#i didn't even drink anything | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

inkskinned · 1 year

Text

probably time for this story i guess but when i was a kid there was a summer that my brother was really into making smoothies and milkshakes. part of this was that we didn't have AC and couldn't afford to run fans all day so it was kind of important to get good at making Cool Down Concoctions.

we also had a patch of mint, and he had two impressionable little sisters who had the attitude of "fuck it, might as well."

at one point, for fun, this 16 year old boy with a dream in his eye and scientific fervor in heart just wanted to see how far one could push the idea of "vanilla mint smoothie". how much vanilla extract and how much mint can go into a blender before it truly is inedible.

the answer is 3 cups of vanilla extract, 1/2 cup milk alternative, and about 50 sprigs (not leaves, whole spring) of mint. add ice and the courage of a child. idk, it was summer and we were bored.

the word i would use to describe the feeling of drinking it would maybe be "violent" or perhaps, like. "triangular." my nose felt pristine. inhaling following the first sip was like trying to sculpt a new face. i was ensconced in a mesh of horror. it was something beyond taste. for years after, i assumed those commercials that said "this is how it feels to chew five gum" were referencing the exact experience of this singular viscous smoothie.

what's worse is that we knew our mother would hate that we wasted so much vanilla extract. so we had to make it worth it. we had to actually finish the drink. it wasn't "wasting" it if we actually drank it, right? we huddled around outside in the blistering sun, gagging and passing around a single green potion, shivering with disgust. each sip was transcendent, but in a sort of non-euclidean way. i think this is where i lost my binary gender. it eroded certain parts of me in an acidic gut ecology collapse.

here's the thing about love and trust: the next day my brother made a different shake, and i drank it without complaint. it's been like 15 years. he's now a genuinely skilled cook. sometimes one of the three of us will fuck up in the kitchen or find something horrible or make a terrible smoothie mistake and then we pass it to each other, single potion bottle, and we say try it it's delicious. it always smells disgusting. and then, cerimonious, we drink it together. because that's what family does.

#this is true #writeblr #warm up #relatedly for some reason one of our Favorite Jokes #amongst the Siblings #is like - ''this is so good u will love it''#while we are reacting to something we OBVIOUSLY find viscerally disgusting #like we will be actively retching and be like ''nooooo it's so good''#to the point that i sometimes get nervous if someone outside my family is like oh u should try it its good #(obvi we never force each other to eat anything. we are all just curious birds and #like. we're GONNA try the new thing.)#edit to answer why we had so much vanilla:#my mom is a very good cook and we LOVE to bake. so she just had a lot of staples in the house.#it's one of those things that's like. have u ever continuously thought ''ah i should get butter im probably out''#even tho u are not out of butter. so u end up with like 5 years of butter.#my mom would do that in a costco but like with vanilla extract #to be fair we WERE always using WAY TOO MUCH bc we were kids #so like she was right to stock up #ps. yes we were VERY sick after this lol i just didn't want to include it in the post in case ppl had an ick about that #u can tell it's real bc we knew "oh no we fucked up that's too much vanilla to waste'' but our reaction was to just. keep drinking it #> sibling understanding that vanilla extract isn't free > knowledge mother doesnt mind if we use it for milkshakes #> sibling choice to maybe get in a loophole of ''not wasting it'' if we drink it bc that's the same as using it (not throwing it out)#listen bud i was like 13 and my sister was like 9 #when my mom discovered this we. got in. A LOT. of trouble. a lot of it. a LOT of it.#3rd edit bc i guess it isn't clear - i am 1 of my brother's 2 little sisters #i am the middle child #out of all the ways i have had to explain a post before being like ''did u forget a middle child can happen'' is my favorite

52K notes · View notes

lockedinthelabyrinth · 2 years

Text

I find it interesting how Muir keeps identifying characters with Jesus but then subverting it in the same breath. The previous books already had it but Nona really goes all in.

