#i love primary research i love primary research i love pri | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

kropotkins-revenge · 1 year

Text

Lemme see if I can explain this a little more clearly than I have been.

I'm neither trans nor Jewish, nor anything else Rowling uses the Potter franchise and her wealth and influence to advocate against.

But I am autistic, and probably the easiest comparison to make would be saying Autism Speaks is to autism what JK Rowling is to trans people and Jewish people. AS (to varying degrees over the years) advocates for a "cure" for autism, on the basis that autism is a burden and a curse to the parents, and may or may not currently, but definitely originally, wanted to fund research into "early detection" of autism - "in the womb" early - with the unspoken purpose of helping parents abort children if they would be autistic (for the record, I'm 180% pri-choice, except for eugenics - that's not choice, that's pure evil). So you could say with reasonable accuracy that AS is the JKR of autism and most autistic people, myself included, feel about AS the way most trans people and Jewish people, I imagine, feel about JKR.

So with that comparison in mind, as an autistic person:

A. If Autism Speaks came out with a video game where the primary conflict is between a united group of sloppily-coded, hatefully stereotyped autistic people - say a nation of Sheldon Coopers - with a stated goal of shutting down a eugenics operation or codifying protections and accomodations for people like them, villified for that goal because it would inconvenience neurotypicals a tiny bit and/or the whole point was just that the Coopers were stupid and annoying and by the way have a secret plot to kidnap and mutilate children? I would be pretty pissed off about that, rightfully, and the very least I would expect of anyone who claimed to support me as an autistic person would be to not play or support or defend that game, and if someone decided that it wasn't worth it to avoid the game just for me, I would - again, rightfully - take that as a message that they only actually supporr me as long as it doesn't inconvenience them in any possible way, and as soon as it does, I can get fucked. And I would stop considering that person a friend.

B. Even if it turned out that AS wasn't really involved with making the game, their name was just on it because they owned the rights because it was set in a universe they created for some books they wrote, but still the game was written by someone less well-known but equally hateful to autistic people, I would still be just as pissed and still expect my friends/allies not to support it, and have the same reaction if they did.

C. Even if it turned out (which it wouldn't, and hasn't with HP, and won't) that the game was written with completely innocent intentions by someone who felt like they did support autistic people, the story itself would still be desperately fucked up and prejudicial and supportive of movements that actively seek to eradicate people like me from the universe for the crime of being people like me, so I would still have the same expectation and reaction to betrayal.

D. If someone who called themselves my friend started defending the game to me based on how much they loved the books AS wrote in the first place, so see, it's okay to play the game because they're just being nostalgic, and they don't support the bad parts, they just like reliving their youth in a new way - I'd tell them that I'm sympathetic, and it sucks that they fell in love with a universe and found out later that the author was a eugenical piece of shit, but that is what the author is, and looking back on the original works with that knowledge it's pretty obvious that that eugenical shit was in there the whole time, we just missed it because we weren't looking for it.

And I'd say that I don't expect them to pretend those stories never meant anything to them, but that continuing to defend the new material that comes out under the pretense of "separating the art from the artist" is a huge slap in the face to me and every other autistic person. I'd also point out that, as mentioned in point C above, it doesn't matter whether you can separate the art from the artist because the bigotry is central to the story itself no matter who wrote it - you could insert any potential author as the artist of this story, even someone perfect, and it would still be fucked up eugenics fantasy. If it turned out Mister Rogers co-wrote the story with Bob Ross and Steve Irwin, the story as it stands would still be some fucked up shit. It's not just about the author, it's about the story itself and what it means. And if they still insisted that it was okay to play it, I would interpret that as "this fictional story is more important to me than your life," and I would, rightfully, stop being friends with them. Probably tell them to go fuck themselves first though.

E. If any person, especially a huge group of people, insisted that I was overreacting and making a big stink over nothing and "blinded by emotion," I'd tell them to go fuck themselves too. I wouldn't be overreacting - the story is literally a fantasy about ending my existence and the existence of everyone like me, based on prejudice.

F. If anyone told me that they feel okay playing the game because "my friend is autistic and they said it's okay by them," I'd ask them, if one of their Black friends said they were okay with them using the N-word even though they were white, would they be out in public yelling the N-word at the top of their lungs and insisting that it's okay because they were given permission? Or would they recognize that one individual Black person being okay with it doesn't mean no other Black person has any grounds to be pissed off about it ever again? I'd explain that no marginalized group is a monolith, that some people, for varying reasons, are going to be fine with things that others aren't, and that doesn't constitute a universal moral judgement or invalidate the views of any other person in that group.

I would further explain that what they've done by using that argument is put me and their other autistic friend into a competition we didn't sign up for - I'm saying it's hurtful, and they're saying it's not, and you've decided that one of us must be universally right and the other must be universally wrong, and you've chosen them as the victor. Why? Are they a better, closer friend than me? Are they smarter than me? Are they somehow "more" autistic than me? Are they somehow more in tune with the universal experience of being autistic than I am?

None of that is real. First, if they're a closer friend than me, that doesn't excuse hurting me. Second, nobody's smarter than anyone. Third, anyone autistic is autistic, we're all different but none are less valid. And fourth, there is no "universal" experience of being autistic - we all have different spectrums of symptoms, we all have different families, different environments, different life experiences. One person having an experience in life that makes them not care very much when people want to exterminate them does not invalidate my experience that leads me to be super pissed off about it. So why are you inclined to choose their opinion over mine? If you're honest with yourself you'll find it's because theirs excuses you doing something you want to do even if it hurts people, and that's not cool.

F. If I found out that AS had already recieved all the money they're going to recieve for the game, that whether it sold 10 or 10,000,000 copies made no difference to their income, I'd still say it's fucked up to play the game, because yet again, the entire point of the game would be that autistic people suck, autistic people are harmful to "regular" society, autistic people are "our" enemies, autistic people should be eliminated.

That's not an exhaustive list of all the defenses I've seen for playing the wizard game, but you get the point: ultimately, every defense of playing this hypothetical anti-autistic game boils down to "it's more important to me to play this game than to support you and have your back," and I would in no way be out of line for taking serious offense to that position in addition to the offense I take at the game itself and the offense I take at everything AS says and does and supports.

Same for real life with the Potter game: even if it wasn't made directly by JKR, even if it was made by someone good, even if she doesn't make extra money from you playing it, even if your trans/Jewish friend said it doesn't bother them, even anything - the story is still literally anti-trans and anti-Jewish, no matter what. That's the story. The story, no matter who wrote it or who gets paid, is that Jewish people are bad and should be eliminated and that trans people are, at best, a bad joke. So no matter how you slice it, defending it and consuming it are supporting those statements, because that's what the story is.

But that doesn't even matter as much as the fact that even if one trans person OR one Jewish person who has an issue with it, is hurt by it, that should be enough. It's one thing to weigh things like this when the choices are "the feelings of one hurt person" vs "the well-being of ten thousand others," that would be one thing; but when the choices are "hurt one or more people by playing the game" vs "literally zero consequences or inconvenience of any kind," one person should easily be more than enough, and if it isn't, you need to stop pretending it's "logic" or "reason" guiding your decisions and accept that it's just selfishness.

0 notes

anxiouslyfred · 4 years

Text

Love After Exile - Cooking Emotions

I have decided not to start using Janus’s name in this story. He will remain just known as Deceit so I don’t have to change the way the rest of the story was written

Summary: Virgil loved Remus and Deceit long before they fell out. Now he’s dating Logan after beginning to recognise similar feelings. Deceit has an idea over how to start repairing things with Virgil so he makes an attempt.

