argue.

Consider her first scene onstage: in the nunnery, with Lucio and Francisca. Unlike the audience, Isabella doesn’t have empirical evidence of Lucio’s amorality and notorious womanizing. She doesn’t need it. She can smell it on him. And in six short lines, she wipes the mosaic-laced marble floor of the cathedral with his ass:

LUCIOCan you so stead meAs bring me to the sight of Isabella,A novice of this place and the fair sisterTo her unhappy brother, Claudio?

ISABELLAWhy her “unhappy brother”? Let me ask,The rather for I now must make you knowI am that Isabella, and his sister.

LUCIOGentle and fair, your brother kindly greets you.Not to be weary with you, he’s in prison.

ISABELLAWoe me, for what?

LUCIOFor that which, if myself might be his judge,He should receive his punishment in thanks:He hath got his friend with child.

ISABELLASir, make me not your story.

LUCIO‘Tis true.I would not, though ‘tis my familiar sinWith maids to seem the lapwing and to jest,Tongue far from heart, play with all virgins so.I hold you as a thing enskied and sainted,By your renouncement an immortal spiritAnd to be talked with in sincerityAs with a saint.

ISABELLAYou do blaspheme the good in mocking me.

(I.iv.18-40)

I’m not going to venture down the English professor’s rabbit hole of rhetorical devices and syntactical analysis—partly because there are thousands of scholars who have already done it better than I ever could (check out Claire McEachern and Julie Felise Dubiner!) and partly because I’ve been blathering for too long in general. But sufficed to say that three hallmarks of a good lawyer are as follows:

The ability to seize and repurpose the language of one’s opponent (“Why her ‘unhappy brother?’”)

The ability to spot and sidestep landmines (“Sir, make me not your story.”)

The ability to redirect conversation (“You do blaspheme.”)

By that metric alone, Isabella’s performance here is worthy of the Harvard Law Review.

And then, of course, two scenes later, she meets her match.

A dear friend of mine, who is a first-year at Georgetown Law and basically the smartest person I’ve ever met, once told me: “The best and worst thing that can happen to a good lawyer is to meet another good lawyer with different ideas.” I do apologize for invoking Sorkin twice in one essay, but honestly: “The President likes smart people who disagree with him” (Leo, The West Wing, 2x05). It is a truth universally acknowledged that however infuriating it is for a highly intelligent person to debate with an equally intelligent person who disagrees with everything they stand for, it can also be unbelievably stimulating and monumentally entertaining to watch. (Hello, 50 million seasons of Law & Order.)

I’m now two weeks deep into rehearsals for M4M and I still get gobsmacked, daily, by the sheer majesty of Angelo’s and Isabella’s rhetoric. Theirs goes so far beyond the mental agility of anyone else in this play, or even—dare I say it—in Shakespeare’s canon. They are beyond intelligent. They are freaky genius kids with the kind of sanctimonious stubbornness that would be obnoxious if it weren’t so damn compelling. Between the two of them, between their two infamous scenes, they pull out every rhetorical trick in the book and play approximately seventeen unique rounds of intellectual checkers. (I say checkers because chess is too slow for them. If you want chilly brinksmanship, check out the Roman plays. Angelo and Isabella have agendas and professional pride on the line. Time is of the essence.)

ISABELLAI do think that you might pardon him,And neither heaven nor man grieve at the mercy.

ANGELOI will not do it.

ISABELLABut can you, if you would?

ANGELOLook, what I cannot, that I will not do.

ISABELLABut might you do it, and do the world no wrongIf so your heart were touched with that remorseAs mine is to him?

ANGELOHe’s sentenced. ‘Tis too late.

ISABELLA“Too late”? Why, no. I, that do speak a word,Might call it back again.

(II.ii.67-78 [italics are mine])

Things get even more complicated when they start moving into those same theoretical marshes I described earlier:

“If he had been as you, and you as he,You would have slipped like him, but he like youWould not have been so stern.” (Isabella, II.ii.84-86)

“The law hath not been dead, though it hath slept.Those many had not dared to do that evilIf the first that did th’ edict infringeHad answered for his deed. Now ‘tis awake…” (Angelo, II.ii.117-120)

ENOUGH WITH THE METAPHORS ALREADY. CLAUDIO IS ON DEATH ROW.

And even when they finally, finally get to the point, they remain at an impasse:

ISABELLAYet show some pity.

ANGELOI show it most when I show justice.

(II.ii.127-128)

Which causes Isabella essentially to lose all sense of self-awareness and control because goddam it, never once in her entire life has she met a person she couldn’t out-argue, who the fuck does this deputy think he is, this was supposed to be a simple mission and she’s been standing in this room for ten minutes and he’s still siTTING THERE SMILING AT HER WHAT THE F—

“So you must be the first that gives this sentence,And he that suffers. O, it is excellentTo have a giant’s strength, but it is tyrannousTo use it like a giant[…]Could great men thunderAs Jove himself does, Jove would never be quiet,For every pelting, petty officerWould use his heaven for thunder,Nothing but thunder. Merciful heaven,Thou rather with thy sharp and sulfurous boltSplits the un-wedgeable and gnarlèd oakThan the soft myrtle. But man, proud man,Dressed in a little brief authority,Most ignorant of what he’s most assured,His glassy essence like an angry apePlays such fantastic tricks before high heavenAs makes the angels weep, who with our spleensWould all themselves laugh mortal.” (Isabella, II.ii.134-152)

Which causes ANGELO to lose all self-awareness and control because goddam it, never once in his entire life has he met a person he couldn’t out-argue, who the fuck does this nun think she is, this was supposed to be a simple smackdown and she’s been standing in this room for ten minutes and he’s still waiting for her to admit defeat and oh God oh no oh no oh no why can’t he look away from her face, what the fuck is happening what the F—

ANGELOWHY DO YOU PUT THESE SAYINGS UPON ME?

ISABELLABecause authority, though it err like others,Hath yet a kind of medicine in itselfThat skins the vice o’ th’ top. Go to your bosom,Knock there, and ask your heart what it doth knowThat’s like my brother’s fault. If it confessA natural guiltiness such as is his,Let it not sound a thought upon your tongueAgainst my brother’s life.

ANGELO, asideShe speaks and ‘tis such senseThat my sense breeds with it.

(II.ii.163-173)

Finally, Angelo gets her to leave and faces the music. My tremendous co-actor, Jude Van der Voorde, always slays this soliloquy.

“What’s this, what’s this? Is this her fault or mine?The tempter or the tempted, who sins most, ha?Not she; nor doth she tempt, but it is IThat, lying by the violet in the sun,Do as the carrion does, not as the flower,Corrupt with virtuous season.” (Angelo, II.iv.199-204)

[Non sequitur: Jude is the kind of actor actors dream of acting with. He’s always got at least one trick up his sleeve, so my Isabella is constantly second-guessing herself around him. And he does the “sleazy wunderkind act” with a panache rivaling BJ Novak’s in Season 4 of The Office. He’s also one of the funniest people I’ve ever met. Kids, don’t be Method. Make friends with your fellow actors. Leave the emotions onstage and go get a midnight pizza. You will be so much happier.]

With regards to the M4M narrative, we all know what happens next, although it takes an agonizing 175 lines of text in 2.4 before Shakespeare levels off and gives us the canonical threat:

“Redeem thy brotherBy yielding up thy body to my will,Or else he must not only die the death,But thy unkindness shall his death draw outTo lingering sufferance. Answer me tomorrowOr by the affection that now guides me mostI’ll prove a tyrant to him. As for you:Say what you can, my false o’erweighs your true.” (Angelo, II.iv.177-184)

What precedes this is the kind of tension-groaning, hair-splitting, goosebump-raising rhetorical tarantella that television writers today spend their entire careers trying to emulate. Isabella plays the fool for as long as she possibly can…

ANGELONay, but hear me.Your sense pursues not mine. Either you are ignorantOr seem so, crafty, and that’s not good.

ISABELLALet me be ignorant, and in nothing goodBut graciously to know I am no better.

(II.iv.79-83)

…but eventually Angelo forces her hand and she has to deflect his onslaught with the sleek diplomacy of a kidnapping victim.

ISABELLABetter it were a brother died at onceThan that a sister, by redeeming him,Should die forever.

ANGELOWere not you then as cruel as the sentenceThat you have slandered so?

ISABELLAIgnomy in ransom and free pardonAre of two houses. Lawful mercyIs nothing kin to foul redemption.

ANGELOYou seemed of late to make the law a tyrant,And rather proved the sliding of your brotherA merriment than a vice.

ISABELLAO, pardon me, my lord. It oft falls out,To have what we would have, we speak not what we mean.I something do excuse the thing I hateFor his advantage that I dearly love.

(II.iv.114-128)

Remember when I said that Angelo and Isabella are alike in that they are inalienably convinced of their own “rightness”? That still holds true. But now Angelo, without warning, has moved beyond the conceits of debate and is taking Isabella’s rhetorical arguments from 2.2 at literal face value in order to trip her up. He’s brought ideology crashing down to earth and introduced their physical relationship into the conversation…again, without warning and very much without her consent. And she has to figure out a way to back-peddle on her words without yielding defeat of the argument. It is nigh impossible. And I bring it up because guess who gets trapped in the exact same situation three short acts later?

LUCIOCome, sir; come, sir; come, sir; foh, sir! Why, you bald-pated, lying rascal, you must be hooded, must you? Show your knave’s visage, with a pox to you! Show your sheep-biting face, and be hanged an hour! Will ‘t not off?

(LUCIO pulls off the friar’s hood and reveals the DUKE.)

DUKEThou art the first knave that e’er made’st a duke.—First, Provost, let me bail these gentle three.—Sneak not away, sir, for the friar and youMust have a word anon.—Lay hold on him.

LUCIOThis may prove worse than hanging.

DUKEWhat you have spoke I pardon. Sit you down.We’ll borrow place of him. (to Angelo)Sir, by your leave.Hast thou or word, or wit, or impudenceThat yet can do thee office? If thou hast,Rely upon it till my tale be heardAnd hold no longer out.

ANGELOO my dread lord,I should be guiltier than my guiltinessTo think I can be undiscernible,When I perceive your Grace, like power divine,Hath looked upon my passes. (V.i.395-421)

Game, set, match.

As for ego… Do I really need to talk about professional pride? I don’t think so. It’s Angelo and Isabella. Pride leaks out of every virtually every line they speak in this play. Pride in their conviction, pride in their moral righteousness, pride in their intellect, pride in their ability to judge the world with clarity (or whatever). Angelo actually admits it out loud to us in perhaps his most famous soliloquy, because the little fucker has a lot more Catholic guilt about lusting after a novitiate nun than his Protestant heart would like to admit:

“The state whereon I studiedIs, like a good thing being often read,Grown sere and tedious. Yea, my gravity,Wherein—let no man hear me—I take pride,Could I with boot change for an idle plumeWhich the air beats for vain.” (Angelo, II.iv.7-15)

And even though Isabella could easily be the poster child for Christian piety, she’s so damn proud of her own humility that she occasionally threatens to void it altogether.

ANGELOWhat would you do?