Most obvious you have Gideon who is the daughter of God. Except her very existence is already a subversion because she is a messianic figure not for the Empire but for Blood of Eden. A savior whose sacrifice will open the Tomb and -ironically enough- kill God. (There’s an argument to be made about how in this context Wake takes on the role of God instead of John, as she is the one knowingly killing her child to achieve salvation. Pyrrha calling her We Suffer’s “God” when talking about her in Nona could be another small nod to this reading. Though I am also intrigued by Wake-as-Mary simply because Mary is always revered as a symbol of ideal purity, womanhood and virginity- all of which Wake is very much not. There’s a crack theory about John-as-Mary between these two statements somewhere.) Also small thing here, but Gideon is at first meant to be sacrificed as a baby. So it would not be a willing sacrifice of an adult but a forced sacrifice without any agency. The person who gives her life with a sense of agency in this context is Wake, who knowingly dies for the higher cause ( so she’s kinda God-and-Mary-and-a-Martyr depending how you look at it. Love that for her.)

At the end of Gideon the Ninth Gideon does eventually sacrifice herself in a way that is more in line with a Christ-like figure in Empire, as lyctorhood itself holds connotations to communion which is again linked to Christ’s sacrifice. However -and I find this part really interesting for all the potential it holds- Harrow ultimately rejects this sacrifice, refusing to let Gideon die for her sins mistakes.

In Nona we see her resurrected but instead of a wholesome biblical resurrection Gideon isn’t alive. She is a corpse walking around, the wounds on her body not proof of a miracle but visible reminders that she is “mega-dead”. God brought her back but it’s more body horror than anything- a subversion of the christian idea of resurrection-as-salvation.

In the context of her being Blood of Eden’s Christ figure Gideon is called a weapon, which is an unusual association to her function as a savior. The weapon motive is brought back in Kiriona who is no longer a weapon for Blood of Eden but the Empire - exept then the two functions merge, as it turns out that both John and Blood of Eden want the tomb open, making her a Christ-figure/weapon for two seemingly opposing forces at once.

Then there’s Alecto who is getting pretty overt connotations to Christ far before Gideon does and again in a subversive way. The tomb that is rolled shut is a direct reference to Jesus’ grave, juxtaposed with the initial framing of Alecto as God’s and the empire’s doom. And the infamous: “I pray the tomb is shut forever. I pray the rock is never rolled away.” which calls forth a theme of resurrection but in an inverted way. It is there, implied through a negative (the tomb opening, the rock being rolled away), but instead the prayer calls for its opposite eternal rest, death - which is on first glance sensible because Alecto is the doom of the empire so it is only logical to pray for her to stay dead- but also incredibly ironic because resurrection is a central aspect of the empire. To pray for its absence in the same breath as praying for the empire seems therefore almost contradictory. (Like, Harrow is essentially saying a prayer that can be read with undertones of hey, maybe necromancy itself is kinda wrong.) It’s likely also a play on christian prayers that frequently feature calls to Christ’s resurrection. (Also something, something the title of this whole series being the locked tomb. The questions Muir poses about resurrection are already right there, on the cover.)

And then. There’s Nona. Where, like, a bazillion things just happen all at once? There’s Alecto getting a body which is both a play at Adam and Eve and God becoming flesh through Christ. (If John literally used his blood, bone and vomit to make Alecto’s body does that mean she has his DNA? I don’t actually want to know but this cursed thought is stuck in my head now. Help.) Anyway, God becoming human is usually something with very positive connotations, it’s the beginning of salvation. In the locked tomb however, it happens amidst a flood/apocalyse, brings with it the death of all of humanity and is an act of violence on Alecto, who did not want a body and didn’t consent to it. It’s not an act of God becoming human through birth but something divine being forced to become human through death. (Could also be examined under the aspect of Alecto already containing all human souls, therefore no real need for her to become human as there’s no barrier between humanity and the divine in the first place. They are naturally intertwined and John creates a barrier by removing the souls. This post by @facille and this post by @mercyisms are absolutely excellent in regards to this, please go read them. In essence for this line of thought: Human souls as seperate individual things and the way the empire thinks of them are a christian concept, one that isn’t representative to how souls actually work in the world building of the locked tomb. John builds an empire based on the aesthetics of christianity but it’s made-up not scientific reality. John doesn’t even know how the river and afterlife really work or what’s beyond it. Also in regards to Alecto not being seperate from human souls- there’s a possible link here with how the narrative in the dreams keeps conflating Harrow and Alecto to the point where it’s at parts not clear who John is speaking to when he says “you”. Might be something different but it makes sense if the individual soul is, and was always, part of Alecto. When John says “I hurt you”, he could be referring to both Harrow and Alecto and all of humanity and life because they were always the same to begin with.)

