#imo this is the main crux of the argument

[wonder-worker]

Here’s the thing I need people to understand:

Even if we believe that the (entirely unproven and far too politically convenient) pre-contract story between Edward IV and Eleanor Talbot was true, it doesn’t actually matter. Even if it was hypothetically true, there was still no reason why Edward V – who was already King at that point and was referred to as such – couldn’t have been able to succeed his father regardless.

David Horspool (Richard's own historian) summarizes it better than I could, so I’m just quoting him here:

"[Richard also made] no allowance for any potential solution to the problem that might have re-legitimized Edward V and his siblings. These included securing a retrospective canonical or papal judgement of the invalidity of the pre-contract; an Act of Parliament legitimizing the children of Edward and Elizabeth Woodville’s marriage, as happened to Henry VIII’s variously tainted offspring; or even ignoring the issue and proceeding to the coronation of Edward V, which would legitimize him by making him the Lord’s anointed, and render allegations of his bastardy as newer versions of the old tittle-tattle about his father."

In short, even if Edward IV truly had a pre-contract with Eleanor Talbot, and even if all of his children with Elizabeth Woodville were supposedly illegitimate, it should by no means prevent Edward V from succeeding his father to the throne. If Richard truly wanted to support his nephew, he had a variety of useful and entirely workeable options to choose from. Instead, he officially declared his nieces and nephews (including a literal 3-year-old) illegitimate, kept Edward V and his even younger brother confined in the Tower of London, and declared himself King.

Why didn't Richard take these actions, all of which he would have been well aware of? As Horspool says simply: "that Richard took none of these courses was because he had no interest in doing so."

The ONLY conclusion we can come to based on Richard's actions is summarized most succinctly by A.J Pollard:

"The truth of the matter is that Richard III did not want Edward V to be legitimate because he did not want him to be king."

#r*chard iii #richard iii #my post #edward iv #princes in the tower #imo this is the main crux of the argument #it DOESN'T MATTER if the pre-contract story was actually true #even if it was true there was no actual reason why Edward V couldn't have been crowned regardless if Richard had truly wanted to support hi #sorry I saw something annoying on Twitter and wanted to rant #(I wasn't even searching for it lol it just popped up; it's very annoying) #I saw a bunch of people quoting John Ashdown-Hill (yeah that guy) on the fact that Eleanor chose to deed some of her property to her sister #Elizabeth Talbot during her lifetime rather than leave it to her in her will #and using this to argue that Eleanor considered herself married to Edward and as a married woman unfortunately could not bequeath real #property by will without her husband's consent #which is absolutely ridiculous considering the fact that #A MARRIED WOMAN ALSO COULD NOT DEED PROPERTY WITHOUT THE PERMISSION OF HER HUSBAND #Eleanor choosing to deed property to her sister during her life proves that *she did not consider herself married to anyone at the time* #Which ... should be extremely significant and indicative! #and should in fact settle the argument once and for all #I don't know how Ricardians have somehow twisted it and claim the opposite #anyway im done ranting. bye

[petruchio]

This is kind of random, but do you have any opinions on Twilight? Idc if they’re “good” or “bad,” I’m just curious.

the first twilight film is a masterpiece of cinema, snubbed by the academy for being so ahead of its time. where is my best adapted screenplay nomination for lines like “it’s the fluorescents” or “animal attack.”

on a more serious note i think twilight is like. fine. i think the hate it got was hugely outsized for its actual quality, and it’s fair to say a lot of it was i think coming from a place of it appealing to young girls and middle aged mothers and so there was a lot of backlash to it that i think was just kind of unnecessary. (lindsay ellis has a really insightful video about it imo!)

i don’t think twilight is by any means the next great american novel but i do think the books actually aren’t as bad as people remember! it’s been a while since i’ve read them and im generally not filled with a huge desire to reread them, but i do think there’s a lot more to them than they get credit for. like, bella is actually really funny in the books sometimes, she’s very sarcastic and i think that gets a little lost in the films. but most people watch twilight much more than they read it lately so people don’t necessarily remember that aspect of her character as well from the books.