ISABELLAAs much for my poor brother as myself.That is, were I under the terms of death,Th’ impression of keen whips I’d wear as rubiesAnd strip myself to death as to a bedThat longing have been sick for, ere I’d yieldMy body up to shame.

(II.iv.107-111)

Look at me, Angelo. Look at this body. It’s mine. Mine and God’s. I see what you’re doing, I know where you’re trying to go. And it is never. going. to happen.

Two weeks into rehearsal and I’m still not sure I’m convincing in my delivery of these lines. I’ve watched every filmed production of M4M I can get my hands on, and it’s no help. I just don’t know what to make of this. Scholars disagree virulently about these lines, but also…scholars aren’t actors, you know? I find myself questioning everything every time I get to this passage. Is Isabella actually a virgin? I’m not sure. Chastity and virginity aren’t actually the same thing and Isabella, for all her idealism, is more worldly than many of her ingenue brethren. One thing is for sure: she’s flushed with self-righteousness when she speaks these words. Angelo may be a haughty son of a bitch, but so is she, so is she, so is she.

Ugh, these characters. I love them so much. I hate Angelo, I do. I also love him. And God help me I love Isabella. They’re dumpster fires of human conviction and I’m so grateful to Shakespeare for giving us their story and for understanding four hundred fucking years ago, that this, THIS is the pinnacle of hell in the female experience: “Who would believe thee, Isabel?”

#MeToo

Thank you, Will. Thank you.

I feel like I should apologize for the length of this reply, but I’ve had so much freaking fun that I also don’t feel apologetic. Thank you for this amazing question! Hope you’re doing well! xx Claire

Tagging @malvoliowithin @measureformeasure @harry-leroy @suits-of-woe

#measure for measure #m4m 2019

53 notes · View notes

beneaththetangles · 4 years

Text

BtT Light Novel Club Chapter 20 (Part 2): Tearmoon Empire, Vol. 1

And here is the second part of our discussion on the light novel Tearmoon Empire, Vol. 1! If you haven’t yet, please check out Part 1 of our discussion first.

We’ve got a lot to talk about, so let’s jump right in! Just like with Part 1, Jeskai Angel and Gaheret are joining me in the discussion.

-----

4. Is there a “god” in this story?

Jeskai Angel: It would easier to write off references to deity as a way to evoke Roman Catholic France…if there weren’t so many examples. One of the last things OG Anne says to Mia in the original timeline is, “I pray that the gods will smile upon you. May you go with their blessing.” Immediately afterward, Mia dies and travels back in time. Coincidence? Ludwig thinks “Surely, she is a great leader bestowed upon us by the heavens…” The narrator makes light of this, but is attributing the situation to a god really so farfetched? Mia died then traveled back in time eight years, accompanied by a diary stained by her own blood. How? Why? While gods don’t come up in a major way, the visit to the church in the slum is another reminder of religion. After Mia arrives at the academy, the escort captain says “May God be with you in your new life at the academy.” Well, Mia is living a “new life” in more ways than one, and again I must ask: how? I couldn’t help but ponder whether the chill Mia feels when she almost ignores Tiona, that sense that she was at a crossroads, “almost as if… As if the decision had already been made,” might be providential guidance. The narrative here doesn’t mention any god, so maybe I’m reading too much into the scene though. On various occasions people compare Mia to the moon goddess, which doesn’t prove much, but is another way the story keeps reminds us about the idea of gods.

There’s also the Duchy of Belluga / its ruler. They form a clear analogue to the pope / the territory historically ruled by the pope, sometimes called the Papal States. It’s played for humor when Mia writes in her diary, “Basically, being the wise person that I am, God in all His Greatness saw fit to make me the chosen one…To put it simply, it is my duty to save the Empire.” Leaving aside the “wise person” bit, remember we’re dealing with postmortem time travel. Is it really that unreasonable for Mia to see divine providence in this?

Again, maybe all these examples are just meant to give the setting the flavor of eighteenth century Roman Catholicism and don’t imply anything about an active role for deity in the story. But I wonder.

Gaheret: I think that there are three ways religion is present in the story: first, as all time travel stories (I would argue), this is a story concerning a fate or vocation. In this case, it is a vocation. Mia is called to be a force for good, and directed towards that end by Providence. And there is a physical reminder of that mission: the diary. I find it sort of odd that the diary would keep changing, taking into account what she does to the timeline, yet she does not expend all day reading it and searching for a way to change what will happen the next day, given her approach to the rest of what is happening.

The other two are: as a force for justice and charity, which clearly presides both the approach of Rafina and that of the international church which aids in preventing the plague and adopts an orphan boy. Placed at the slums, it works for the poor.

And as a political force, given its role in Rafina´s kingdom. We still don´t know the specifics, it is true. There is a moment when Mia is on the verge of praying, but she does not, and as Jeskai notes, at first she comically reflects that she is chosen by God. Which, being this kind of story, must be literally true. I wonder what will happen if Rafina, Keithwood and the rest will think if they learn of Mia´s experience, and how will they square it with the rest of their beliefs, of which we do not know much.

stardf29: Well, when it comes down to it, there are two clearly supernatural elements in play in the story here: Mia’s return to the past, and also the diary that tells her how events will lead to her execution, which even changes as she performs different actions to account for those and show how they might still lead to doom. With no other obvious magical elements in the story, I have to assume that there’s at least some “god” that is at work here.

The question then is, based on that assumption, how much that god is like the Christian God. The thing here is, we have a situation where this “god” seems to have turned back time in order to change the course of history. Now, the whole concept of time travel is one that is very hard to grasp due to how it seems nearly impossible in real life, to say nothing of its philosophical/theological implications. Is this an actual rewind of time? Is this an alternate universe that had followed the same events of history until the point where Mia basically gains the knowledge of events in a parallel universe? Or was Mia’s past life beyond her reincarnation point basically just one long and extremely visceral prophecy that never actually happened, which was shown to her alongside the diary in order to avert a terrible fate? Each one would have different implications on what the “god” of this world is like. And really, at this point, I have no idea what the case is here. I’m definitely curious on this point, but for now, I can at least appreciate that there are higher powers in play here.

Jeskai Angel: I found it curious that throughout the book, there seemed to references to a variety of deities. One is just called “God.” Another is identified as the “moon goddess.” And there’s also broader mention of “the gods.” It’s unclear to me for now which if any of these is actually “real” in-story.

5. This novel seems to take inspiration from European history, particularly the French Revolution. What do you think about the similarities and differences between the story and the history of our world?

Jeskai Angel: Tearmoon Empire uses its background material quite well. This is not historical fiction, thankfully, just fiction loosely inspired by history. The author paints in broad strokes, piggybacking on popular knowledge of the French Revolution to help tell the story, without being slavishly beholden to historical minutia. A great example of this is the “Let them eat meat” quote attributed to Mia. Marie Antoinette never said “Let them eat cake,” but the quote is so strongly identified with her at a pop culture level that putting a paraphrase of it in Mia’s mouth becomes an effective way to tell readers Mia should bring to mind this historical figure. The rest of the book is similar, using historical allusions or resemblances to give readers a feel for the setting and characters.

I also love the overall premise, using fiction to give a happy ending (or so we hope!) to a tragic historical figure. About a decade ago, I took a course on the French Revolution at FSU, under Professor Rafe Blaufarb. It was my first time studying the French Revolution in any depth, and I came away feeling a lot of sympathy for Louis XVI and Marie. So a story where Marie Mia goes back in time to avert the revolution strongly appeals to me.

stardf29: All I’ll say here is that, whereas it seems like for you two, your interest in the French Revolution got you more interested in Tearmoon Empire, for me, it was the opposite: Tearmoon Empire got me more interested in the French Revolution. So that’s +1 for light novels encouraging academic learning. Yay!

Jeskai Angel: I like that Mia and the Tearmoon government more generally are not simplistically presented as evil. Some are rotten apples, as we see at the highest levels of the nobility, but they weren’t all horrible people. Some, like Ludwig, meant well but lacked power to effect change. Some, like Mia, simply aren’t equipped to deal with the disaster. She was selfish and arrogant in her first life, but hardly a monster. It’s impossible to celebrate her death as the story opens, only pity her. Especially in the first timeline, Mia was flawed yet also faced unfair condemnation. This again fits nicely with history. Despite a few philosophers braying about absolute monarchy, in actual practice Louis XVI’s power was far from absolute. (If France really had been an absolute monarchy, maybe the revolution could have been prevented!) Like Mia, Louis and Marie were not educated and equipped to deal with the challenges they faced. Many of the problems related to the revolution preceded them or were beyond their control. They were flawed and made mistakes, yes, but they weren’t evil monsters who deserved to die.

Gaheret: Yes. And even if that was not the case, the tyranny of the revolutionaries was far worse than that the government of the Monarchy. It actually lead to a period of madness and totalitarian terror, followed by an actual Emperor, Napoleon, that created an actual secret police, tried to conquer the world and assasinated the Duke of Enghien. Among other things, because the old France, with all its flaws, actually had some checks and balances between aristocracy, monarchy, the cities, the customs, the Church…

Jeskai Angel: True. So much unnecessary bloodshed and death.

Gaheret: Discrimination among the three states was one thing. A national Church, the Terror and the massive murder of priests, nobles and people of La Vendee was another, and far worse.

In the case of the Tearmoon Empire, things may be more different, but I´m all for Mia.

6. To what extent do you consider Mia “selfish”? Does her acting primarily out of self-interest diminish the value of her actions?

Jeskai Angel: This comes back around to the issue we keep harping on, that Mia is an impressively realistic example of how complicated we humans are. Undoubtedly, some of what she says and does is ultimately motivated by selfishness. Where the narrator goes wrong, in my view, is in talking as if that selfishness negates everything else. She was selfish, period, end of story. I don’t think that works.

When Mia drags her retainers to the slum and gives away an expensive piece of jewelry to help fund medical care for the indigent, there was certainly some selfishness involved (e.g., I don’t want to die on the guillotine again). But as you read her words on this occasion, is it really plausible that she was acting for purely selfish reasons and completely inadvertently spoke in a way sounded more benevolent? Again I remind the jury that the narrator never suggests Mia was a liar who schemed to trick people into thinking she was kind and good. The narrator just claims Mia is a doofus who expresses herself poorly.

When Mia first encounters Tiona and stands up against the bullies, there was certainly some selfishness involved (e.g., I don’t want to die on the guillotine again). But as you read her words on this occasion, is it really plausible that she was acting for purely selfish reasons and completely inadvertently spoke in a way sounded more benevolent? Again I remind the jury that the narrator never suggests Mia was a liar who schemed to trick people into thinking she was kind and good. The narrator just claims Mia is a doofus who expresses herself poorly.

What is more plausible? That Mia is such a derp that she tries to be selfish and keeps failing at it by accidentally sounding wise and compassionate without meaning to? Or that she isn’t purely selfish and her fine-sounding words and deeds are more genuine than the narrator, and perhaps Mia herself, realize?