Formatting: There’s a shifting POV, anytime you see Bold starts of a paragraph then there’s been a perspective shift.

Pairings: Analogical from the start, eventual Analoceitmus

Warnings for this part: cooking, knives being used to chop vegetables, emotional scene

/\/\/\/\/\ Part One /\ Part Two /\/\ Part Three /\/\Part Four /\/\ Part Five /\/\ Part Six /\/\

It was clear that Deceit wanted to discuss something but Logan delayed that to ensure Virgil was feeling better again. Whatever he'd spoken about with Remus had left Virgil in somewhat of a guilt spiral so he had to calm that down before leaving for a while.

“You do realise you could have just text instead of hovering in the living room?” He queried, closing the door to Anxiety's room as he spoke.

Deceit nodded. “Of course but I find they never include the correct levels or urgency or courtesy in them. Waiting patiently where you can see I'm present seems much more reasonable and allows me to check on Virgil as I do so.” The words relaxed some of the trepidation Logan had been feeling. Since the rejection Deceit hadn't been seen in the common area the known sides shared and one explanation Logan had been able to think of was that the invitation to date had come from trying to support Remus's wants. That had definitely been backed when Virgil had mentioned just how badly Remus had taken the scene as well.

“Is this something involving him then?” He checked regardless of his suspicions.

“Partially. I was hoping to confirm what he referred to as he was leaving but there were a few other questions I would like some more information on and who better to ask than Logic for a lesson or two.” Deceit was anything but clear in his explanation.

Thinking for a moment, Logan began walking towards his room, waving a hand so the other would follow. “Very well, What are you wanting to learn about? I have a wide variety of books and information but possibly not on the psychology that seems to be your main interest.”

“Well recently I've been trying to understand the love languages a bit more, hoping it will offer some understanding of Remus as I'm sure you've realised we're very different people.” Deceit began, easily focusing on his own relationship rather than the one he wished to form.

Logan immediately brought a book from beside his bed over at the words. “I believe I can empathise with you on the importance of understanding one another there. Thankfully in my own relationship our primary love languages coincide, although there was originally some misunderstandings over how they are expressed. This book should be able to explain what I cannot, but is there any specific query you'd like to discuss?” He expected there to be a trick in the conversation, or an attempt to focus it back on Virgil and himself but hoped to waylay it with the side comment.

“How would I recognise what language is the one I respond to best? I've been able to recognise Remus enjoys and responds to physical touch primarily as a love language and it appears that he expresses it through gift giving as well, but frankly when I've read the descriptions I'm struggling to confirm which ones might apply to myself.” Deceit's gaze had definitely sharpened at the mention of Logan's relationship with Virgil, cataloguing the comment, but his words raised an intrigue in Logan. “And before you suggest it, we both know how unreliable online quizzes can be.”

“I was actually going to suggest asking Remus. Perhaps going through a few experiments with him to find out what you find most fulfilling if done as part of your relationship.” His voice was cutting, silencing any more counters to possible suggestions that wouldn't be made. “It's preferable to having an argument after trying to do the same things for each other and each feeling unneeded. At least that way Remus will be included in what you want to know and he probably has already noticed the main one you use.”

Deceit's eyes gleamed and his mind was spinning with thoughts, not at the suggestions but at the tiny pieces of information he'd gleaned from Logan. The pair shared their primary love language and had an argument before Logan researched love languages because of it.

“Well I'm fairly sure neither of us have Acts of Service as a love language so coming to an argument over trying to do the same things is unlikely. Pray tell is that what you were referring to?” He pried, remembering the conversation was meant to be information gathering on his prospective loves, and not asking questions he already knew the answers to.

Logan pushed the book he'd carried on holding forwards. “Be that as it may, the other subject you mentioned when requesting to converse is not one I feel at liberty to share. Perhaps you could bring the subject up with Virgil instead?”

Of course the subject turning to focus on Logic would have him retreating, even if they were stood in his room. Deceit didn't mind though, already working on the next steps they could make, even as he nodded and took the offered book. “Many thanks for the information, Logan. I hope we'll be able to receive dear Virgil's forgiveness soon.”

“That's a new book! You seeing the nerd behind my back?” Remus asked as he bounced into Deceit's room, finding him reading still. “Thought he wouldn't date us unless Virgil's okay with it?”

“Not dating, just information gathering so I can come up with a plan to fix some of the damage we've done to our relationship with Virgil.” Deceit sighed, rubbing his eyes, suggesting he'd been reading for too long if Remus was any judge. That was an itchy eyes action that made him want to remove them from his head if he ever experienced it.

Remus tilted his head then, confused by the amount of planning Deceit was trying to do. Acting on impulses seemed to be working perfectly so far. “You mean we need to be doing more than just trying to spend more time with him and talking through some of our emotions with him? It helped a lot when I had the breakdown of him being My People.”

“Yeah, I'm thinking that might work pretty well, but learning about the other love languages he's likely to use can't hurt, might even help me work out a way to let myself be emotionally vulnerable without you know, all my normal automatic misdirections.” He mused, finally marking the page and setting the book to one side.

“Vivi knows you. He's not going to want either of us to change how we are, even if we do it trying to reach out.” Remus comforted him, automatically wrapping their bodies together. He would have done more, but had learnt already that Deceit didn't always take kindly to some actions when there were a lot of thoughts in his head.

With those words Remus decided they were having a nap, muffling any further protests or musings from Deceit with thick blankets and lots of hugs.

It was a tentative hope that Deceit now held, although he knew Remus believed he saw it as enthusiastically as he did. Working with the love languages both that Deceit found himself using and that he'd learnt Virgil held, he would put time and effort into the relationship before anyone brought up dating again.

Of course Logan would be included too but on this first attempt Deceit was approaching Virgil alone. Words of affection came naturally but Deceit wanted to start with an idea of what to say, to explain about what happened before.

After talking it over and over with Remus, helping him to understand how their previous rash actions appeared to impact Virgil as well as wondering if the things they used to do together might help, it was time to actually try something.

"Want to help me make dinner?" the offer made Virgil pause, door only half open when Deceit asked the question.

It had been the activity Deceit thought he'd most willingly do again and they always spoke while cooking. That had been enough reason to try and Remus had supported the idea hopeful they might all share it later.

"Sure. What are you wanting to make?" Finally Deceit could let out the breath he'd held just hoping this might work.

Virgil knew something was being attempted, Deceit had a way of standing when he was trying to achieve a goal but he'd missed working with him doing something simple. He followed easily knowing either of them could make the dish alone but preferred to cook with people.

He took the task of chopping vegetables, even before Deceit answered his question. It was fairly clear that while he had already started getting ingredients out of the cupboards Deceit hadn't actually settled over a specific dish to make. “You know, we actually need a decision over what we're cooking so I don't dice these too small. Do you want to answer my question yet?”

They'd come down too the kitchen as soon as Virgil agreed to cook and while he was thinking through what motivation there could be behind the invitation, it almost seemed like Dee was deciding that at the same time.

“Spaghetti Bolognaise.” He nodded, taking in that Deceit had chosen a dish that would leave him chopping vegetables and turned away from where Dee would be preparing the mince and sauce while the pasta simmered. That positioning guaranteed there would be emotions talked through and about.

Honestly Virgil was glad to realise that. He'd been wondering whether Deceit would just avoid him forever after the scene in the imagination. It was what he'd do when rejected in such a way, at least.