there are criticisms of twilight that i think are wholly legitimate and there are criticisms that i think are kind of bad faith arguments to discredit it. like, the portrayal and use of Native people in the books? yeah, not good, and deserves legitimate and negative critical attention for the stereotypes it perpetuates and damage it has done to the actual Quileute people. the criticism that it’s a bad example for girls when edward watches bella when she sleeps? idk, it doesn’t really bother me because, like, HES A VAMPIRE. it’s well established in the FANTASY UNIVERSE WE ARE IN that he doesn’t sleep and he can stand completely still which is why he can do that. i think it’s kind of weird to assume that young girls are going to be like “oh man, i wish that would happen to me” because i think most people are aware that vampires who don’t sleep and stand completely still ARE NOT REAL.

but i digress. there are some problematic tropes in it but i just think the outrage some things is way overblown for what’s actually happening in the book. like edward is much older than bella? YEAH BECAUSE HES A VAMPIRE SJDJSJSJSBS THATS LITERALLY THE WHOLE PLOT like it’s pretty clear that he’s not maturing physically or mentally from being 17, that’s kind of like. the entire crux of the story, he doesn’t want that happening to bella. it’s. the main conflict. of the book.

anyway i will close by saying that i really do love the first twilight movie in a so-bad-it’s-good-but-also-no-its-really-good kind of way. i do kind of wish twilight had been a standalone novel though, mostly because i find breaking dawn really weird and disturbing and i wish i had never read that book, the only good thing that came of it was the renesmee memes and even those don’t make up for all the weird creepy things that happen in that book.

so yeah. twilight is like, fine. it’s not perfect and it probably got a little too popular for its quality, but it was a fun read for a lot of teen girls in the early 2010s so like. okay. i think we can have a nuanced discussion about the problems it has while also acknowledging that at the end of the day it’s basically just a mediocre vampire teen romance book.

#sorry it took me so long to answer this #and this is kind of chaotic and unorganized as an answer #but that’s like. some of my twilight thoughts #answered #anonymous

[coffeeandcalligraphy]

Hello! I just found your yt channel (it's amazing) and watched your video on writing diversely. What an awesome video, I learnt and took away a lot from you and your thoughts, especially as a white writer. I am still however a little conflicted on one thing. Not just writing the characters as another race or gender or identity of any kind from the writer, but the actual main character. Would it automatically be offensive and destined for failure for a white author to write a black main protag?

Hi there! I’m happy you found the video helpful, thank you for watching! This is a link to the video if anyone reading this has not watched it.

To be honest, I think I explained this as concisely and accurately as I could in the video as it’s truly the thesis of the video itself. I don’t want to fully reiterate what I said in the video because I feel like I won’t be as accurate/coherent, so I urge you to rewatch the video and take care to look at the timestamps as that may clarify your particular question, first and foremost! Taking a look at some of the comments too might also be helpful.

Stay in your lane as a detrimental, albeit well-intentioned, mantra

As I say in the video, it’s not as easy as saying “white people can’t write XYZ main character” or “we can write whatever we want”, nor is it as easy as and saying “stay in your line” , which may inadvertently enforce the majority as publishing is majorly white (stats are in the video). I believe I did address main characters too in that video, but whatever I said about characters in general 100% applies to POV/main characters as I was rebutting the well-intentioned, but perhaps detrimental idea that it’s only appropriate for a marginalized POV character to be written by someone marginalized in the same way (IMO, long-term, this will cause an influx of white POV stories which is the opposite of the intention [people say “stay in your lane” will allow marginalized folks to represent themselves rather than have white people represent us] as the publishing industry a) is mostly white and b) only seems to care to actively publish white people. “Stay in your lane” may also inadvertently define the role a marginalized person should play in the writing industry [responsible for writing stories about their marginalization]).

Writing POC main characters = automatically offensive/destined to fail?

If you’re viewing or questioning if writing a POC MC is “automatically offensive” or “destined for failure” I really urge you to rewatch the video because this is covered quite extensively but particularly take a look at the “trade fear for empathy” section as this question in itself is laden in a black and white binary of right versus wrong. If you’re asking this question, it might be that you are lacking the empathy to understand what I’m saying in the video (which is okay! there are many others who I’ve further discussed with in the comments). Writing POC isn’t something that’s destined to fail just because you’re a white author IF you do your research, be respectful, write empathetically and craft well-rounded, complex people. If you’re thinking you might automatically fail in this department because you are a white person, I did mention in the video that you may not be ready to write diverse characters in the respectful, robust ways necessary because you may be viewing POC as a “pass or fail” system which is obviously not what we are. If you want to write a diverse POV character and you do your research, write empathetically, speak to those people from that community (with their consent) and be willing to adjust your representation with that feedback without getting defensive, I don’t see how this would be automatically offensive or destined for failure, just like anything else that requires research.