I think again of the how before Abel’s fight, Mia tries to think of something clever and diplomatic to say…and then wishes him victory, and, according to the narrator, “let slip her true thoughts.” There’s something similar in the scene where Mia tries to convince herself that Abel is just a little kid and there’s nothing special about being with him, and is puzzled with herself as to why she would be so flustered. Is it not reasonable to suppose to that on other occasions, too, Mia’s motivations may have been less purely selfish and more complex than she and/or the narrator realize?

I think of Jesus’ teaching that a tree is known by its fruit. Mia promotes Anne and protects her from workplace harassment. Mia prevents a good civil servant from losing his job and being banished to the hinterlands for trivial reasons. Mia personally leads an effort to provide medical care for the poor by visiting the slum with her retainers and donating that valuable jewelry. Mia saves Elise’s life by becoming her patron and ensuring she’ll have the income she needs to survive. Mia protects both Tiona and Abel by standing up to bullies (notwithstanding how cowardly the narrator says she is). Mia befriends friendless Chloe. Would a person who isn’t good, and who isn’t trying to look good in front of others, really say and do all this stuff? Going by the “fruit test” Jesus taught, I feel compelled to suspect there’s more good in Mia than she or the narrator are willing to admit.

Yes, there’s some selfishness or other ill motives mixed in, but the same is true for every one of us. Why do we obey God? Because we fear God’s judgment? Because we love God himself? Because we want to avoid a guilty conscience? Because we want to go to heaven? Because we want to look like good people to others? Because…etc.? Who but God can hope to answer these questions? But if partially tainted motives are enough to devalue one’s actions, then nothing anyone does ever has any worth. This is part why reading this book was so powerful for me. As I read this work of fiction, I can see how wrong it is for the narrator to harp so much on Mia’s flaws & use them to ignore or minimize her virtues. And I could see that the same is true of myself. Do I ever act out of purely virtuous motives? Probably not. But that doesn’t justify treating everything I do as having diminished value. I want Mia’s good deeds to matter, despite her selfishness and other flaws, because I want my efforts to do good to matter, despite my selfishness and other flaws.

Gaheret: I would add that, apart from these signs that she cares for others, Abel and Anne especially, saving yourself of three years of imprisonment and of being unjustly condemned to the guillotine is a perfectly reasonable thing to do. The narrator may say that she is a chicken, but it’s not him (presumably) who may go to execution at twenty. But the important thing, in my view, is that she is growing. If she sometimes does good deeds without realizing or intending them, that’s a sign of hope that one day she will, and a gift, too. I am interested in seeing her triumph against her defects, but I find her to be a very enjoyable character just as she is.

stardf29: Okay, so the reason I asked this question was because this book made me think of something. Mainly: is it really that bad to be self-interested? After all, one can argue that all of our actions, even our most “selfless” ones, are ultimately done in our self-interest: we help others at the expense of our short-term interests because we believe doing so will be better for us in the long term. Even something like following Christ and living a Christian life is something Christians do because we believe it is both the best way to live our present life, and also because we believe in great things in the next life.

Maybe, what we think of as “selfishness” is really just “short-sighted self-interest”: doing things only for what we can gain in the short term, without thinking about how it might ultimately hurt us in some way or another. And that leads us to Mia…

Mia’s actions might be supposedly “selfish”, but what is the big difference between her actions in the current timeline versus the past? It’s that now, she’s acting with a far more long-term view of things, in particular how certain actions made with short-term gain in mind may lead to her head rolling in the future. And with that view in mind, the vast majority of her self-interested actions become very helpful to the people around her as well as herself. And that view, likewise, kickstarts her mind into starting to be considerate of others.

The fact that she’s still mainly thinking of her own interests makes for some good comedy, but I think it also reveals an interesting truth in that being self-interested isn’t bad in and of itself. The key is what we decide our self-interests are, whether they be short-term benefits that can bite us later in life, or long-term goals that help us grow and prevent (sometimes literally) painful regrets. And while Mia has room to grow in this way, having a self-interest of “avoid a revolt that will get my head chopped off” is quite a huge… head start.

…I don’t think Mia liked that pun. My apologies.

On that note, one specific example that sticks out to me right now: Mia selling her prized hairpiece in order to help fund a hospital. Her motivation might have been as simple as “that way it won’t end up in the hands of those horrible revolutionaries”, but in that moment, Mia has grasped one of Christianity’s big teachings: the impermanence of physical possessions. Heck, that’s something even I admittedly struggle with sometimes, and Mia has grasped that concept pretty much perfectly. I can’t see that as anything but admirable.

Jeskai Angel: I think maybe the difference between enlightened self-interest and selfishness is not time (i.e., long-term vs. short-term benefits), but that the former does not exclude looking out for the interests of others, and the latter does. A person can act partially out of self-interest without elevating their interest above the good of everyone else, but a truly selfish person is always willing to prioritize themselves over anyone else.

stardf29: I agree with you, but that does bring up an interesting thought: perhaps always prioritizing ourselves over others is the most damaging thing we can do to ourselves.

Also, when I say “short-term” versus “long-term”, I’m not strictly speaking about time, but “scope” in general. Which includes more than just time, but also things like our emotional well-being and other psychological factors that one could probably do an entire graduate thesis on. There’s probably a better phrase than “long-term/short-term” here…

Jeskai Angel: Maybe “long-term” = effort to consider all the consequences, “short-term” = paying attention only to desired consequences?

Gaheret: Well, Aristotle would say that we always move when attracted by goods, which are goods for ourselves and also open to others, as common goods. Freedom consists in the ability to choose one of these goods over others, and a good use of freedom would be the “right reason”, which brings us to the best we can achieve, integrally considered. Good things usually give us some pleasure and are also beneficial in the long term, because they are in accord with our nature. Beyond Aristotle, one could say that such a decision can also be a vehicle of love: you choose to bring good things to your friends that you share, in a way, to remove obstacles, to enjoy reality… Ideally, growing in virtue means also learning to be attracted by higher goods and enjoy them more fully. So, there is always some good for us, direct or indirect, in helping others. We are not totally disinterested: only God is, because God does not need anything, and gives of His abundance.

So, in this view, the problem with being an egoist is that either one does not follow the right reason because of a blind spot concerning others, as in the one who eats all the cake when it would be best to enjoy it together, or that one loses part of the good he could enjoy. For example, if Mia defends Tiona without thinking about Tiona herself, she gets less of that interaction that if she appreciated the good there is in defending others when they need it.

This sometimes happens to her, but less and less. She is not so clueless now, and growing.

7. What are your favorite quotes or moments from the novel?

Jeskai Angel: How am I supposed to answer this?! There are SO MANY wonderful lines and scenes in this book. For sheer awesomeness, I think it’s hard to top the scene where Mia rescues Tiona from the bullies:

“Excuse me, but what exactly are you girls doing? …It seemed to me that you were behaving rather rudely toward one of my subjects. …You see, I love all my subjects, and I love them equally. Even the child of the poorest beggar shall not be denied my affection. No matter who they are, so long as they belong to the Empire, I will not condone any discourtesy toward them.”

If any scenes rivals the above, it might be the duel between Abel and The Artist Formerly Known As Remno’s First Prince, especially after Abel hears his brother trashtalk Mia and threaten to abuse her:

“‘You can call me whatever you want. Mock me. Insult me. I don’t care. But,’ Abel stared at his brother with a piercing gaze, ‘if you say one more bad word about Princess Mia…’ He thought of the girl known as ‘the Great Sage of the Empire.’ He thought of the light she’d brought to his world. For her to be robbed of that radiant aura… Was absolutely unacceptable. …’I won’t allow you to insult her any further!'”

Cue the OHKO.

On a humorous note, I’ll offer the scene before that fight: “Mia didn’t actually think badly of Abel’s brother. She… didn’t think anything of him at all, in fact. She’d completely forgotten he existed until this very moment.” What makes this so great is that throughout the book, Mia keeps forming connections she didn’t have in her first life, seeking allies, making a point of remembering names and faces; she is far more humble and caring and interested in other people than she was in her first life. She even remembers the names of other people’s servants! The ONLY person in the whole story she so completely disregards in her second life…is Abel’s brother.

Gaheret: When the worldbuilding started becoming evocative and unique for me: “The Azure Moon Ministry was the administrative agency for the capital city. The Golden Moon Ministry handled taxes. The Scarlet Moon Ministry was the administrative agency for the surrounding rural regions. The Jade Moon Ministry handled foreign affairs. Finally, the Ebony Moon Ministry commanded the seven armies of the empire”.

Despite not liking Sion on the whole, I agree with Jeskai that this fragment about him is quite compelling:

“To Sion, the ability to feel righteous fury — to be justly angry in the face of evil deeds — was an essential quality for those who reigned over the people. However, how many people could truly empathize with the suffering of others? How many could go as far as to feel anger as if they themselves had been wronged? Even Sion, who had been ready to step in himself, would have done so out of a sense of duty. It came from the mind, not the heart. Faced with Mia’s genuine anger toward injustice, he felt that he saw in her the makings of a ruler who truly lived up to his ideals”.

“Sion Sol Sunkland was born the eldest son of the King of Sunkland. “He who reigns over the people must believe firmly in fairness and hold justice close to his heart.”

This was funny, too:

“Unbeknownst to her, the “knowledge” that she was counting on was entirely based on the romance novel Anne’s sister had written. In other words… Not once did she suspect that Anne — five years her senior — was a complete novice at relationships who had never herself been in love before. “How promising,” she said, completely unaware of her terrible misconception. “With you at my side, Anne, I feel as though I’ve gained an army ten thousand strong!”

This was a great way to introduce a character:

“Abel Remno knew he was a loser. Likewise, he knew Remno was a second-rate kingdom. It possessed neither the rich history and tradition of Sunkland nor the sheer might of Tearmoon. Outmatched by even Belluga in influence and authority, it failed to garner any real respect from its neighbors”.

And this one, again about Abel:

“He focused every ounce of his efforts on one single thing. He raised his sword, and he swung it down. He repeated it. Then he did it again, faster. And faster. He devoted all his time to honing the motion. Ever since the night of the dance party, he’d done nothing else. Day after day, he poured his heart and soul into practicing that one swing. And now, after all the sweat and fatigue and pain, it was time. He swung. Today, he would conquer genius. Today, he would slay a god!”

stardf29: So as I mentioned earlier, one of my favorite moments is when Mia sold her beloved hairpin in order to help fund a hospital to prevent a plague. Two great quotes to go with this moment:

“No matter how precious the item, no matter how closely you try to hold onto it, there will be a day… It may go missing, or it may break… but its time will come. Knowing this, the most we can do is to use it well, and thereby give it meaning.”

And then, for something on the funnier side:

And not only was it stolen, it was stolen by a hooligan of a man, rude and violent and with entirely too much beard to be proper. Not that it’d be okay if she was robbed by a handsome fellow with a dashing crop of finely kempt hair, but anyway…

And then a bit later, during a tea party:

“Whatever I did, I did following my heart. There’s no deeper meaning to it than that.” Which was really just a more diplomatic version of, “What? I did it ’cause I wanted to. Got a problem with that, punk?”

Later on, Mia forgives a horse for sneezing on her:

“Oh please. Why would I possibly want to have a horse killed over a dress?”

For Mia, it was extremely obvious which one was more valuable. A dress couldn’t help her run from the revolutionary army. A horse could.