“Do you know how often I lie by omission?” Dee asking the question made him hum a little, focusing on chopping the tomatoes carefully as much as listening. It wasn't one that needed a reply anyway since he carried on speaking a moment later. “You were only nearly matching me before we kicked you out and I couldn't fathom any motive to do so. My roles makes me look for underhand motivations and where safety necessitates a lie but between us you never needed to worry about your safety, not in a way that would be impacted by anything you could reveal or say at least.”

Virgil snorted, shaking his head. “You forget to include emotions almost as easily as Logan does sometimes. There's feelings other than ambition and fear that motivate most of us.”

Deceit paused his speech while Virgil turned to add the tomatoes to the sauce and fetch the mushrooms to be diced next. Virgil still glimpsed the hesitant look, more watching his movements than the mince although it was still cooking evenly so far.

“You'd think being close with Remus and yourself I'd be better at factoring in how our actions make others feel more often, but I never meant to or wanted to create a place where you couldn't tell us even a part of what you felt. I thought the times I listened to your rambles about conspiracies and monsters meant you felt free to share things with me, but those are easy subjects to broach, nothing like emotions.” There was musing in Deceit's voice as he began speaking again, and a sorrow that Virgil understood, including realising that the shields were down for now, no pretences were being used this afternoon.

“Just a bit of a difference in subject there Dee.” He couldn't help snarking, shaking his head at the knife he was using.

“That's everything, Virge! I deal in lies, in distractions to protect and conserve Thomas as who he is or wants to be so he can appear that way while looking after himself and taking the time to become it. I spend all the time working out verifiable reactions and trying to prevent the unpleasant ones that of course I sometimes overlook the emotional ones when all the actions we have say things are fine. You're the one who knows emotions far better even when we have to share self preservation responsibilities and you left me floundering when all I could get was a sense of being lied to where there was no reason or motive I could understand for you to do so.” The rant had Virgil turning, bewildered and concerned over the hurt in Deceit's voice but unsure how to help.

Instead he stood still, watching as Dee sighed, shoulders slumping as he replaced the hat he must have knocked off with a gesture. “I just wanted to understand and help with whatever you felt the need to lie about for all that time. There were so many causes of what it could be when I tried to think of things changing or happening that you wouldn't tell us until it felt like the most reasonable was that you were planning to leave, so I tried to give you a chance to tell us or not and get what I thought you wanted. You'd already spent so much time helping Thomas around those guys that it was all I could understand being omitted. I lashed out, losing you without you saying a word or trying to do it secretly hurt so much to think of until that was what I caused anyway.”

Virgil moved then, standing behind him as the mince was shifted in a pan a little more. It was difficult to hear how everything he'd gone through when being kicked out was from Deceit's point of view, but finally made sense of how sought out he was even when he thought Dee hated him for getting accepted.

It felt like Deceit had just bared his heart in the speech he'd just made. It wasn't quite what he intended to do and the silence from Virgil was biting at him now. Still he stepped to one side letting Virgil add the last vegetables diced and mixing the sauce, vegetables and mince all together while he drained the spaghetti, just waiting for a response.

“You always focus on Thomas living in society when arguing with the others. I think we all forget that we live as parts of Thomas with our roles impacting how we see the world and react to emotions.” Virgil sighed, and Dee froze taking a moment to realise that Virgil wasn't ready right then to carry on the emotional talk immediately. “I don't know if you're looking for forgiveness or just trying to explain the bullshit you and Remus pulled but if you need it you're forgiven or whatever.”

There was a sensation of a weight lifting at the words accompanied by a dread that everything he'd just said had been misunderstood. “No, Well yes and thank you but no, I was just... I wanted to say I was an idiot who didn't deal with that well at all, and hoped you could understand a little of what I thought was happening.”

“Story understood then, I guess. Now can we break this sappy moment and go feed the starving beast before one of us has to do a supply run for more soap and shampoo?” Virgil's shoulders were beginning to slouch in more than usual and Deceit knew he couldn't take much more high emotion talk either so he nodded, letting the talk drop and splitting the food between four plates.

“Do you want to invite Logan to eat with us all down here tonight?” He suggested, smiling a little as he saw the confusion about the number in Virgil's face.

Perhaps he hadn't focused on using their love languages as much as he had intended when planning the evening but this seemed to have had a better ending than he'd expected anyway. Especially as Virgil darted off up the stairs with a yelled thanks and agreement to invite Logan down.

/\/\/\

@book-of-charlie asked to be tagged

/\/\/\ Part Eight /\/\/\ Part Nine /\/\/\/\

#dukeceit #Janus Sanders #deceit sanders #virgil sanders #remus #logan sanders #Analogical

27 notes · View notes

hattydrago-official · 4 years

Text

Otome Thought-ology Pt.1 Number of Love Interests

Name is pending, but essentially I felt like exploring Otome games as a genre in a few thought pieces. I myself primarily watch otome game based anime, but also delve into researching their sources. Note, there will be minor spoilers, or more like hints towards spoilers, for many of the games and anime I end up talking about.

The first topic of discussion I felt like going into is, what makes an Otome, especially in the space of the anime sphere, differ from just a romance anime/game. There are many ways to think about this, but I believe that the separation has a good amount to do with the number of Love Interests involved.

For the most part from what I’ve seen, an otome game has to have at least 3 initial love interests. This is to say for the protagonist, your MC/OC, there are at least 3 love interests in the game upon starting up the game. The only game I can think of that skews this formula slightly is Shall We Date Love Triangle, only in concept, where you choose a route based on going between two guys as Love Interests. But even in that case there are initially 3 routes to go down.

So why 3? I think it is to go away from the usual issue of romance anime. In a romance anime there is usually a Love Interest presented right away, and later on another is added as a foil. There are likely exceptions, but usually the romance anime still focus on the character eventually ending up with the first Love Interest presented. This is not to say romance anime never have more than 3, Kiss Him, Not Me, is an excellent romance which from the forefront presents 4 potential Li’s and a fifth not far behind.

Now again, why 3? For the most part this likely has to do with character dynamics. If you only have 2 choices, they are either so different that you can only come to enjoy one over the other, or one does something so heinous that it emotionally forces you into the arms of the other. With at least 3, if one Li peeves you off to no end, there are still two prime options to build tension with.

Another character dynamic that comes with having 3 or more Li’s, is each Li’s interactions with another Li’s. The more Li’s there are, the more interesting dynamics that can be created. This ends up becoming more interesting the more Li’s there end up being.

When you have at least 4 Li’s, there are often opportunities to divide the Li’s into two man groups. A great example of this is Amnesia, where with the initial 4 Li’s are grouped as two of them being childhood friends of the protagonist, and the other two being good friends with each other. Another great example is Mr. Love Producer: Queen’s Choice (MLQC), where each character works on their own for the most part, but can be divided either by the two oldest vs two youngest, or by two working for a company in game, and the other two being against said company.

It gets even more interesting when you get to 6 or 7 Li’s. Obey Me is a great example of this, initially having 7 Li’s who are all brothers each with distinct personalities. Meaning, each of them can have a different character dynamic with a different Li. I’ll take Beelzebub (Beel) as the primary example on this topic. Beel has the closest ties with his twin brother Belphegor, and their dynamic works in almost opposites attract sort of way. One is big in stature and works out, while the other is smaller and more lazy, but they are both pretty chill overall. Comparing that with Beel and Satan, where Beel is strong, Satan is highly intelligent. I could go into way more detail but I think I’ll leave the Obey Me Brothers and their dynamics for a separate thought piece.