Disproportionate amounts of white versus POC writers being published

In terms of publication failure, white people are actually the ones being majorly represented to write marginalized stories (when they don’t share that marginalization), so you probably wouldn’t have a problem getting a POC-lead story published (not saying I think this is right) because publishers treat diversity as a quota/marketing tactic and IMO, don’t seem to actually care about representation on a structural level, but rather on a topical, superficial level (which is why my main point in that video is that publishers, not individual writers, need to be held accountable).

White writers accidentally “dehumanize” POC in a misguided attempt at being empathetic

I think some white people, (and I don’t exactly want to use this word because it is quite severe but illustrates what I mean) may accidentally “dehumanize” people of colour in worrying that whatever move they’re going to make is automatically going to offend us, when in reality, if you take the time, and put in the effort to research and get to know people of colour (from my comments, these worries often stem from white people who don’t know many people of colour IRL), you will see that yes, we are different from you and difference is good, but no, this difference does not make us an untouchable, unknowable species. I don’t mean to make this seem like an “I don’t see colour” or “the only race is the human race” argument, which would be harmful, but rather a reminder that people of colour are also human beings and as you would write a white character with empathy, integrity, and vigour, you should also do the same when writing characters of colour (I address this in more detail in the video).

Doing personal research in times of confusion

I understand that as a white person, thinking about and understanding these issues may not be particularly easy, and even after a nearly hour long video of me expressing these thoughts, I genuinely do understand why someone who is not affected by these issues daily may still struggle with grasping these concepts. That’s because anti-racism is not something you can accomplish by watching one video, or reading a few articles--it’s a lifelong commitment, and so that’s when you would take your privilege as a white person to do more digging before you ask questions to those who have to expel emotional labour to answer them for you (not saying I have any problem answering your question at all, but putting this out there because there are many well meaning white people who I’ve encountered in my comments that do ask me or other BIPOC questions before turning to other resources that wouldn’t require free labour). Take some time to ruminate with this info, and then do some digging of your own. If you haven’t checked out these, these are my favourite anti-racism resources, all of which are free to access (noted otherwise):

Jane Coaston - The Intersectionality wars

A pretty comprehensive place to start with Kimberle Crenshaw’s theory of Intersectionality

Peggy McIntosh - White Privilege: Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack

Wonderful place to start in understanding white privilege for those who don’t understand the differences/nuances between race VS class VS gender privilege etc

Article that explores white privilege beyond McIntosh’s ideas

It’s really important that white people also learn the systemic ways in which they benefit from white privilege and not just the “bandaids are made in my skintone” examples (though those examples are often used first because they’re the easiest to understand for a white person who is affected by other intersections, i.e. class, sexuality, gender, who does not feel they are privileged in other ways i.e. race).

Documentary on white privilege (Jane Elliott’s Brown Eyes VS Blue Eyes experiment)

Angela Davis - How Does Change Happen?

bell hooks - Ending Domination: The Struggle Continues

Abena Busia - In Search of Chains Without Iron: On Sisterhood, History, and the Politics of Location

I was able to access this reading through my university but IMO it is a must-read, especially for non-POC who may not fully understand the privilege of whiteness.

Claire Heuchan - Your Silence Will Not Protect You: Racism in the Feminist Movement 

**Absolute must-read: “The theory did not emerge in order to aid white women in their search for cookies – it was developed predominantly by Black feminists with a view to giving women of colour voice (Heuchan).”

Tamela J. Gordon - Why I’m giving up on intersectional feminism 

Powerful perspective on Intersectionality and how it’s been used in white feminism

Jennifer L. Pozner - How to Talk About Racism, Sexism and Bigotry With Your Friends and Family

Really good place to start if you have loved ones in need of education.