And, finally, the one point where I am in complete solidarity with the narrator:

Anne and Tiona seemed equally mesmerized by the two princes as they watched with wide, spellbound eyes. As for Liora… She poked at the meat in the sandwich, confirmed that it was well-roasted, and nodded to herself in satisfaction.

Liora, you see, was a girl who knew what was important.

8. Final Comments

Jeskai Angel: I want to express how greatly I appreciated many-short-chapters format of the book. So many LNs have like three 80-page chapters, and it’s stupid. Like, if the chapters are obnoxiously long, why bother with any chapter divisions at all? As Tearmoon Empire demonstrates, chapter divisions are not some kind of natural resource that needs to be rationed. The capacity to include another chapter break in a book is never depleted. Please, authors the world over, if you’re reading this, I beg of you, write using more but shorter chapters. Please and thank you.

stardf29: I think the whole “having lots of chapters” thing is left over from the novel’s origins as a web novel, where it’s more natural to just post a small chapter regularly. Though many such web novels, upon transitioning to light novel form, get several small chapters combined into larger chapters. So this might be more of an editorial decision. Maybe it’s because in Japan, light novels are still a largely physical medium, and combining chapters saves paper by reducing page breaks? It’s definitely better for e-books to have more chapters because it’s easier to jump to a specific part of the book with hyperlinked table of contents.

Whatever the case, looks like Tearmoon Empire kept all of its chapters in the transition to light novel form. Maybe it’s because each chapter has a witty little title? So maybe the real advice is not just to write lots of small chapters, but to give each chapter a title so that your editor has a reason not to combine them all into larger chapters.

Gaheret: I can´t wait for the next volume! I want it to go full French Revolution.

Jeskai Angel: According to the Amazon page for vol. 2 (which becomes available 19 July), the next book does feature a revolution.

Earlier when we were speculating about the narrator, someone (Gaheret, I think?) suggested the narrator might be an older Mia in the future. But I remembered a certain comment by the narrator, about how Mia disliked her bad ending so much, she restarted the whole game to play over again. It’s an obvious video game joke. But assuming Mia’s world is reminiscent of late 18th/early 19th century France, an older Mia wouldn’t have the frame of reference to make such a comment.

stardf29: Ah yes, there is that to take into account. So… maybe the narrator is one of Mia’s descendants, after Mia has told of her story to her family and they started to realize how things got misunderstood, and then as her story continued to be passed down the generations, that sentiment that she was “misunderstood” also got embellished. In this way, the somewhat unreliableness of the narrator can be explained.

As a final comment for me, I should say that I really like the illustrations in this volume. They are clean, cute, and show quite a lot of emotion. I definitely wish there were more of them, but we still got a good batch here.

=====

Whew, that was a lot to talk about! Of course, we would love to hear what you think about the novel, so post your own answers and thoughts in the comments!

As a reminder, we will be discussing Infinite Dendrogram, Vol. 4 next! The discussion for that will be posted on June 23rd. See you then!

#Light Novels #Christianity #Tearmoon Empire #Tearmoon Teikoku Monogatari #Articles #Author: stardf29 #Author: JeskaiAngel #Author: Gaharet

3 notes · View notes

teabooksandsweets · 4 years

Text

Sayers in the Archipelago

I need to write down a few thoughts on Dorothy L. Sayers and her place in the Archipelago of Dreams. I haven’t actually given this possiblity much thought at all until lately, and now I am really curious about it.

As far as I can remember, she was not mentioned in the books, but then again, I really often wrote about my headcanon of Hope Mirrlees as a Mystorian until I realized in a re-read that she actually is one, and that she is in the center of an illustration (and very visibly so!) and that I probably only learned about her through CotIG, so I have to be really honest: Dorothy L. Sayers might have had an appearance or mention in the books and I either missed or forget it.

At any rate, I am pretty sure that she’s not a Caretaker, since she’s too old to not have been mentioned as one in the books (unlike younger authors, who have been alluded to as apprentices, like Madeleine l’Engle), but I absolutely cannot imagine that she is not somehow involved with the works of the Archipelago.

I mean – the general nature of her writings, the theological aspects, Oxford, and, yes, also Lord Peter’s personality.

A Lord Peter Wimsey story (partly) in the Archipelago of Dreams, and generally in a CotIG-environment would work really well, without a doubt. Especially in his early years before, during, or shortly after the war, perhaps involved somehow with the development of his mental health; but also in his later years.

But to go back to Ms Sayers, I think she might have been a Mystorian, but for some reason that doesn’t fit right. Just as I sometimes think of someone rather as a Mystorian than a Caretaker, I think neither position really fits her. I think she might be something different altogether, perhaps a messenger, or some other sort of “free” ally of the Caretakers.

And Lord Peter (and Bunter) might also be some sort of messengers, or Peter is really, actually a detective in the Archipelago, or in matters of interdimensional criminality, which would be actually really cool. With all the matters of politics and wars in both series, I really think it would be interesting to connect Peter’s own war experiences to experiences in the Archipelago (just as is the case with John, Jack and Charles) but also that maybe some of his pre-WWII trips around Europe were...trips to the Archipelago of Dreams!

Also...who is Harriet Vane? Is she an different version of Dorothy L. Sayers from a different dimension (like Ransom is of Charles) or is she a normal person from the Summer Country? And if she is the latter, does Peter introduce her to the Archipelago, or not, or does she know it on her own?

Oh, and...by the way: if you’re familiar with CotIG but not with Dorothy L. Sayers and her books, you probably don’t wonder about this post, but if it is the other way round...don’t worry, please. This is just a harmless headcanon about a sort of crossover to a different book series, which happens to be a sort of crossover of impossibly many different stories, including real people, most of them authors.

Edit: Important addition! I am absolutely sure that Peter’s early journeys were (at least partly) with Bunter, and that first Bunter, and later Harriet took Harriet. The only other person who knows about his travels there is his mother, who believed him immedietly, without questioning anything of it, when he told her about him. The only thing she did ask, was whether Lewis Carroll would sign her favourite copy of Alice. He did.

Also, Jack’s own allegorical experiences with Nemo are exactly the sort of thing I have in mind with Peter – both traumatic experiences that mirror his experiences of the war in the Summer Country, and a sort of relief that helped him cope that he could only get in the Archipelago.

I also think that Jack was a strong connection for Dorothy L. Sayers to the Caretakers in some way or the other. Which does not mean that she didn’t find there very well of her own.

I first thought that maybe Peter was actually a person from the Archipelago who inspired Dorothy, as is so often the case with the authors who went there, but the idea of Peter being from here is much more beautiful. But there may be someone from the Archipelago, maybe an alternate version of someone of them, or maybe Bunter? or an alternate Bunter? I don’t know. At any rate, Peter is from the Summer Country, and since he’s quite used to actual ghosts, his pretty open for all those things. And, yeah, Oxford. But still...someone has to be from a different world, and some mysterious connections for Bunter just feel right.

Also, I think John Donne might be a Mysterian, and if he is, then he’s seen as the odd one among them, in the way Schubert is among the Caretakers.

Just another addition: I have so many feelings about this. There are so many possibilities. It just fits so neatly. I mean, both Dorothy L. Sayers as the real-life author who is connected to the Archipelago, as well as Lord Peter Wimsey as the fictional character who is absolutely real (within the fictional reality) which also fits so well with the fact that Peter is often presented as a real person, with her chronicling his life. (And doesn’t it often seem as if Scowler Jack was writing about real children?) And just think of Doctor Baum, really enjoying a Dorothy travellint to another world. And just think of all the badgers just lovng her, because she smelled of Oxford.

#cotig #dorothy l. sayers #lord peter wimsey #literature

2 notes · View notes

jeannereames · 5 years

Note

hi if it's not a too personal question to ask how did you come to be interested in history/antiquity/alexander..? I mean did you always like it as a child? or how did it start?

It’s not too personal, and in fact, I LIKE to tell this story, as I’m the definition of coming in the back door, which might encourage others.

Understand, I’m a chick from the other side of the tracks. My generation was the first to get a college education, and I’m among the few to go on to grad school, especially not professional *(e.g., law or med school). I was lower middle-class growing up. My father is from one of the two poorest families in Jackson County, S. Illinois before (and after) WWII. My mother was better off, her father a successful farmer and carpenter, but the Brouillettes had been Catholic (even if he wasn’t), and (worse) they had Indian blood.

There was no silver spoon in my mouth. I had better: wonderful parents who cheer-leaded me all the way. So if you disbelieve a father as great as Amyntor could exist? That’s MY parents. Amyntor-Berenikē are real, and their names were Ed and Idalee. Rise is dedicated to my father. Some of us get that lucky, and I’m HUGELY aware of my fortune, especially as I aged and realized my fellows didn’t have parents like mine. So Hephaistion’s desire to share his father with Alexandros? That was me. All my friends came to my house to visit my mother.

My love of history owes entirely to HER. She loved history, and understood it was about the stories of people. But my elementary and junior high history teachers made it about “kings-n-things” with lots of dates, etc.

So I HATED history.

I hated it all through regular school, then my tenure at UF, where (despite being a humanities major) I AVOIDED all history classes except one, an elective on the history of the Early Church. I think it’s pretty much a crime that a humanities major anywhere can graduate without a history class. WTF?

Yet it’s all the fault of poorly taught history. Plus, yes, younger students are less inclined to understand why it matters. Not all, but a substantial portion regularly return surveys saying history doesn’t matter because it’s the past, not the future.

Back to my clever mother. Instead of teaching me history, she told me about my family: the story of my ancestors, my people, including my tribe (Miami-Peoria). I was routinely hauled around to cemeteries as a kid, shown where my people were buried, and then told stories about them. Respect for Elders and the ancestors is a native thing. Yet I became fascinated, constructed family trees, and tried to trace back their stories, as most of my mother’s family were French who came in the 1600s/early 1700s, or Native Americans. My father’s family were more recent immigrants, but it all made a wonderful puzzle.

The story of me.

That’s history. The story of us, more broadly.

And so my clever, sneaky mother taught me to love history by coming in the back door.

Yet as a teen and undergrad, my interest in other cultures were largely Celtic and Scandinavian. I was introduced to J.R.R. Tolkien as a teen and remain a HUGE fan. My “home” fiction genre, insofar as I have one, is SFF (science fiction and fantasy), where a number of my friends publish. So I resisted the whole “Classical” field until quite late. Latin was the most popular language at my HS (Lakeland Dreadnoughts), and had the most active student group… so of course I refused to join! Never was a follower. I took German instead. In college, I took RUSSIAN, just to be different.

My undergrad degree was a BA in English, with a concentration in creative writing and a minor in acting. My M.A. was in theology and early church history. While at the Candler School of Theology, Emory, I kept hearing about this dude, “Alexander the Great.” I had NO idea who that was. (That’s how bad my previous history education had been.) Yet as he seemed so pivotal in cultural transfer, east to west and west to east, I wandered over to the Emory library to check out a couple of bios.

By chance, they were N.G.L. Hammond’s King, Commander and Statesman, and Peter Green’s (original, Thames-on-Hudson, later re-released by U. Cal Press) Alexander of Macedon.