Going even further with this, I have been recently rewatching Uta-Pri and they also show this concept fairly well. From the beginning, initial 6 Li’s are grouped by two into boarding rooms, 2 of the 3 groups already know each other from their pasts, and all 3 groups the Li’s are somewhat foils to the other. Closer towards graduation when the MC asks for them to work together, you have them split off differently, with 2 being all in, 2 on the fence, and the last 2 fully disliking the idea.

I think I’ll end this here for now, but I could go on and on about how the Idol based otome games tend to have larger numbers of Li’s, and some going to crazy numbers due to the nature of gacha games (100 Princes). If ya’ll are curious about my thoughts on any other otome topic, feel free to ask. I am likely going to write the piece on the Obey Me Brothers and each of their pair dynamics next.

#obey me!#obey me shall we date #uta no prince #mlqc #amnesia #obey me

8 notes · View notes

meowloudly15 · 5 years

Text

Stranded: Day 5 - OCTAGONS

Okay, I know I'm supposed to be on hiatus from Tumblr right now, but I have to keep posting these things.

First | Previous | Next

Gwen woke up gradually to the high pitched hum of fluorescent lights. She stared blankly at the black ceiling, blinking a trickle of blood out of her eyes. Her forehead ached. Actually, every part of her ached, felt restrained and tight.

OCTAGONS

"So the spider finally awakens," said Liv. At least, the lady standing at the other end of the room resembled her to the extent that Gwen's blurry vision could distinguish between figures. The primary difference was her clothing. Liv now wore a green and black onesie and had three, no, four long tubular arms, each ending in a translucent pincer, protruding from a harness on her torso.

"Nuh?" Gwen mumbled sleepily.

Liv turned away from some sort of black rectangular blur. "Still tired, are you? Don't worry. You'll have plenty of time for rest."

"Whaddya wan' from me?" Gwen slurred, blinking rapidly in an effort to clear the fog from her mind. For some reason, she couldn't reach up to rub her eyes.

Liv walked to her side. "You've got an awfully pretty face, you know. Except for this thing." One tubular arm reached over her head and tapped Gwen's eyebrow piercing. "How nonconformist of you."

Gwen grimaced, less at the jolt of pain than at Liv's condescending tone. "I like it. And I don't care if you don't."

The fog abruptly lifted.

Gwen was in a medium-sized, low-ceilinged room with frosted glass walls and a white tiled floor. It was brightly lit, despite the darkness outside. There was a computer about twelve feet away and a workbench covered with science-y stuff two feet to her right. Her backpack and mask stood on another, more distant table. Gwen herself was strapped to a black and green chair by thick plastic bands. She could move her head and hands, but that was all.

HOSTILE SITUATION

Her spider-sense could easily contend for the position of Captain Obvious.

What was this, the second time that she had been imprisoned? She needed to up her game big-time.

Gwen shook her head. "You couldn't have just sent me back home, could you?"

Liv chuckled. Her insincere grin remained on her face as though it had been stuck there with epoxy. "No, sweetie, of course not. You're the perfect guinea pig for me to understand more about dimensional travelling, especially the effects that it's had on you."

Gwen strained against the bands. They were an awful lot tougher than they looked.

"Don't bother struggling. I've analysed your strength levels. You're stronger than you look. It's truly fascinating how your spider DNA has affected your physique. Regardless, these bands can only be opened by me and this lever." Liv gestured to a small metal switch on the workbench.

Gwen immediately knew exactly how she would escape. She nearly snickered, but her face remained impassive. She was well-practiced at concealing her emotions. Still, she didn't trust herself to speak.

Liv began to pace back and forth and continued, "I figure you'll appreciate being enlightened about your situation. I mean, you have nothing better to do. And I do love imparting my knowledge of science upon others.

"The way you got here is utterly fascinating. I still can't figure out how the dimensional transporter hasn't even been activated yet but you arrived last week."

"It what?" asked a befuddled Gwen.

"Yes. We're due to test it tomorrow evening. I can't imagine the test will go very well, seeing as you're now here."

"Tell me more about it."

Liv chuckled to herself. "Oh… that's none of your concern. Besides, how would I know if it hasn't happened yet?

"The big question is, what's happening to you? I'm sure that'll interest you far more." She clapped her hands together. "So! I'm sure you've noticed those odd spasms that you have every once in a while, right?"

"Atomic disjunctions," Gwen corrected.

"Ato- huh." Liv ran over to the monitor and typed forcefully on her keyboard. "That's a good term for it. Well, the thing is, your atoms aren't really jazzed about being in another dimension. The rules of physics and such are a bit different here than they are where you're from. So your atoms are breaking down. Slowly. Agonisingly, I imagine. Have you been in much pain?"

"Well, I've been getting headaches, and I'm tired all the time," Gwen answered truthfully.

"Those must be side effects. I imagine they'll worsen as time passes. You've been here for how long now? Five days? Five and a half?"

Gwen nodded.

"Given your superhuman durability, I imagine you'll be dead in about a week."

She was right. She was a ghost. She was going to die.

But at least she wouldn't die holed up in this lab.

"That's why you have to stay here. I need to study the long-term effects of dimensional travel before you disintegrate. While I could wait or find the other one, you're already h-"

"Wait," interrupted Gwen. "Other one?"

Liv clapped her hands together. "Ah, yes! I've detected traces of another being, similar to you, in Brooklyn."

That was intriguing news. Maybe that was a good thing. She could get help from him. Or her. Or maybe he had ill intentions. Not all people with superpowers were good. Regardless, Gwen now had a goal.

Liv strode over to the workbench. "Well, anyway, now that you're awake, I ought to perform some more tests on you. Don't worry. I promise they won't hurt too much."

It was now or never. Gwen looked down at her gloved hands, chuckling inwardly.

"There's one factor that you haven't considered," she said.

Liv frowned, looking up. Her claws continued to fidget with what looked like a futuristic syringe.

"And what's that?"

"You gotta watch the hands."

Gwen fired a webline from her glove at the switch, flicking it off. The bands snapped open, and she leaped to her feet, mildly disoriented.

Liv exclaimed and whipped the syringe at Gwen, missing her neck by a fraction of an inch as she dodged out of the way. Gwen grabbed the claw and yanked it forward, sending Liv hurtling into the workbench and chair, scattering instruments everywhere.

Gwen let go and ran to the exit, but Liv blocked her, moving more quickly than she had anticipated. Her cybernetically-enhanced foe lashed out with a claw, striking Gwen across the face. She retaliated by webbing the pincer shut and kicking Liv in the chest, sending her flying backwards into the door.

Liv recovered and grabbed the workbench, tossing it at Gwen. She ducked under it, and it smashed to pieces against the surprisingly sturdy wall. Gwen shot a webline at the door handle and attempted to pull it open, but the handle snapped off.

Liv slashed and stabbed through thin air, playing a game of Wac-A-Mole with Gwen. The mole was winning. Gwen ducked and dodged, expertly avoiding the swinging tentacles.

Liv was protecting the door. There was no way for Gwen to get past her, so it looked like she'd have to take her out.

"Could you please cooperate?" asked Liv. "I need these data for research purposes!"

"Yeah, sorry, you're getting your mad science in my compelling need to get back home. That's a no from me."

One of Liv's tubular arms managed to grasp Gwen by the left wrist, holding tight. Gwen struggled to free herself, but the inflatable claw was a good deal stronger than it looked. She eventually resorted to using her right hand to pry off the pincers one by one, but another arm grabbed her by the neck, choking her, as a third grabbed her right wrist and yanked her arms apart.

She needed to disable that harness.

"Please, don't make me do this the hard way! I can't get much useful data from a dead body!"