Maria Lugones - Playfulness, “World”-Travelling, and Loving Perception

This is the absolute crux of my points in writing empathetically.

"The paper describes the experience of 'outsiders' to the mainstream of, for example, White/Anglo organization of life in the U.S. and stresses a particular feature of the outsider's existence: the outsider has necessarily acquired flexibility in shifting from the mainstream construction of life where she is constructed as an outsider to other constructions of life where she is more or less 'at home.' This flexibility is necessary for the outsider but it can also be willfully exercised by the outsider or by those who are at ease in the mainstream. I recommend this willful exercise which I call "world"-travelling and I also recommend that the willful exercise be animated by an attitude that I describe as playful" (Lugones 3). 

^^^ For writers struggling with the prospect of diversity and trying to find a place to start in what I call in my video "letting go of fear and voraciously welcoming empathy" I highly recommend this article as it is a powerful account of travelling across each other's "worlds". Read it for free with a free JStor account or through your institution, like your public library.

How to BLACK: An Analysis of Black Cartoon Characters

A FANTASTIC video that is an absolute must-watch (covers writing empathetically, writing with care)

If you have not already, read through the sources I used to formulate and argue my thesis in my video (much more detailed than I could do in an hour!):

Corinne Duyvis (ownvoices creator) on # ownvoices

CCBC - "Publishing Statistics on Children's/YA Books about People of Color and First/Native Nations and by People of Color and First/Native Nations Authors and Illustrators"

Hannah Heath - "5 Problems Within the Own Voices Campaign (And How to Fix Them)"

Saadia Faruqi - "The Struggle Between Diversity and Own Voices"

Kat Rosenfield (Refinery29) - "What is # ownvoices doing to our books?"

Lee and Low - "Diversity Baseline Survey 2019 Results"

Vulture - "Who Gave You the Right To Tell That Story"

School Library Journal - "An Updated Look at Diversity in Children's Books"

TL;DR: if you’re more overcome with the fear of offending people (often grounded in white fragility) instead of making the active, albeit sometimes uncomfortable, decision to do the hard work necessary to empathetically represent someone outside of your marginalization in fiction, I don’t think you’re ready to write POC in the nuanced, complex, empathetic ways necessary for good representation, and I would encourage you do more independent anti-racist work. (Note that “you” is not individualistically aimed at the asker!!)

Questions like this don’t necessarily have a clear-cut answer, and that is essentially the point of my video (I know, not super helpful, but I hope that makes sense!).

Hope this helps!

--Rachel

#asks #writing

[mrmallard]

I have another vent post in me, and maybe more in the future. They won't get in the way of my blog's regular activity as much as they were before. But right now, I need to vent.

To lay the whole situation down - I pursued romantic feelings for a girl for a year. I usually call her my former crush, but I'm going to call her redhead girl from this point on. During this time, I confided in my best friend about my feelings - when I was building up to a point where I wanted to tell her, and then subsequently when she let me down easy and told me she wasn't interested.

Me, my best friend and redhead girl are all in the same friend group, and it's this group that's become my main friend group over time. Over time, I came to resent that I had pursued romantic feelings for her - even before I told her how I felt, I wished we could go back to being friends. I hoped she'd reject me to that end - it'd suck, but I'd put in the time to re-establish our friendship and hopefully get back to a place where we made each other laugh and just had a great time in each other's company. I realised that despite the romantic feelings I had for redhead girl, there was a deeper platonic love for her that I didn't want to lose above all else. And I've accepted that she just doesn't view me in a romantic sort of way. It hurts a little, but I understand.

The detail I want to focus on is how I confided in my best friend for a year about how I felt about her. Because that's the most relevant detail to explain how I'm feeling.

Recently, while I was sick, my best friend got closer with redhead girl. And the thing is, she initiated it - she chose him. But when I got back from being sick, I instantly picked up on the vibe. I felt locked out, I felt like I had missed everyone more than they had missed me, and I had that awful feeling I tend to get around my best friend when I'm being a third wheel. And that's what drove my recent meltdown posts you've seen on my blog lately.

I confronted my friend about this - I overstepped my boundaries by listing the events that made me feel as badly as I did, but the crux of my argument was "I'm not going to sit here and feel like a third wheel any more". And a couple days later, my friend told me about how he and redhead girl had gotten closer after she initiated things.