I literally couldn’t have picked two more different bio’s if I’d tried.

AND HE FASCINATED ME. Who was this KID, who conquered most of his known world by 32, but generated such different evaluations, positive to negative?

Like Alexander, I’m a bit inclined to … obsess?

So I kept reading, and reading, and reading (articles, not just books), and then got into Macedonia (which then in the 1980s, was mostly articles).

By the early 1990s, I’d decided I wanted to study him professionally, not just to write a novel about him, so on the urging of Judy Tarr, I called Gene Borza at Penn State. He was my #1 choice to study with (in the US) as I’d admired his honesty to reply to those who disagreed with him, not just ignore them. So Gene asked me what I’d read, and I started reciting my list, until he said, “Stop, stop! You’ve already read more than most of my current PhD students!” He encouraged me to apply.

Ergo, if my BA was in English, and my MA in Theological studies, and I’d originally intended to go on to a PhD in the latter, I sent off ONE application—to Penn State—for history.

Guess which one offered funding (e.g., a graduate assistantship).

I wound up at Penn State, studying Macedonian history with “Aristotle” (e.g, Gene Borza, whose resemblance to the philosopher is a wee bit uncanny). It was, I think, the best choice I could have made. I remain Gene’s “academic daughter,” and Book 1, Becoming, is dedicated to him due to Aristotle’s prominence, while book 2 is dedicated to my father, Ed Reames, because he’s the model for Amyntor.

So yes…there IS a backdoor for those of us determined enough. But be aware, the handicap never goes away. I face it every single day. My Latin and Greek wasn’t “good enough,” and I don’t have the extensive reading in Classics that someone with a BA in Classics would have. But I DO bring my diverse previous experience. I have a background in bereavement counselling and ER on-call duty that allows me to look at Alexander’s mourning and such events as the Philotas Affair with experience most of my colleagues (however good their Greek and Latin) don’t have.

So be prepared to justify your existence to your colleagues who had Latin in high school and pursued a BA in Classics or ancient history. Don’t apologize.

And those of you who DO have the above, remember, there are a couple of us out there, scrappy and “previously untrained” who loved the field enough to work our asses off to get a degree, and eventually, a job. So unlike some of my colleagues at Penn State, don’t snort and look down on your unusual fellows. Help them out.

I’ll also note that of the students I entered with? Only two of us received the PhD. Tim Howe, my academic brother who came with better prep, teaches today at St. Olaf’s in Minnesota. But dammit, I fought my way through. And I finished, and I’m at a uni that, with my colleagues, created an Ancient Mediterranean Studies Program at the BA/BS and MA level. I’m damn proud of that.

The field has changed since I applied to grad school in 1991, I won’t lie. Tenure-track jobs in the US, especially in ancient history and Classics, have turned into unicorns. Other countries are different. But if you are determined enough, and damn stubborn enough, you might be able to carve your own path, as long as you keep an eye on the current state of the field. I won’t lie to anybody about how few ancient history and Classics jobs are out there on H-Net these days. BUT don’t let the afternoon-tea set make you feel less than them: “imposter’s syndrome” for pursuing a PhD in ancient history or Classics. Some of those Classics blue-bloods won’t get a job, at the end of the day.

I am THE definition of an “imposter’s syndrome” faculty member who succeeded. And I don’t give a good goddamn what anybody thinks of me. I excel at what I do, and I’m proud of it.

#classics #Classics in the back door #ancient history #stubborn ancient historians #realities of the field #asks #Jeanne Reames #ancient Macedonia #degrees in history #advanced degrees in history

9 notes · View notes

ivnwrites · 5 years

Text

How Asuka Langley Soryu is a realistic portrayal of teenage female sexuality

Neon Genesis Evangelion is a legendary science fiction and mecha anime created by Hideaki Anno in 1995 (though there's some heated debate over the second designation given the reality of the evangelions). It's noted for its psychological and theological discussions and its questions about humanity, loneliness, and what it means to live with other people. The main characters have also achieved this sort of legendary status, becoming easily recognizable, but they also are notable just for how well they're written.

Asuka Langley Soryu is one of the main eva pilots and, I am going to be talking about how she is depicted in terms of her developing romantic and sexual awareness in the series and how it's still one of the most accurate depictions of female adolescent sexuality in any media.(I am doing this as a currently 21 year old woman who went through being a 14 year old girl)

Asuka fits almost perfectly into the mold of a traditional mecha anime protagonist; we're told that she got her college degree at 13, she's an ace pilot, she's assertive and much more determined than the actual main character, and has a dead parent. But Evangelion isn't a traditional mecha anime so none of this happens without consequence. Asuka's accomplishments and her need to be the "best" are shown to be the result of her desperation not to be ignored. This in turn stems from her mother's insanity during which she thought a doll was Asuka and couldn't recognize her own daughter. Needing her mother to see her is so important and fundamental to her character that knowing her mother is still literally there 'watching over her' inside the eva is enough to pull her out of complete catatonia in the series ending. This background allows Asuka to have more depth than a traditional character who is simply portrayed as sexy with no knowledge of it or acknowledgement from other characters in the series, making her simply eye candy for the audience but has no ownership of her own body.

The most famous (infamous?) scene that needs to included in this discussion happens when she is attacked by Arael in episode 22 and has her mental breakdown, we see a snippet a the scene I'll talk about later with Kaji. It repeats over and over the last moment when she yanks open her shirt to expose her bra and the top of her breasts and screams "Look at me, dammit, look at me!" As a result of her mental state, we don't know if this is what actually happened, but that doesn't matter because the scene tells us that this is part of how Asuka thinks of her body in her own mind. One analysis I've read talked about this scene as Asuka's frustration that "her body isn't developed or adult in the way she wishes it was." I agree with this, and also read the scene as her sort of trying to physically reinforce her assertion that she's an adult, and her saying 'I have an adult body, why don't you want me?'

This frustration and anger stems from the conflicting messages that girls receive. They're told at various young ages that they're women just because of their bodies development. Growing breasts mean that they are "getting a woman's body," they "become women" when they start menstruating. However, these physical experiences are universal, and pay no heed to a girl's individual mental development. Physical changes can only exacerbate this, because girls see their bodies matching those of women, and so does society at large. Girls the world over start to be treated as adults the instant they start developing breasts when it comes to seeing them as sexual objects, but at the same time, they are still belittled and told that they aren't smart enough to know their own bodies. Girls are also told that they supposedly mature faster than boys, and all of this together creates a strange conflict where girls are at the same time told that they are supposed to be adults and yet only treated as adults when it is convenient for those around them, or when they do something wrong, otherwise they are seen as foolish children. "Save the world, but don't expect your emotional turmoil to be taken seriously."

This can be seen clearly in her relationship with Kaji. Throughout the series, Asuka is shown to be infatuated with him, even though he’s in his 30s and already in an on-again-off-again relationship with Misato. He's shown openly flirting with other adult characters in the series, and multiple characters even get in cracks about it, but from his first appearance onward, he brushes off every one of her advances. We see what is perhaps the most significant their interactions during the Arael scene. The audience is shown a flashback to the two of them having a nighttime conversation on the deck of a ship while they're traveling to Japan from Germany during which she tries somewhat clumsily to seduce(?) him and convince him that she's not interested in anyone else. His ultimate response is to tell her that she's still a child and doesn't have to rush into everything because she still has time.

In reality, it isn't rare for teenagers to develop crushes on adults in addition to their peers. In real girls, the same way as in the series, they can see it as a sign that they are more mature than their peers or even more ready for an 'adult' relationship than those around them. Asuka has what is probably the best outcome; the subject of her affection turns her down but is otherwise kind, as are the other adults around her. In the end it's her own deeper unacknowledged problems that cause the situation to spiral. The problem is that unlike in the series, there often seems to be no way for girls to win psychologically. In real life, if a girl's feelings are returned this leads to obvious problems, and public rejection can lead to ridicule. Girls are blamed for mistakes on the one hand, and belittled on the other. They aren't given the compassion and understanding that they need most at those times.

Through her interactions with Kaji, we can see the disconnect between Asuka's desire to be seen as an adult and her actual actions. She become hyper, somewhat aggressive, and slightly possessive when Kaji is around, becoming frustrated when the relationship between him and Misato rekindles. From Asuka's perspective, she can't see why she isn't the better choice. As discussed above, she sees her physical body as functionally the same as all the other women Kaji expresses even passing interest in, and psychologically she sees herself as more mature than Misato (and she is both right and wrong depending on which aspect of their personalities you examine, but that's a whole unrelated issue). The problem is that she has no idea what the adults around her are thinking; an adult man will not be attracted to an adolescent girl, and though all of the women around her can see that this is just a teenage crush, Asuka herself doesn't have the life experience to know this yet. This, combined with her fear of being ignored, means that what is actually a perfectly reasonable rejection registers to her as abandonment.

We can see this even more clearly if we look at her relationship with Shinji. The two of them are the same age, classmates, living together with Misato, both lost their mothers at a young age, both pilot the evangelions, and have grudging sexual tension that persists to the very end. Despite this, their personalities are pretty much incompatible. The line that is most iconic between them is Asuka's "what are you, stupid?" (the english dub's version of her japanese line "Anta baka?" basically asking 'are you dumb?'). Shinji is a lot more timid and less self confident than Asuka, and she frequently is shown literally pushing him around. We see in other parts of the series that he is attracted to her but is too intimidated by her to really be able to do anything.

At one point when the two are alone at home, she kisses him, explicitly stating that it's because she's bored. It predictably doesn't go well, with Shinji just standing there frozen until Asuka backs away and then runs to the bathroom to dramatically rinse her mouth out, declaring that she should never kiss to kill time. It's played as a funny scene, but later we see that it actually had a deep effect on Asuka. It's implied that she did see Shinji as a potential romantic interest, but saw his silence and his lack of engagement with her as rejection, and this along with his improvement as a pilot over the series leads her to resent him more and more. During her mental breakdown, Asuka sees an image of his face and screams "You won't help me! You won't even hold me! You're no one! No one!"

In her mind, she has been rejected by all of the people sh's approached romantically. This leads her to feel unwanted and she starts to draw in on herself, and her feeling of animosity grow to encompass all of the characters in the series. In the same episode as her breakdown, she's shown standing naked in front of a bathtub (see note below) saying how much she hates having to be so close to Misato and Shinji. She become more and more worked up until she kicks something across the room yelling "I hate Misato, and I hate Shinji, and I hate that First Child bitch Rei! I hate my dad, I hate my mom! But mostly, most of all, I hate myself! I hate this! I can't stand it anymore! Why do I have to do this! Why me?!"

It is intriguing that Asuka, and the other female characters in Evangelion who show similar insight, came from the mind of an unmarried (at the time), childless man in his mid-30s. Anno himself says that "I like to read romance novels written by women. Since I'm a male, I don't really know the emotions of women. And because I want to understand their feelings, and create more realistic female characters, this is something I have to pursue." and there are plenty of accounts of him asking female animators and voice actresses for their input on characters to ensure that they were realistic. Because of this, Anno allows Asuka to express some of the frustration teenage girls feel with their bodies, and manages to walk the thin line of making Asuka real as a burgeoning sexual being without crossing into the sexualization of a minor.