Gwen gasped out, "I'm… already… dead!"

She attempted to gain ground against the push of the claws but barely got two feet before being forced back again. Her shoulders screamed from the strain of keeping her arms attached to her body.

Liv chuckled maliciously. "You're not dead quite yet, but you might be sooner than you think. There's at least one other spider-person out there, so you aren't all that important to me. And I for one would love to squash a spider."

Gwen somehow found the strength to flex her left arm so that her hand was pointing at Liv. She opened fire with her webshooter, covering Liv's face with webbing so that she couldn't see. Liv yelled in surprise and started wiping the stuff away, but Gwen surged forward and pinned her human arms to the wall.

The claws, unsure of what to do, loosened up. Gwen yanked her arms free from their grasp. She ran forward and dented Liv's harness with a swift kick to the gut. Liv doubled over, gasping for breath. The arms likewise deflated and retracted into her harness.

Gwen pried off the harness, wires crackling and snapping apart, and grabbed Liv in a chokehold. "Tell me more about the collider."

Liv shook her head, remaining silent.

Gwen glared at her. "Answer me! Answer me, or, or I'll kill you!"

"You wouldn't."

Gwen blinked, then reaffirmed her savage look. "I've killed before…"

Memories that she would have preferred to stay repressed bubbled to the surface. She quickly shoved them back down.

"...and I can do it again."

She squeezed harder, and Liv gagged, her face losing all its colour.

"Can't… tell… if… can't… breathe…"

Gwen relaxed her grip, still keeping her hands on Liv's neck. "Then tell me."

Liv gasped for air. "We're testing it tomorrow, on the bottom floor. If I were you, I wouldn't intervene. Who knows what you'd do to the timestream? And know that if I see you again, you're gonna die."

Gwen sighed, then released Liv and webbed her securely to the wall. She grabbed her mask and backpack, kicked down the door, and left the room.

She wasn't going home for a while yet, but at least she had some inkling of what to do next. She could try to find the other spider-person, or she could find the dimension collider. Or both. She had a week.

First | Previous | Next

#spidergwen #spider gwen #violence #brief peril #death mention #gwen stacy #ghost spider #spiderverse #into the spiderverse #spiderman into the spiderverse #fanfic #fic #fanfiction #spiderverse fanfiction #spiderverse fanfic #writing #stranded #stranded fanfic

4 notes · View notes

shoury01 · 3 years

Text

PERSONAL EFFECTIVENESS AND PRODUCTIVITY: BEHAVIOURS ASSOCIATED

Story - The Ivy Lee Method:

By 1918, Charles M. Schwab was one of the richest men in the world. Schwab was the president of the Bethlehem Steel Corporation, the largest shipbuilder, and the second-largest steel producer in America at the time. The famous inventor Thomas Edison once referred to Schwab as the “master hustler.” He was constantly seeking an edge over the competition. One day in 1918, in his quest to increase the efficiency of his team and discover better ways to get things done, Schwab arranged a meeting with a highly respected productivity consultant named Ivy Lee. Lee was a successful businessman in his own right and is widely remembered as a pioneer in the field of public relations.

As the story goes, Schwab brought Lee into his office and said, “Show me a way to get more things done.” “Give me 15 minutes with each of your executives,” Lee replied. “How much will it cost me,” Schwab asked. “Nothing,” Lee said. “Unless it works. After three months, you can send me a check for whatever you feel it's worth to you.”

The Ivy Lee Method:. . . . . . . . During his 15 minutes with each executive, Ivy Lee explained this simple set of daily routine steps for achieving peak productivity:

1. At the end of each workday, write down the six most important things you need to accomplish tomorrow.

2. Do not write down more than six tasks.

3. Prioritize those six items in order of their true importance.

4. When you arrive tomorrow, concentrate only on the first task.

5. Work until the first task is finished before moving on to the second task.

6. Approach the rest of your list in the same fashion.

7. At the end of the day, move any unfinished items to a new list of six tasks for the following day.

8. Repeat this process every working day.

The strategy sounded simple, but Schwab and his executive team at Bethlehem Steel gave it a try. After three months, Schwab was so delighted with the progress his company had made that he called Lee into his office and wrote him a check for $25,000. A $25,000 check written in 1918 is the equivalent of a $400,000 check in 2015. The Ivy Lee Method of prioritizing our to-do list seems stupidly simple. How could something this simple be worth so much?

A) It is simple enough to actually work: . . . . . . . . The primary critique of methods like this one is that they are too basic. They do not account for all of the complexities and nuances of life. What happens if an emergency pops up? What about using the latest technology to our fullest advantage? Sometimes, complexity is actually a weakness because it makes it harder to get back on track. Emergencies and unexpected distractions will arise. Ignoring them as much as possible, dealing with them when we must, and getting back to our prioritized to-do list as soon as possible is what brings productivity. The use of simple rules to guide complex behavior often serves the best results.

B) It forces us to make tough decisions: . . . . . . . . . There is nothing magical about Lee's number of six important tasks per day. It could just as easily be five tasks per day. However, there is something magical about imposing limits upon ourselves. Sometimes, the single best thing to do when we have too many ideas (or when we are overwhelmed by everything we need to get done) is to prune our ideas and trim away everything that is not absolutely necessary. Constraints can make us better. Lee's method is similar to Warren Buffett’s 25-5 Rule, which requires us to focus on just 5 critical tasks and ignore everything else. Basically, if we commit to nothing, we will be distracted by everything.

C) It removes the friction of starting: . . . . . . . . . The biggest hurdle to finishing most tasks is starting them. Lee's method forces us to decide on our first task the night before we go to work. If we decide the night before, we can start work immediately the next day, and not end up wasting time deciding what needs our attention. It is simple, but it works. In the beginning, getting started is just as important as succeeding at all.

Another tool that could be useful here is known as the Eisenhower Box (or Eisenhower Matrix) and it’s a simple decision-making tool. General Dwight Eisenhower had an incredible ability to sustain his productivity for weeks and months. And for that reason, it is no surprise that his methods for time management, task management, and productivity have been studied by many people. Before becoming the 34th President of the United States, Eisenhower was a five-star general in the United States Army, served as the Supreme Commander of the Allied Forces in Europe during World War II, and was responsible for planning and executing invasions of North Africa, France, and Germany.

D) It requires us to single-task: . . . . . . . . . Modern society loves multi-tasking. The myth of multi-tasking is that being busy is synonymous with being better. The exact opposite is true. Having fewer priorities leads to better work. World-class experts in nearly any field—athletes, artists, scientists, teachers, CEOs—have one characteristic that runs through all of them: focus. The reason is simple. We cannot be great at one task if we are constantly dividing our time ten different ways. Mastery requires focus and consistency. The bottom line? Do the most important thing first each day. It's the only productivity trick we need.

The Myth of Multitasking: Why Fewer Priorities Leads to Better Work

The word priority did not always mean what it does today. In his best-selling book, Essentialism (audiobook), Greg McKeown explains the surprising history of the word and how its meaning has shifted over time. “The word priority came into the English language in the 1400s. It was singular. It meant the very first or prior thing. It stayed singular for the next five hundred years. Only in the 1900s did we pluralize the term and start talking about priorities. Illogically, we reasoned that by changing the word we could bend reality. Somehow, we would now be able to have multiple “first” things. People and companies routinely try to do just that. One leader told me of this experience in a company that talked of “Pri-1, Pri-2, Pri-3, Pri-4, and Pri-5.” This gave the impression of many things being the priority but actually meant nothing was.” –Greg McKeown, Essentialism

Yes, we are capable of doing two things at the same time. It is possible, for example, to watch TV while cooking dinner or to answer an email while talking on the phone. What is impossible, however, is concentrating on two tasks at once. Multitasking forces our brain to switch back and forth very quickly from one task to another. This would not be a big deal if the human brain could transition seamlessly from one job to the next, but it cannot. Multitasking forces us to pay a mental price each time we interrupt one task and jump to another. In psychology terms, this mental price is called the switching cost. Switching cost is the disruption in performance that we experience when we switch our attention from one task to another.