A connection can be made between Alecto’s birth-through-death and the Resurrection Beasts- named for resurrection, but in effect products of murder. (No resurrection without death.) They’re also linked by the allusions to the furies. The Resurrection Beasts endlessly hunting John’s Orestes (murderer of Mother earth) Alecto being named for one. (Or for John. He’s named after her- Gaia, and he was the one who couldn’t let go of vengeance, so the name “Alecto” could carry aspects of his character as well as Alecto’s.) However despite suffering the same fate, Alecto’s relationship to John is very different to that of the Resurrection Beasts’.

Nona sacrifices herself in order to become Alecto which is a resurrection but again, imperfect. Because Nona and Alecto aren’t quite the same so there’s still an element of permanent death here that even resurrection cannot rectify. (I’m looking forward to what Alecto will do with this, especially with Nona’s love for Pyrrha and Paul. Can love survive resurrection unchanged?)

There’s also this line in the epilogue: “And Alecto said, Pyrrha, he lead me down as appeasement to them; he fed you to them as appeasement to them; but he has never appeased me, and now all he has done was teach me how to die.” Which, first off, banger line there Muir. Second off, drawing a direct line between John putting Alecto in the Tomb and the cavaliers being unnecessarily killed to achieve lyctorhood when John knew better, both of those again getting connected to Christ’s sacrifice, however the word choice here is “appeasement” to the lyctors which is notably different from how theology would usually treat christian sacrifice.

And: “John loved her. She was John’s cavalier. For she had loved the world that she had given them John. For the world so loved John that she had been given. For John had so loved the world that he had made her she. For John had loved the world.” In this context Alecto becoming human is again likened to Christ becoming human but here explicitely framed within the context of Jesus becoming Flesh as an act of God’s love for humanity. And in a way reframing John killing earth and humanity as an act of divine-and-human love. It also intermingles John with Alecto mirroring how both Christ and God are ultimately one and the same in christian theology. As well as the way Alecto and John become intermingled through perfect Lyctorhood- making her human and him divine, both taking in aspects of the other. In contrast to christianity where only the divine becomes human, here it goes both ways, but in a strange cannibalistic way in which the divine is consumed in order for the union to happen. (Communion-as-cannibalism and divinity and humanity already being one come to mind again.)

It also calls forth John as another Christ-figure, chosen by Alecto-as-God to save humanity. A reading which is made explicit earlier in Nona when he likens himself to Jesus while healing the sick (which is really fun, because not only is there a Christ parallel, the characters themselves are aware and intentionally invoking it. It’s delightfully meta.) Of course John as not only God but also a Christ figure is brought up already in the books before Nona with “the God who became man- the man who became God”. Which within the text is a nod to the process of lyctorhood between John and Alecto but also another play on God and Christ being one and the same. (For those who don’t know: There’s a thing in theology where Jesus had to be fully God and fully human at the same time in order for his sacrifice to be meaningful. Fun stuff.)

John-as-Christ in Nona is interesting in regards to the end of the world that we witness, as it calls forth both images of the flood of the old testament and the last judgement. The flood meaning that the trillionaires fleeing on their space ships are Noah’s ark - not chosen by God to survive but by corruption and selfishness. (Blood of Eden itself is interesting in its naming because it has both connotations of paradise (within the context of the worldbuilding probably earth) and original sin, a state that is carried on from generation to generation and is only removed through Christ’s sacrifice.) Also making a connection between rising sea levels via climate change and the biblical flood, as well as John killing everyone to start anew to God killing everyone with the flood to do the same thing, except John also kills everyone with the goal to sink the ark, those chosen to survive, as their survival is unjust in the face of everyone else being left to drown.