Note: It is uncomfortably easy to find sexual art and dolls of the underage main female characters in the series but none of this comes from the series itself (there is one character who provides occasional 'fanservice', but she is an adult woman in her 30s). In the actual anime, nudity is not treated sexually, rather it is used to represent and heighten characters' feelings of vulnerability and isolation, reinforcing the idea that characters have been left completely alone with nothing except for their own skin, and at times not even that. Despite this, fans in Japan fixated on the character Rei Ayanami, which Anno attributed to the fact that "They can't handle strong women such as Misato and Asuka." This is even more unfortunate because it abandons the character's stoic loyalty and dive into self reflection midway through the series in favor of reducing Rei to an injured quivering victim using just the visuals of episode 1 (though once again, there's character traits there that are ignored as well). The most important part to say about this is also the fact that both Rei and Asuka are 14 YEARS OLD IN THE SERIES. For god's sake Japanese men, WHY!

Another Note: Actually I can explain why; the age of consent in Japan is 13 which has led to entire industries based on the exploitation of teenage girls, which means that child prostitution and pornography are rampant. Essentially, pedophilia is totally legal in Japan, in addition to child pornography as long as it isn't of real people, meaning that pedophilic anime and manga are totally legal, because easily available child pornography has 0 negative impacts, right? (WRONG). industries based on exploiting young girls: https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia_pacific/for-vulnerable-high-school-girls-in-japan-a-culture-of-dates-with-older-men/2017/05/15/974146c4-035d-11e7-9d14-9724d48f5666_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.a58a262e1867 child pornography laws in Japan: http://time.com/2892728/japan-finally-bans-child-pornography/ https://www.bbc.co.uk/bbcthree/article/57eaaf23-0cef-48c8-961f-41f2563b38aa

#neon genesis evangelion #asuka langley soryou #analysis #character analysis #evangelion #this turned out longer than I expected

52 notes · View notes

hidetothink · 5 years

Note

I have a question about your experience in the church if that's okay. Do you feel like it's possible for Christians to be supportive of you and love you whilst also thinking homosexuality is sinful? I'm sorry bc I'm not sure if this is a stupid question but I hope it makes sense. Do you feel like the doctrine breeds hostility and homophobia in every Christian even though the message of Jesus was actually to love indiscriminately? Is it possible to do these things simultaneously? Thank you

“Do you feel like it’spossible for Christians to be supportive of you and love you whilst alsothinking homosexuality is sinful? I’m sorry bcI’m not sure if this is a stupid question but I hope it makes sense.”

-Not a stupid question atALL. It’s one I have to ask myself very often, honestly, since most of myfamily and two of my closest friends are somewhere on the “it’s wrong to havehomosexual intercourse” spectrum. For instance, by Aunt thinks it’s morally wrongand two men dating is yucky. My uncle thinks it’s wrong to the extent I’mkiiiiind of afraid he would violently hurt me if he saw me with another man.Meanwhile, my best friends, last we talked about the issue, said “it’s possiblethat’s what the Bible means, but we aren’t sure….”

Honestly….I think the answer to your question is complex

On one hand, I know manygay people feel that unless you cannot love them while believing homosexual “expression”is morally wrong. Or even that there is some difference in the moral goodness ofsame-sex couples versus opposite-couples. And on some level, I am one of these people

Every gay person who livesin connection with organized religion has a complex relationship betweenthemselves, their loved ones, and this issue. And honestly, I feel out of placecalling any of their convictions on this question wrong. I know that’s a littletoo far on the “well everything is subjective” side of rhetoric, but Isimply can’t….argue with a gay man or lesbian when they say that refusing tosee homosexuality as morally neutral means refusing to love them

So I’ll only answer for myself

And it’s complicated

On one hand, I think theanswer is easy

If I met a new friend and foundout they believed homosexuality was immoral, I would drop them. Full stop. I don’twant that in my life anymore. I don’t want those kinds of people in my life anymore.I would say that these people, no matter what they claim, do not love me. Youcannot exist in our world, in our homophobic reality, and still hold those beliefswithout sacrificing genuine love for me

But then it gets messy

My dad, when I first cameout, had no qualms in treating me the same way. Honestly, we had a betterrelationship because I wasn’t hiding my self-loathing anymore and could get professionalhelp for my mental illness. However, this peace was partially influenced by thefact that I came out with the caveat that I still saw homosexuality as sinfuland would never “act on it” by way of dating, relationships, marriage, orsex. My dad held the opinion, and even said it out loud, that “whatmatters most is that you know I love you and you know what’s right.”

This would make thingstricky when shit hit the fan and I came out AGAIN, this time saying that I’mgay AND I’m not going cut love out of my life anymore. Suddenly my dad has towrestle with his two major concerns: that I know he loves me and that I know “what’sright” (in this case that homosexuality is wrong and I cannot follow God completelywhile believing and acting otherwise). Which is going to win out?

My dad, in a very incharacter moment, just…didn’t talk about it

I remember overhearing himtalk with my mom and say “I just can’t talk about this, I’m not going totalk about this” when she tried to ask what he felt about my announcement. Thiswent on for several months. Luckily I was away at college so there wasn’t a lotof tension. I knew something like this would happen. I had braced myself

But then….he slowlychanged. Even before he reached the point of accepting my sexuality asperfectly healthy and normal (which is where I think he is now, he’s hard to read),he started to talk about things. He told me that he would be at my wedding, nomatter what. He listened to me when I talked about unhealthy relationships andtheir effect on me. Even though he, internally, held a certain belief, hisexternal actions were…supportive and, dare I say, loving (?)

So it becomes a complexquestion

If love is an action, notjust an emotion, was my father loving me despite not supporting thathomosexuality can be morally expressed?

Honestly…I don’t know

Maybe I’m just thankfulthat he did what he did. Maybe I’ve set the bar very low. In some ways, I thinkI have. However, at the same time….I question wonder….if someone believesthat you are doing something wrong but genuinely treats you no differently thananyone else, or actively takes actions of love, where does that leave you?

Two of my best friendsdon’t know where to land on the homosexuality issue. Quote: “it feels likeboth sides have good theological arguments.” However, at the end of the day,they still treat me like all their other friends. They ask me about my datinglife, they encourage me to find someone, they support me when I get my heartbroken

So again, it becomes aquestion, where does the importance lie: in the beliefs, or the embodiedactions? Both? Neither?

I don’t think you can lovethe sinner and hate the sin when hating the sin means treating people as lesseror different. Hate and love are actions

But can you ideologically condemn the “sin” and still take actionsof love? And if you do…are those actions still love? And if they are, are YOU aloving person despite your beliefs?

When it comes to the people like my father and friends…I end upunable to answer…

“Do you feel like the doctrine breedshostility and homophobia in every Christian even though the message of Jesuswas actually to love indiscriminately? Is it possible to do these thingssimultaneously?”

Short answer, yes, absolutely.

There’s a reason why I don’t sayflatly that you can see homosexuality as sinful and still love gay people. Thepeople who I think get closest are literally the most influential people in mylife who I may honestly just be giving a break

The problem that comes with saying “Jesusloved everyone so why do Christians not love gay people” is that Jesus DOESN’Ttell you to accept every part of the people you love. Jesus calls you to loveyour neighbor but still see their wrongful actions as wrong. So when you alsobelieve that homosexuality is wrong, you believe that LOVING gay people meansNOT ACCEPTING that their love is ever good

If the belief that homosexuality is(in any way) morally lesser than heterosexuality (I would agree with thisstatement) then yes, the current sexuality doctrine of mainstream evangelicalisminherently breeds and generates homophobia.

And I believe that in most cases, thisleads naturally to hostility as these people fail to actually interact with andmaintain any relationships with real gay people. You get a large socialcommunity which views something as morally reprehensible, and then fails tointeract in any way with those same people they judge, and also has a doctrineof working to change the world and make it more of “The Kingdom of God on earth”,and you have a storm brewing

I simply cannot look at the instrumentalways that evangelical Christianity has helped form, maintain, and strengthenthe institutional homophobia in my country without coming to the conclusionthat “condemning homosexuality” at a religious, doctrinal level will not INEVITABLYand UNAVOIDABLY create real-world damage against gay men and lesbians

In some ways this contradicts my lastanswer, so make of that what you will, haha

#long post

8 notes · View notes

jewishconvertthings · 5 years

Note

What’s the difference(s) between a reform conversion and an orthodox one? I converted reform, had my biet din a few months ago, and plan on staying in the reform tradition. I know, however, reform conversions are not recognized really, and I was considering converting through orthodox as well. I already eat kosher, observe all but 2 mitzvot (mixed cloth and astrology are hard to quit), and study Judaism extensively. Would this make sense/be possible? [also I’m vaguely nb so orthodox could be eh]

Hi anon,

There’s a couple questions here, so I’m going to break it down into sections based on the questions you’ve asked:

1) What’s the difference between an orthodox conversion and a Reform conversion?

So there are quite a few differences between Reform conversions and orthodox conversions. Reform conversions, as I’m sure you’re aware, require a period of study - either individual study guided by a rabbi or through a class, usually a full year of community participation to experience all of the holidays, and then a beit din. Although the traditional requirements of mikveh immersion and (when relevant) circumcision are typically done/required by individual rabbis, the Reform movement as a whole only recommends, but does not require them. Notably, there is no requirement that a person undergo kabbalat mitzvot - that is, make a promise to accept responsibility for full observance of the mitzvot/to enter into the Covenant as a binding, lifelong agreement. Certainly, the Reform movement requires converts to accept some kind of responsibility to have a relationship with the mitzvot and to engage the ones that are spiritually meaningful, but it is not the same as accepting the Covenant as strictly binding.

In an orthodox conversion, a lot more is required. Timing-wise, what I’ve been told by folks who converted orthodox is that it can take around two to three (or more) years for someone coming in without a Jewish background, because you not only need to learn how to be fully shomer mitzvot, you actually have to become fully shomer mitzvot. That involves a huge amount of time, energy, effort, and expense. The amount of learning and knowledge base required is also much greater (please see this list as the reading list for the Chicago beit din, for example.) One of the converts whose process I was aware of was studying Gemara in Aramaic before his beit din.

As for observance, if you are not already living near enough to your orthodox shul to walk on every Shabbat and Yom Tov, you’ll need to literally move close enough so that you can. If your wardrobe is not already totally tzniut, you’ll want to make sure you get it to a place that meets your communities standards. (That would mean, for example, that if you are halachically female, that you would need to make sure you were wearing modest skirts and dresses, and if you are halachically male, that you would need to wear modestly cut pants, usually button-up shirts and a kippah.) If you are halachically female, you will need to cover your hair, as well as observe niddah once you are married. Regarding relationships, if you are single, you will probably want to stay single until you’ve finished your process. If you’re not, that person either needs to be halachically Jewish by orthodox standards or convert with you; or, you will need to end the relationship. You will need to be fully shomer Shabbos and observe all the analogous rules of Yom Tovim. Even if you’ve already kashered your kitchen, you will likely need to re-kasher under the supervision of an orthodox rabbi, and make sure that you are keeping kosher both in your home and outside of it. Depending on the community, you may also need to be shomer negiah. Etc.