For example, A 2003 study published in the International Journal of Information Management found that the typical person checks email once every five minutes and that, on average, it takes 64 seconds to resume the previous task after checking your email. In other words, because of email alone, we typically waste one out of every six minutes.

The myth of multitasking is that it will make us more effective. In reality, remarkable focus is what makes the difference. While we are on the subject, the word multitasking first appeared in 1965 IBM report talking about the capabilities of its latest computer.

Finding Your Anchor Task: . .. . . . . . . . Doing more things does not drive faster or better results. Doing better things drives better results. Even more accurately, doing one thing as best you can, drives better results. The power of choosing one priority is that it naturally guides our behavior by forcing us to organize our life around that responsibility. Our priority becomes an anchor task, the mainstay that holds the rest of our day in place. If things get crazy, there is no debate about what to do or not to do. We have already decided what is urgent and what is important.

Saying No to Being Busy: . . . . . . . . As a society, we have fallen into a trap of busyness and overwork. In many ways, we have mistaken all this activity to be something meaningful. The underlying thought seems to be, “Look how busy I am? If I am doing all this work, I must be doing something important.” And, by extension, “I must be important because I'm so busy.” The people who do the most valuable work have a remarkable willingness to say no to distractions and focus on their one thing.

Implementation Intentions: Mastering One Thing at a Time

Many people have multiple areas of life they would like to improve. The problem is, even if we are committed to working hard on our goals, our natural tendency is to revert back to our old habits at some point. Making a permanent lifestyle change is difficult.

The approach to mastering many areas of life is somewhat counterintuitive. If we want to master multiple habits and stick to them for good, then we need to figure out how to be consistent. How can we do that? Research has shown that we are 2x to 3x more likely to stick with our habits if we make a specific plan for when, where, and how we will perform the behaviour. For example, in one study scientists asked people to fill out this sentence: “During the next week, I will partake in at least 20 minutes of vigorous exercise on [DAY] at [TIME OF DAY] at/in [PLACE].”

Psychologists call these specific plans “implementation intentions” because they state when, where, and how we intend to implement a particular behavior. For example, implementation intentions have been found to increase the odds that people will start exercising, begin recycling, stick with studying, and even stop smoking. However (and this is crucial to understand) follow-up research has discovered that implementation intentions only work when we focus on one thing at a time. When we begin practicing a new habit it requires a lot of conscious effort to remember to do it. After a while, however, the pattern of behavior becomes easier. Eventually, our new habit becomes a normal routine, and the process is more or less mindless and automatic. Automaticity is the ability to perform a behavior without thinking about each step, which allows the pattern to become automatic and habitual. But here is the thing: automaticity only occurs as the result of lots of repetition and practice. The more reps we put in, the more automatic a behavior becomes. The most important thing to note is that there is some “tipping point” at which new habits become more or less automatic. The time it takes to build a habit depends on many factors including how difficult the habit is, what our environment is like, our genetics, and more. The counterintuitive insight from all of this research is that the best way to change our entire life is by not changing our entire life. Instead, it is best to focus on one specific habit, work on it until we master it, and make it an automatic part of our daily life. Then, repeat the process for the next habit. The way to master more things in the long run is to simply focus on one thing right now.

**Source Credits:

Too Much of a Good Thing by Amy N. Dalton and Stephen A. Spiller

How are habits formed by Phillippa Lally, Cornelia H. M. Van Jaarsveld, Henry W. W. Potts and Jane Wardle (2010)

Atomic Habits by James Clear.

Essentialism (audiobook) by Greg McKeown

The Time Trap by R. Alec Mackenzie and Mary Kay

Content Curated By: Dr Shoury Kuttappa

#human behavior #habits #motivation #procastination #consistency #deliberate practice #goal setting #productivity #better thinking #creativity #decision making #focus #mental toughness

0 notes

s0021069a2film-blog · 8 years

Text

Post, G. Creative Investigation - Stage 5

Final Submission

Creative Investigation

Introduction- I have chosen to conduct my creative investigation on American film maker Martin Scorsese. Martin is one of the most influential film makers of the last century, many claiming him as the greatest American director of his time. I strongly believe this is due to the way Scorsese treats movies, they are his life. Quite literally and figuratively, Martin has invested his life purely to film. After reading chapters from ‘Scorsese on Scorsese’ and watching his Interview at Browns University I’ve come to realise he works on the philosophy that all great films come from somewhere personal in film makers’ hearts. Martin knows he can only work on a script if it means something to him, if he can relate to it. Therefore, it is fairly easy to spot the themes Martin has threaded through his body of work because they mirror his personal life so closely. Scorsese’s up brining is what has given him such a distinct view of the world and his distinct view of the world is what makes his movies so distinctive.

Key Texts- Primary Sources:

(Fig.1) Mean Streets – Scorsese’s motive for this film was to offer an accurate interpretation of Italian-American life style and showcase the way this culture works. It gives a real insight on the environment Scorsese grew up in and the protagonist is said to be based on an alter ego of Scorsese himself. The general premise of mean streets: Charlie, is torn between impressing his uncle, a local mafia boss, and being there for the ones he loves, Teresa and Johnny Boy. There are lots of religious motifs and there’s lots discussing the importance of street family over real family.

(Fig.2) Goodfellas – This film was an adaptation of the book ‘Wiseguy’ be Nicholas Pileggi. Scorsese loved the arrogance of this story and felt he knew enough about the setting to make an interesting movie about it. The story follows a Mafia Foot solider turned FBI informant called Henry Hill, the movie starts during Henry’s childhood and shows how quickly a boy born in an Italian American neighbourhood can start running errands for the local Mob.

(Fig.3) The Departed – This film is an adaptation of Andrew Lau’s ‘Internal Affairs’ (2003) and was a return to Scorsese’s success with mobster films. Taking place in a more modern era, the film finds two protagonists Billy Costigan and Colin Sullivan pitted against each other both working as rats on opposite sides of the law. The two race to uncover each other before their own duplicity is exposed. The film shows how invested a person can be into their own lies and the toll this has on the mental psyche. Everything is sacrificed for their cover.

Secondary Sources:

Books

(Fig.4).Thompson, D., Christie, I. and Scorsese, M. (1995) Scorsese on Scorsese (directors on directors). London, United Kingdom: Faber and Faber. – In the chapters I’ve read, this book has offered some invaluable insight into each of Scorsese’s films, up to casino. This comes from Martin himself, he explains much about his intensions behind the films, where they came from and how he made them. In the books opening chapters Scorsese tells us about his childhood and his education which all back up previous finding about Scorsese’s life influencing his movies.

(Fig.5) Grist, L. (2000) ‘the films of Martin Scorsese’, 1963-1977: Authorship and context. 2nd edn. Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire [England]: St. Martin’s Press

Articles

(Fig.6) .Ebert, R. (1976) Interview with Martin Scorsese | interviews. (Accessed: 10 October 2016) – An old interview at the start of Scorsese’s career which gives an interesting insight on how quickly Scorsese was established as a great film maker and how much of this was due to his Catholicism. Most of the talking is steered around Taxi Driver and although not it’s not one of my focal films it is still all very useful information.