John’s focus on punishment for the sinners trillionaires over trying to save everyone else and his words in John 5:4 “We’ll get them all back...some of them, anyway...or at least, the ones I want to bring back. Anyone I feel didn’t do it. Anyone I feel had no part in it. Anyone I can look at the face of and forgive.” reads to me as a condemnation of christian thoughts and ideologies, that reserve heaven and salvation only for the few worthy and have a heavier focus on sin and punishment than they do on forgiveness, redemption and healing. John’s insistence that he can just do another flood, another blank slate by killing everyone is also pretty horrific and damning in this context. (Maybe purging everying you percieve as wrong isn’t the answer. Maybe all the flaws and wrongs and dirt are an important part of humanity. Maybe it’s not the world that is wrong but your way of looking at it.)

Interesting also that in this context he not only sees other people beyond redemption but also himself. A system where sin, once it is commited, is irredeemable is fundamentally an unhealhy one. It doesn’t allow moving on or growing from it, you just live with your mistakes forever. (Again shout out to @mercyisms fantastic post, because John being himself a victim of his mentality is really interesting if you view it as him being a convert to christianity)

In essence, Muir brings up allusions to christianity everywhere and never once plays them straight (something something lesbians). (I talk mostly about the Christ metaphores here, but it’s also true for all the rest. Like Ianthe and Corona being a Cain and Abel parallel but notably without the murder etc.)

A small aside at the end: Harrow’s role in all of this is very important as well and I think it can in part be interpreted as that of a believer struggling and trying to find truth in religion. Most obvious she is constantly defined and adressed in a context of religious worship- as a nun and her title of Reverend Daughter. She most consistently treats John as the God of her religion, where the others go along with his just some guy spiel, and when they talk she questions and demands things from him- both in a way that harkens back to the way a religious person may interrogate their religion and God. We see her actively rejecting Gideon’s sacrifice and her questions for John in John 5:4 are just...”What does it mean to love God?” and “I want to journey to find God . Maybe at the end of that road, I will find God in you, Teacher...the God who became man and the man who became God. Or, perhaps, the child of the Ninth Houses will recognize a different divine. But I am the Reverend Daughter- I am the Reverend Mother, the Reverend Father- I must find God, or some aspect of God, and understand it for myself...even if she lies, right now, within the Tomb.” It’s about faith. Being born into a religious tradition and starting to question it and trying to find your own kind of truth. And John’s answer: “God is a dream Harrow. You all dream me together- and she’s dreaming me too. In a way, her dead dreams of God mean more than all your dreams put together.” And then. He lets her go. He let’s her go and allows her to seek answer’s for herself.

Anyway fuck TazMuir forever and ever because I’d really love to take a closer look at all of this to get a grasp on what the narrative is actually trying to say with it instead of just noting that it’s there, except that that would require rereading these books in detail with a bible and Dante’s Inferno at hand and looking at how it all intersects with her other literary references and ideas and I really really don’t have any time at all right now, which is why I’m shouting about this on the internet so I can get it out of my system and work on the things I’m supposed to be doing. (And I hate how there may be small mistakes in this because of me misremembering but I can only reread small passages because time and. Fucking damn it TazMuir). I swear to Jod Alecto better come out when I actually have some time, so I can at least take a proper look at the whole picture once it’s done instead of slowly going insane.

#tlt #the locked tomb #nona the ninth spoilers #gideon nav #alecto the first #jod #john gaius #long post #tlt meta #harrowhark nonagesimus #one day I will write a long text without using 'also' every other sentence #until then: drinking game where you take a shot every time an 'also' pops up #There's a point I wanted to make in the Harrow section about one possible interpretation being the detangling of native faith from christian #imperialism. But I don't know anything about Maori faith and whether her heritage and praying to the Tomb/Alecto/Earth could mean anything #in that regard. And her religion is pretty steeped in christianity #so I didn't want to draw lines between it and Maori traditions if there may not even be any.

109 notes · View notes