While you mention that you observe all the mitzvot, please be aware that the orthodox standards for these same ritual observances/negative commandments are much stricter than the Reform standards. Although I am not going to make assumptions about your personal practices, you should be aware that there is a pretty significant gap and it’s not always obvious if your only frame of reference is Reform. I say that as someone who started out Reform and explored orthodoxy very seriously before completing a Conservative conversion. For example, I thought it was a pretty extreme fringe/far right-wing orthodoxy viewpoint that all of the plates and dishes and cookware, etc. in one’s kitchen that couldn’t survive boiling or open flame would need to be replaced and separated by meat/dairy/pareve going forward for a kitchen to be kosher. I genuinely believed I was keeping kosher by checking all ingredients and/or checking to see if an item was hechshered, and then not mixing meat and dairy, and that it would be over-the-top to replace basically my whole kitchen. I of course learned that kosher equipment was essential to keeping kosher by traditional standards and have subsequently taken on this practice. It’s worth noting that this was not an inexpensive project.

Astrology…. you’ll need to ask an orthodox rabbi if you’re serious about reconverting, but I suspect that he will tell you it’s either avodah zarah or skirts too close to it. The shatnez issue is something that an orthodox rabbi will be able to help you with - it really is just making sure that you aren’t mixing linen and wool, but there are shatnez labs where you can have your clothing tested. I don’t think you’ll have to totally replace your wardrobe to observe it, but you may need to replace a few suits or other woolly/linen items if you have them.

Regarding the non-binary piece of this… you don’t say what your assigned sex at birth is, but please be aware that that is how you will be treated halachically (for purposes of counting in a minyan and/or whether or not you will be able to lead services or receive honors, for marriage, etc.) in an orthodox community, even in an otherwise progressive or enlightened one. As a non-binary person who participates in a progressive Modern Orthodox community, it can get interesting. While binary trans people can sit on their identified side of the mechitza and non-binary people can either choose or sit in a more ambiguous space in the room, it is still far from perfect. More traditional communities than mine generally do not even do that much.

And, of course, once you reach a place where you are fully integrated into the community, have studied to your sponsoring rabbi and beit din’s satisfaction, are observing the mitzvot to a level accepted by that community, and are otherwise ready, you will then need to go before an orthodox beit din, have a kosher immersion in the mikveh, and either do a hatafat dam brit or have the beit din approve your earlier circumcision, if applicable. You will also need to accept upon yourself the full weight of a binding Covenant and promise to fulfill it to the best of your ability.

2) Does it make sense to reconvert orthodox after completing a Reform conversion?

Personally, I wouldn’t bother unless you’re planning on actually being orthodox. Other people’s opinions about your conversion only really matter to the extent that they exclude you from your own community, and that is only going to be relevant if you are actually participating in an orthodox community on the regular. If you’re planning on staying Reform, then who really cares what some random non-Reform person has to say about your conversion? It’s none of their business and you aren’t trying to be counted in their minyan anyway.

And in general, this is kind of a pet peeve of mine. Orthodox communities do not exist to provide validity to liberal Jews who do not otherwise have any intention of being orthodox, nor should orthodoxy be held up as the gold standard by the Jewish community as a whole. Your conversion is valid by Reform standards, you are part of a Reform community, and you intend to stay in that community. In my eyes, that means you’re Jewish and doing Judaism in a way that fits your current spiritual needs, so there’s not really any good reason to reconvert.

Now, if you decide that you really want to be part of an orthodox community, that you hold orthodox values and theological beliefs, and your passion for traditional Torah observance outweighs the challenges of becoming orthodox, then you should absolutely pursue the kind of Judaism that speaks to your soul and I wish you all my best.

I hope this helps!

36 notes · View notes

dailyaudiobible · 3 years

Text

03/11/2021 DAB Transcript

Numbers 15:17-16:40, Mark 15:1-47, Psalms 54:1-7, Proverbs 11:5-6

Today is the 11th day of March welcome to the Daily Audio Bible I am Brian it is always a great day when we get to get together like this, come around the Global Campfire, find our place, step out of whatever's going on and just let the Scriptures speak. And, so, let's let the Scriptures speak. We’re reading from the New International Version this week, picking up where we left off yesterday back into the book of numbers and just remembering what has happened. Spies have been sent into the land, the people have moved out, it's time to go into the land, but a bad report comes back. And, so, they are disqualified and now an entire generation will spend the rest of their lives in the wilderness while their children grow up and then it will be their job to go into the promised land. And, so, we’ll turn into some areas now where we feel like we’re reviewing things - additional laws, a reaffirming of laws, a rehearing of laws. This is because we have a shifting of generations that is taking place. Numbers chapter 15 verse 17 through 16 verse 40.

Commentary:

Okay. So, in the book of Mark today, we covered the territory that includes the crucifixion of Jesus, His death, and before that brutal mistreatment and mockery. And this culminates with Jesus hanging from the cross having been crucified. So, He’s got nails affixing Him to beams where He's hanging waiting for death to come and He cries out in a loud voice, “my God my God why, why, why have you forsaken me?” And, so, let's…let's just work our way to that point by just looking back at the last days of Jesus. We…we remember Jesus, walking through Jericho and healing blind Bartimaeus while He’s on His way to Jerusalem. We…we…we know that Jesus knew what was going to happen because He kept telling His disciples what was going to happen. And, so, He heals blind Bartimaeus as He passes through Jerusalem knowing that He's 18 miles away from His death, an uphill climb to Jerusalem. And as He is on that walk, we remember some of the disciples coming around Him arguing who’s the greatest and can they have a position with Him on the left and on the right. And we see Jesus loving and caring for them but understanding that what’s about to happen is beyond them. They really do expect the Messiah to cause a revolt and overthrow the corruption and overthrow the government. So, you…I mean…how could we put ourselves in the position of the Savior in that moment, but we can think about it, at least, we can consider it, at least, we can consider what it might be like if we knew that we were going to be dying. And none of us want to think about that, but if we knew that we were going to be dying in the next couple of days and our friends or family, they come around us asking for things, we might find that to be isolating, we might find that to be tremendously lonely. Like nobody actually does understand what we’re going through. We read the story of the Last Supper the Jesus had and we certainly know that this is where the Eucharist or communion originated and comes from, this tradition that we carry on until this day. But Jesus had this last meal, and that's the thing. It was the Last Supper. It's called that because of some huge theological meaning. It's the last meal. It’s the last meal before the suffering and He's having that meal with the one who is betraying Him to death. So, you have to wonder, like what is that like? Usually we find out we’re betrayed and it causes a big battle and there’s broken relationships and all that but He’s like sitting there enduring it, even inviting His betrayer to partake…take of the cup. We could say Jesus is enduring the betrayal. And anyone…and I think everyone in the sound of my voice at least understands the concept of betrayal, but many of us have been betrayed in some sort of way in our lives. And, so, we know the isolation in that and the depression in that, the uncertainty, sort of the shift of what we thought was real being tipped upside down. Jesus is enduring all of this. This is all part of the makeup of a fully human and fully God being upon the earth. We’ve followed Jesus into the garden of Gethsemane now a couple of times in Matthew and Mark and we see Him crying out to God very, very human prayer, very human prayer, “if there's any way that we don't have to do what we’re about to do that would be great. Like, is there any way the cup can pass? If there's any way that I don't have to do what I'm being sent to do, if it…if it can go away or if there’s some other way…but not my will but yours.” And, so, we’ve seen Jesus sweating it out. Like He's in anguish in the garden of Gethsemane, anguish - a very human thing to experience. And then the time comes, and the mob shows up and the kiss of betrayal and the binding of the hands and freedom is taken. And Jesus, the Divine One made flash has lost His freedom and He's willingly going. And then we go in before the high priest and all of the accusations. And let's imagine that this is taking place at night and that it goes the deep, deep into the night until exhaustion sets in. And we know that when we’re being yelled at and we’re exhausted at the same time, the feelings, the emotions involved in that are so isolating and so confusing and so upside down. And Jesus is being falsely accused and He’s taking it. He’s not saying anything back. He's listening. He's taking everything that they’re trying to concoct against Him. They’re verbally abusing Him for hours. And some of us have experienced this in some sort of way or another. We…we get the concept if…if not like the whole thing if we don't understand exactly what it's like to be verbally abused. But for hours. But then…then they judge Him. He tells the truth about who He is and then they call Him a blasphemer and they start beating Him and blindfolding Him and tearing out His beard. We can read these things as if they don't hurt, as if He doesn't really feel them, somehow, He’s above it, somehow, He's aloof, somehow, He’s not really enduring it, somehow, it's not really what it appears to be. If they grabbed His whiskers and yanked, then it would hurt. If they spit upon Him which the Bible says that they did, it would drip off His nose, it would drip down into His beard. Like, let's not make this what it's not, let's make it what it is. This is what He's doing. This is what He's going through. And like I said, we can't really put ourselves in that position but we can imagine just briefly what the emotions might be inside of us if this is what we were enduring. And after being smacked around and beaten up then He's given over to the Romans who…who professionally beat Him until He's…He’s a bloodied pulp gasping for breath trying to endure every frayed nerve that is screaming agony. And then He tries to carry this cross and He gets some help. But in the end, the cross gets to where it's going, up on the hill of Golgotha where they strip Him, humiliate Him and nail Him to beams and hang Him to die. So, when we get to this moment where He’s like, “my God, why have you forsaken me?” Well, we can understand the path that brought Him to that moment just before His death. And I know. All my life I’ve heard the theological explanations for the “why have you forsaken me, my God, my God.” The thing is, it’s theological conjecture. It's trying to solve a problem when it's not inherently explained. So, it is what it is. We take it at the face value. We take the words at what they say that He hung from this cross and He cried out. It’s why, which is so human. I don't…I don't even…I wouldn't even know where to begin to count the times that I’ve said that to God over the course of my life and I know I'm not alone. It's sort of the question we end up at with all the time, “like why is this happening?” So, I don't think that God was confused about what was going on. I don't think Jesus was confused but I think He was feeling the things that human beings feel because He chose to descend, to condescend Himself, to reduce Himself, to become one of us, to show us in person the way that we should go and to call out the truth and model life for us in person, experiencing what we experience in all points except for without sin. So, He would experience what any human being would experience, which brings us to the big point here. We’re looking at Jesus died on the cross and this is the second time we’ve crossed this territory in our readings for this year, but if we just simply look back over the last few days of Jesus life and the things that transpired, the things that He had to deal with physically, spiritually and emotionally we would realize that we really don't have anything to hold onto when we are crying out to God that He doesn't understand what we’re going through. Probably more accurately is that we can't understand what He went through, but He certainly understands what we go through. And, so, the cross certainly means a lot of things to us, as believers in Jesus. It is pivotal, it is irreplaceable in the Christian faith and in our story, but one thing that it should tell us very clearly is that God does understand. So, my suggestion or word of advice, or whatever you want to call it is, that we just don't go there anymore. It's…it's not true. God understands all of it. He's the only one that understands all of what you've been through, all that you're going through, anything that you might go through, things that you’ve had to endure that have left scars, things that you desire that are just out of reach, brokenness that's too painful really to even think about. This is the thing about this story. This is the thing about the gospel, is that Jesus came to rescue us eternally, but also, He came to identify with us personally. And when we kind of hurl these why questions - I don't get it, You don't understand - all of this stuff that gets built up and that we say or at least feel or think, it's not true. And that only estranges us, that only puts up a wall between us and the only one who actually does get it. So, we've been in this season, a season known as Lent. We’re still in that season. It ends the Saturday before Easter, so April 2nd I believe. This is the time, a season, an actual season to meditate upon and consider these things deeply, not just quickly, not just surface, but to actually take 40 days to contemplate and sit with them and meditate upon them and open ourselves completely to God in every conceivable way, maybe even fasting so that every time we have a craving that we can consider what we’re doing to remind us of what's happening or opening ourselves fully to God so that He can rearrange us in any way that we need so that there's nothing off-limits to Him because He does understand us and we do put our hope and faith in Him and Him alone utterly. So, this is a really good time then to look at what's happening here and look at the humanity of Jesus and understand that he does understand what we’re going through and that we would be lying if we claimed that He didn't. And, so, we should never put that between us and Him ever again because He does know.