(Fig.7) Smith, S. and Jones, K. (2014) Interview: Martin Scorsese at 72. (Accessed: 10 October 2016) - This is a very short interview with Scorsese however martin out right claims all his films have links to Catholicism which is clearly a recurring theme making this sores very useful. It also alludes to the importance of New York in Scorsese’s film making.

(Fig.8) Gussow, M. (1997) Movie fan who also makes them. (Accessed: 10 October 2016). – A report from after Martin’s success with Goodfellas and release of The Last Temptation of Christ. The report includes a short interview where Scorsese is asked questions about his inspirations for mean streets and what the impact a director’s childhood has on their film making. Both the report and the short interview are very useful however there is a lack of detail due to the interview being so short.

(Fig.9) Murray, R. (2012) Director Martin Scorsese discusses ‘the departed’ Scorsese delivers another unforgettable film. (Accessed: 7 October 2016). – A report including questions answered by Scorsese. Being primarily focused of The Departed and the films themes. This is very useful as this is one of my focal films and I had not picked up on these themes when watching the films. Although it must be said, only one quote will likely prove useful in my analysis.

(Fig.10) .Silverman, S. (2013) ‘Food’, 12 April. (Accessed: 7 October 2016). – This source is rather useless compared to my other sources as for the most part it describes Scorsese’s appearance and character more than anything else. However the reason for its inclusion is one particular quote from Scorsese which give great detail about where he found his passion for films and how living ran the society he did led him onto that path.

Video Interviews

(Fig.11) Blank on Blank (2016) Martin Scorsese on framing | blank on blank | PBS digital studios. (Accessed: 10 October 2016). - An animated interview with Scorsese from 1990 were he explains much about his style and where the inspiration for his films come from. This is my most valuable sources as Scorsese really dives deep into his religious beliefs and how they effected his career.

(Fig.12) K. Trolander (2013) Martin Scorsese interview - 2003, brown university. - An interview held in light of Scorsese’s then recently released title ‘Gangs of New York’. A lengthy interview where Scorsese talks about much more than ‘Gangs of New York’. Much is discussed about his family, culture and religion and how they are truly the inspiration behind everything he does in film. This source is another of my most valuable and will prove very useful.

Hypnotises – Having conducted my research, it is clear there are some fundamental factors in Scorsese’s personal life that have deeply influenced his film making career. I have narrowed this down to three major points to explore and these are Scorsese’s culture and family. Scorsese will express these things in any way he can. Weather that be through his themes or his style, even his camera techniques have visual metaphors for things deeply connected to Scorsese’s heart.

Discussion – How does religion Influence Scorsese’s film making: If you’re watching a Scorsese film and you don’t see a cross at least once, you’re probably not watching a Scorsese film. Martin uses religious symbolism both abruptly and subtly, he’s a serious Catholic and doing this is a homage to his faith. It gives his films a biblical tone, like his pictures are trying to convey a message on a more holy level.

Often they are for example, the first thing to be established about Charlie, the protagonist from ‘Mean Streets’, is his faith. Before we hear about his uncle, Johnny Boy or Teresa we see a close over shoulder shot of Charlie at the church. This is important because we now know Charlie feels guilt and at this point it’s the only thing we know about him. The opening line of the film is “You don’t make up for your sins in church – you do it in the streets” (fig.1). If you use this logic when analysing each of Charlie’s actions we learn why he is so compelled to help Johnny boy; he feels guilty because of his faith. This is still strange because faith hasn’t got much to do with the overall narrative but it’s the message behind the narrative that’s important. But why would Scorsese bother to do this if it doesn’t impact the story? This could simply be a way to give Charlie’s character more depth, but the reason is possibly explained by a quote from Scorsese when asked about catholic references in ‘Taxi Driver’: “I suppose there are a lot of Catholic references in the film, even if they’re only my own personal reference” (fig.6). Scorsese places meaning into his films for his own sake, “I’m a Roman Catholic. I’m very serious about it. My films usually deal with a certain religious subject, there’s no doubt about it.” (Fig.7). Martin expresses his religion through film the same way Charlie expresses his religion through looking out for Johnny boy. This quality is one of the most distinctive characteristics of Scorsese, if he wasn’t a Catholic his films wouldn’t be the same. This says much about how a film really can come from a director’s vision which in turn comes from their own beliefs.

‘The Departed’ was an adaptation of ‘Internal Affairs’ (Andrew Lau, 2002), Scorsese claimed to follow the source material “quite closely” (fig.9). However, having watched ‘Internal Affairs’ one clear difference is that Collin Sullivan, The Departed protagonist, has Catholic beliefs and Lau Kin Ming, the protagonist from ‘Internal Affairs’, doesn’t. Like in ‘Mean Streets’ this isn’t all that important but it leaves a subtle undertone of greater meaning.

For the best example of this one must closely compare one of the first scenes we see Colin and the last scene of the film, Colin’s death. The former places young Colin in a Catholic seminary (interestingly Scorsese himself was part of a similar seminary in his youth (fig.12)). The scene starts with a medium close up of Colin as he performs a ritual over a coffin, cutting to a mid-shot of a priest preforming the same ritual. The camera stays focused on Colin forcing us to observe his uninterested expression despite being dressed like a priest and preforming priest like actions. We can assume from this that Colin is starting to consider straying off the path of god. We then get a beautiful wide angle from the roof of the church looking down at Colin who is dead centre. Possibly a visual metaphor for God looking down at Colin as his starts to idolise Costello, the film’s antagonist, as oppose to him. The scene finishes with a long shot of Colin and the priest bowing, over which we hear a sound bridge of Costello’s voice claiming: “the church wants you in your place” (fig.3).

Keep this scene in mind whilst analysing the last scene of the film where Colin has truly left the path of God. Said scene starts with a mid-shot of an elevator door which opens to reveal Colin. The camera reverse tracks Colin as he approaches his apartment door, on the way he tries to stroke a puppy which avoids his touch as if it can senses his evil. The door holds the number 711, the 11th verse of the 7th passage of the bible discusses how God detests those who indulge in sin and how he will have his revenge on them, this heavily foreshadows what’s to come next. We see Colin enter the room from the inside, this gives the impression that there is a person in the room waiting for him and this shot is that person’s POV. In the same shot Colin looks up to meet his maker, the look on Colin’s face tells the audience he’s immediately at the mercy of someone in the room before we even see that person. The next shot slowly reveals the intruder to be Sargent Dignam, a character most of the audience have forgotten about. The shot starts at Digman’s feet which are covered by surgical shoe covers, this is the moments we realise Colin is going to die. The Camera briefly flicks back to Colin to show his startled expression then back to Digman as he shoots Colin dead. Digman leaves the room, without cutting the camera pans slowly upwards from Colin’s lifeless body to the Cathedral seen through Colin’s window. The Cathedral is at a higher angle to Colin’s body and the idea of the church looking down, like in the first scene, is very apparent. At the end of the film God has got his revenge. This message is never told directly to us but through subtle use of Mise en Scene and cleaver camera work Scorsese entwined it into the story.

As said, the original script from ‘Internal Affairs’ didn’t include these biblical message but in order for Scorsese to make this film his own he added them into the Script. When discussing the evolution of the Departed script Scorsese claims it was a “long process” and that you “had to be there” to fully understand how it changed from ‘Internal Affairs’ but ultimately he claims. “I had to put myself into the script to make it my own” (fig.9). One part of himself he defiantly put into this film was his faith.

To partly conclude, it is clear that Scorsese is a very strong believer in Catholicism he holds this value very highly when making his movies. A quote from Scorsese explains much about why he put these messages into his films: “One doesn’t realize that one doesn’t need to become a priest or need a third or fourth person to be able to talk to god, its direct communication. Making up my first short films that I did in my youth, that’s when I decided I would probably fair better at what I wanted to do making movies. I didn’t set out to specifically say well I can put whatever emotions or passions I had for priesthood into film making but that happened.” (fig.11) What Scorsese is saying is much like the opening line of ‘Mean Streets’ “You don’t make up for your sins in church – you do it in the streets” (fig.1) Scorsese doesn’t make up for his sins in the church he does it in his movies. That’s the important thing to understand, although the Catholic references make him an interesting director they’re only there for his own communication with his God.

How does culture influence Scorsese’s film making: Scorsese is an Italian American. The Italian American culture is very authentic. Scorsese knows this culture like the back of his hand having grown up on Elizabeth Street, New York. It is of no coincidence the Italian American culture is one of the most apparent themes throughout Martin’s films. Roger Ebert even claims his first film ‘Who’s That Knocking at My Door’ was “semi-autobiographical” (fig.6) as is it detailed his personal life and culture so closely.

The film that really shines a light on the true Italian American gangster culture and not the glamourous gang life normally seen in films is ‘Mean Streets’. When asked about the research for this film Scorsese states: “The research on 'Mean Streets’ was my life. There was no research…I literally took one step out of the neighbourhood and made that movie.” (fig.8). This quote really allows the viewer to understand where all the inspiration for this movie comes from.

A scene that really captures Italian American’s culture is the first bar scene. The scene starts with the camera panning the bar as ‘Tell Me’ by Rolling Stones plays. Scorsese’s use of contemporary non-diegetic music is famous but it’s also a reflection of his culture. “Music was played when we were living on lower east side… so my life was scored with music that I never heard in film, so I said if I ever make a film I’d put this song against that…that’s how I saw the world I think ‘Mean Streets’ was the first one to do that.” (fig.12). Everything in this scene likely came from something Scorsese experienced first-hand clearly that included the music. The shot after the bar pan is a close up of a window with a naked woman etched onto it, the camera then zooms and a female dancer comes into focus. Moments earlier we saw Charlie in the church where sin is discussed heavily and now we have a symbol of sex and sin painted right in front of us. Through this simple use of prop we learn that the Italians Americans don’t really regard sin as important. Scorsese understood this even though he was deeply religious himself. “My parents were not that religious…because my grandparents came from Sicily…they just didn’t take government or church seriously I just found myself in the church or the movie theatre and so I took the church more seriously.” (fig.4). The shot then cuts to another pan of the bar very similar to the first however Charlie enters this time. The Camera tracks him as he walks along the bar he’s greeted by Tony who holds him a friendly embrace. Without cutting Charlie walks through the bar to find a seat. The bar is full of people who look to be enjoying themselves but the lighting casts a red tint over everything, red is the colour of lust and sin, a visual metaphor for how the Italian Americans lived. None coincidently the next shot is of the female dancer the camera zooms out from her breasts and it then cuts back to Charlie. We follow with a tracking mid shot as he dances through the bar and joins the women on the stage. Italian Americans couldn’t get away from crime it was part of their culture so even a guilty character like Charlie ignored his faith when around his friends. “People were decent hard working people who’re trying to make a living for themselves…trying to keep their kids away from the alcoholics on the Bowery and from getting involved with the rougher element…but my father was involved my father grew up with them and he didn’t know any other world.” (fig.10). This is the reality for many Italian Americans Scorsese saw this happen within his family and it’s what gives him his accurate views on his culture. The scene ends with a close up of an unnamed character watching Charlie on stage, his expressions is one of envy, like he admires Charlie’s actions.

The world of ‘Mean Streets’ is a closed one, different to today’s society. Scorsese offers a valuable insight into what life was really like living in lower east side New York. This bar scene paints a picture of the type of people who live in the Italian American community and due to the films accuracy we also gain an understanding of the people Scorsese grew up around.

Italian Americans are notorious for their gangster culture. Films like ‘The Godfather’ (Francis Ford Coppola) ‘Scarface’ (Brain De Palma) and ‘Goodfellas’ have helped establish stereotypes and in some ways glamorise the actions of this type of crime. However, this isn’t for the sake of mindless entertainment these films give a warranted interpretation of the Italian American Gangsters. Scorsese’s interpretation is particularly warranted because he has seen this crime first hand in his upbringing. ‘Goodfellas’ deals with a whole different calibre of gangsters than ‘Mean Streets’. Although Nicholas Pilegge first came up with the story, which was based on true events, it’s set in a similar environment in which Scorsese grew up in. Both Nick and Martin wrote the script for the movie. When discussing the movie in the book titled ‘The films of Martin Scorsese’ (fig.5) he claimed he was “comfortable” (fig.5) with this type of story and that he could “have fun with the script” (fig.5) as he was used to these sort of characters.

A scene that reflects the people that Scorsese grew up with is the club entrance scene from ‘Goodfellas’. This was an improvised scene as Scorsese couldn’t get permission to shoot the actors going in the front door of club however the result is something very special. The whole scene is filmed in one fluid roaming shot. The camera moves at the same fast pace as Henry and Karen as they enter the club. The two characters are always centre frame as they move through the side entrance and through the kitchen, this keep our focus on them. We see the prestige Henry has gained through his line of work by everyone in the scene paying respect to him, even when he is invading their work space and cutting through lines. Scorsese claims mobsters like Henry had the respect of everyone: “you could feel the power of these people as you crossed them in the street -you couldn’t help but put your eyes to the floor and keep moving” (fig.4). In the Italian American culture people like Henry called the shots, even when being seemingly obnoxious no one batted an eyelid. The whole scene feels uninterrupted as if the world just falls into place around men like this, aided by the masterful single take which this scene is captured in, we really get an insight into the life people like this led just from this one shot. These are the people Scorsese grew up around and him knowing when to “put your eyes to the floor” is likely why he can direct Henry so convincingly.

Something much more subtle yet perhaps more interesting is the framing of this scene. The framing is very narrow, the whole way through the shot there is little on the edge of the two characters. This may seem fairly forgettable but during an Interview at Brown University (fig.12) Scorsese explains these types of shots scattered throughout his films. “I grew up in a neighbourhood if you go in there, the hallways were really narrow, claustrophobic…that’s the way I see things” (fig.12). Again this is evidence of Scorsese’s culture influencing his film making. The narrow halls he grew up in are now narrow frames in his movies. These subtleties define his films and make him a very interesting Director to analyse.

To partly round off my analysis, an Italian American film is something Scorsese will always be able to direct because his knowledge of this world is so extensive. The place he was brought up in is so evident in the authenticity of his movies they can almost be watched as documentaries. His upbringing is so apparent in all aspects of his film, it’s something that established his style and has remained a foundation to his film making career throughout.

Conclusion:

From the evidence I have displayed, with some context into Scorsese’s personal life, it is fair to conclude that both culture and religion are huge influences on Martin’s career. These attributes are so deeply entwined into Scorsese’s methods of making film, it seems impossible for him to direct without at least a morsel of their significance. When asked whether or not film makers are trapped by their childhood Scorsese replied simply: “maybe just me” (fig. 8). ‘Trapped’ or not it is suffice to say, the way Scorsese connects his religion and culture to his films are partly the reason he’s one of the best film makers of our time.

0 notes