Prayer:

Jesus, we confess. We have said it more times than we can count. We have come to You with misunderstandings. We have come with estrangement. We’re angry with You that You didn't show up in the way we wanted You to, or You don't understand what we’re going through or the depths of the blackness of what we’re facing, or that You just couldn't possibly understand the depths of the human experience. And yet that's not true. You do indeed understand the depths and blackness and darkness of the human experience. We just bore witness to it with what we read in the book of Mark today. You understand. And, so, we’re sorry that we've used that, that we've hurled that. Like when we face You hanging on a cross on our behalf and then we think of the insults that we've hurled or the accusations that we've leveled at You, that You couldn't possibly understand what we're going through, O it's embarrassing, it’s humiliating. This is what we should feel, sorry. We should feel sorry. We should repent. We should turn and go the other way and never come this way again. And, so, this is our prayer, and this is our declaration. We will never accuse You of not understanding us, never again. It's not true and it only divides us. It pulls us away from each other, where it's only going to get more destructive in our lives. So, we’re clinging to You and we’re inviting You as we continue through this season of lament and repentance to show us, Holy Spirit come. What are the ways, what are the places inside of us that we’re still walling off, that we’re still withholding from You? We want to move through this season and give everything to You. Come Holy Spirit we pray. In the name of Jesus, we ask. Amen.

Announcements:

dailyaudiobible.com is home base, it’s the website, it’s where you find out what’s going on around here, it's where the home of the Global Campfire is in a virtual world, in a community that’s spread all over the earth like the one we share that reaches out into all corners of the globe in all kinds of different cultures. We still have a home base day or night no matter what it is we have a home base. And, of course, that home base can also sit in the palm of your hand. It's known as the Daily Audio Bible app and if you don't have the app definitely download the app. Go to your app store and just look for Daily Audio Bible, and download the app. That is the best way to experience all of the different facets of the Daily Audio Bible and it's also where we continue to build and develop and continue to have vision for the way forward in the palm of our hands so that we are together in community as we take this journey through the Scriptures. So…so, check that out.

Whether you are using the website or the app you can be aware of the Community section. That's where the Prayer Wall is, that's where we are continually reaching toward each other either to offer prayer or to…or to request prayer in this community. So, be aware of the Community section. It’s also where you can find different links to social media channels that we participate in. So, check that out./

If you want to partner with the Daily Audio Bible, if the mission that we share to bring the spoken word of God read fresh every day and offered to anyone on this planet any time of day or night, and to build community around that rhythm so that were not on this journey alone, if that is something that matters to you than thank you for your partnership profoundly and with all humility. There is a link on the homepage at dailyaudiobible.com. If you’re using the Daily Audio Bible app you press the Give button in the upper right-hand corner or the mailing address is PO Box 1996 Spring Hill Tennessee 37174.

And, as always, if you have a prayer request or encouragement, you can hit the Hotline button in the app, which is the little red button up at the top or you can dial 877-942-4253.

And that's it for today, I’m Brian I love you and I'll be waiting for you here tomorrow.

Community Prayer and Praise:

Good morning DAB family God bless you all. Guinn from Texas you had called in for a father who has one son in jail and the other homeless and you also mentioned how you had a son who is in jail and you know he had experienced an…an encounter with the Lord and is saved although you lost him late along in a motorcycle accident. First of all, I'm sorry about your loss Guinn but I'm grateful that you got to know the Lord. And for father that you called in for I am praying for him. I am praying in the name of Jesus that both your sons are going to come to know the Lord in the name of Jesus. I am believing in the name of Jesus not only are they going to come to the Lord they are also going to be a witness to the Lord in the name of Jesus. That the one who's incarcerated will be able to witness the gospel to others in the name of Jesus. And the one who is homeless will be returning home in the name of Jesus. Melissa from Alabama I am sorry for the loss of your friend your dentist doctor Kirby. I am believing and praying that his wife and kids are going to be comforted as well as you and all those who have survived him in the name of Jesus. Lynn newbie your daughter's marriage rocky marriage that is and I am praying for her in the name of Jesus I am praying for all things that are not of God in that marriage to be bound in the name of Jesus I am believing for restoration in the name of Jesus I am believing for assistance with the four children. You know, especially the ones with the special needs I am believing in the name of Jesus. Maria first time caller long listener your daughter Taylor 26 years old I am binding that in the name of Jesus I am binding everything that is attacking and restraining her away from the Lord in the name of Jesus God bless you all. Esther…

Hello this is Michael Gene Elmore from way out West. We had a couple of praise reports. And first one is about my wife Terry…Terry Elmore she’s been working the last couple years in a Christian school as a teacher's assistant for the preschool kids and it has just been wonderful. I mean it's really just blessed her life and really been a great thing for her and for the kids that she get to teach these kids about Jesus teach them how to spell their name tie their shoes and do all this basic stuff and she just absolutely loves it. And another praise report is about my daughter. My oldest daughter Jessica has told me that she's been listening to the Daily Audio Bible since the first of the year and she's got a couple kids and stuff and I think they're listening to the…I think they are listening to Zeke the kids are too. So, just really really an answer to many of my prayers and stuff. I'm also praying for all these people on here. I…I listen to all of the requests and some of 'em just really touch my heart. I mean this lady that said that her husband she overheard that her husband’s leaving her and I'm praying for her and praying for him to come to his right mind and change his mind and repent. And all the people who are sick and so forth, I pray for em’ every day and and I love you people love this family, the Daily Audio Bible. Adios.

Hi family this is Biola from Maryland I hope you're all doing well. Brian And Jill God bless you, God bless you for this powerful ministry that is a ministry to thousands around the world. Family when you do think of Daily Audio Bible and you throw your log into the campfire remember to give. This is very important for continuity. I want to pay for the young lady that called in dealing with postpartum depression. Doctor John from New York give you an excellent, excellent advice. Sister I want to direct you to 2 Corinthians 10:3-5 that tells you how to fight. Like doctor John said, every time those evil thoughts come to your head just take them captive like prisoners of war, pull them down in the name of Jesus. Hold them captive to the obedience of Christ. And right now, I come against every contrary voice that is disturbing you that is harassing you. I bind you foul spirits in the name of Jesus. Sister I want you to listen to doctor John's advice, excellent advice. And I want to pray for Lynn. I want to pray for your daughter, her situation and your son in law. Father I pray that you will arrest this young man's heart O God Lord, that You will arrest his heart for You, that You will break his heart, make it tender for You, let him come to know You. And I pray for deliverance oh God for Lynn’s daughter in this situation in the name of Jesus, that you will reconcile them, reconcile their marriage in Jesus’ name. Maria, I heard your heartbreaking prayer request. I pray for Taylor. O Father Lord I break the hold of the enemy over Taylor's life in the name of Jesus. Father Lord of heaven I pray that You would deliver this Young lady, soften her heart for You, Holy Spirit pursue her diligently. Let Andrew and his team, let them be successful in the name of Jesus. And Lastly, Julie I'm praying for you in your situation that the Lord will step in and take…

Hi, my name is Amy I'm calling from Vancouver Canada and I am so grateful for this Daily Audio Bible. Brian I discovered it back in the fall and countless days of pure joy and that the scriptures have just come alive through your voice and through…through God in…in you. Thank you very much for that. Thank you to the community for your prayers for your encouragement for one another. I have realized that there is a family out there that is worldwide and just God’s Angels everywhere is incredible. I've had the opportunity to pray for so many and I thank you for that. I thank you for moving forward your prayer concerns. Today I bring you mine. I've been diagnosed finally, praise God, after waiting for three years to have diagnosis with a pelvic prolapse. I’ll spare you the details but it's incredibly painful and there's at least a two year wait list for surgery here in Canada, at least. And…and 34…and it's really really painful. I’m off work and I want the joy of the Lord back in my step. I'm persevering, I'm continuing on. __ and…but I also pray for strength and determination too, to learn what he has for me in this season of my life so that one day I can __ and __ and encourage others as well in their own journey. Thank you so much for the prayers and the support and I…I really truly have come to love each and every one of you that I have had the opportunity to hear. Thank you so much. Wonderful…have a wonderful day. Bye bye.

Hello, DABbers this is Bianca calling from North Carolina it's actually Sunday March 7th at 9:07 PM __. I decided I would call in every 7th of the month or at least try to. So, I was just calling really to say thank you to Brian and the Hardin family. I actually started to listen to DAB Kids with my son in the morning with Ezekiel and five and a half. He get really excited when Ezekiel reads by himself. And, so, that's really awesome, those short little tidbits on the way dropping him off at school is really cool. And I’ve just been pondering a lot lately how Brian has been talking about having situations happen taking a pause and just observing for a moment before we respond. So, I just wanted to call and say that I am praying for that for myself. I definitely know that I can be quick tempered and quick to speak before I think and it’s something that I know that I've needed to work on but I haven't truly invested the time and the thought into it in order to do it because it is a skill that can be learned if it is practiced. And, so, I'm just calling in today praying for that ability to take that pause before responding and try to respond from a place that's in line with who I want to be versus who I am in that moment of frustration and inability and anger and sadness. And, so, I'm just asking for prayers for that. I'm praying for all of you as I listen through. There's so many different things going on but just know that when your prayer is voiced and played it is heard and someone is praying for you. Thank you. I love you all and I hope you all have a wonderful week.

Hey DAB family this is David from Pennsylvania first-time caller just started listening back in January. Just wanted to call in and say thank you to all those people who have been sending in prayer and encouragement. I'm praying along with you guys and the encouragement just keeps lifting me up as I listen to them. So, thanks. I actually was touched by one caller who came in and was talking about how God still does the little things. It really hit me because in the past week I've been asking God, “hey can you show me something that…that you are still doing small things?” And he showed me at least three times in the past three days, “yeah I'm still doing small stuff.” So, thanks…thanks for just bringing that up again. Well…hoping to call in again soon. Bye.

2 notes · View notes