---

Here's the part that's got me fucked up this time.

When my friend told me she had initiated things and that he didn't know what to do, I interpreted that as "this is something that's happening to my best friend". It's like, he didn't set out to hurt me, she chose him. So during the course of that day, I told redhead girl that I wouldn't be up at the house for a while, and then I messaged my friend to tell him that whether he tells her about this afternoon was entirely up to him. I essentially removed myself from a situation that would A) cause me pain and B) make things unbearably awkward to make things easier for everyone. I chose to be the bigger man.

But I woke up the next morning with an epiphany.

Why am I trying to be the better person here? Why am I sparing my best friend's feelings and making excuses for him?

I confided in my friend FOR A YEAR about this girl. I went to his place and told him when I admitted my feelings for her, and he's been there to help me cope with trying to get over her. I CONFIDED EVERYTHING IN HIM. And then I say to myself "oh, this is happening to him", like it's entirely out of his control. Like it's an ordeal, something hard for him to cope with.

And to his credit, I accept that both he and redhead girl were concerned about hurting me to a degree. But frankly, by acting on this relationship, I think my friend can go and fuck himself. Because even if she came into him, he had the option of saying "no" considering everything I've told him. He had the option of removing himself from the situation, being honest with me from the start and sparing my feelings. But he didn't.

And maybe I should be angry at redhead girl as well. But I've accepted that we're just friends, and I've been trying to get over her and just be a good friend. She's also re-entered the dating pool, which was a hard pill to swallow, but I'm happy that she's moving on with her life and I want her to be happy. There seems to have been some consideration of my feelings in regards to her getting with my best friend, which I appreciate. It just rings a lot more hollow when it comes to my best friend, considering how much trust I put in him to talk about my feelings in regards to redhead girl.

And there's a lot of jealousy here as well, because my best friend is the sort of person who's just really good with people and gets along with everyone and is very charismatic. There'll be points where I'll see how he speaks to people or gets along with people like it's nothing - and I see everything in him that I'm not. I mean Christ, he has a mother who'll bring him Oreos and milk while he sits in bed.

But the reason I'm bringing this up is because sometimes I'll look at my best friend, and I'll see a person. And in comparison, I feel like less of a person than he is.

With redhead girl, speaking to her is effortless and I adore her company. Even now, I regret pursuing her romantically - she means the world to me. Speaking to her makes me feel like a person.

So there's girl jealousy, which is something I have a history of. I'll admit that there's jealousy over redhead girl. But there's also jealousy over my best friend being everything I'm not. I've got a friend who makes me feel like a person and a friend who makes me feel like I'm not a person, and the latter is pursuing the former. And it might sound dumb, but that dehumanises me more than anything, because now it's incredibly awkward and painful to be around someone who makes me feel like more of a person.

And the jealousy over redhead girl is tied into a long history of feeling like a third wheel around my best friend. I feel this badly specifically because it's him. This is the one outcome that causes me the most pain.

She chose him, but he could have walked away considering everything I've told him over the past year. If someone he was interested in came onto me and started showing interest, I would pump the brakes and probably tell my friend, and I wouldn't go through with it to spare his feelings because that's a shitty thing to do.

Not only did he go with the flow with redhead girl, their relationship progressed right under my nose and my friend didn't tell me until I confronted him about it.

So why should I be the bigger man about this? Why is the onus on me to be graceful and respectful and kind? And most importantly - why in the everloving name of fuck was I making excuses for him?

To sum up: I confided in my friend for a year about my feelings for a girl, and now they're pursuing each other. I only know this because I confronted him over a weird vibe, and even after he told me, I tried to be the bigger man about it even though HE betrayed MY trust. I'm pissed at him, rightfully so imo, and the only way for me to protect myself is to excise myself from a friend group I care about because his actions have turned me into a massive fucking third wheel, which is a feeling he's been instilling in me for YEARS.

Fuck him. Fuck being civil. Fuck his happiness. I got played like a chump, and he can go and fuck himself.

[sorinkavglazy]

I recently watched Dmitri Chernyakov’s The Tale of Tsar Saltan on a big screen and it’s left some lingering thought and feelings and that’s probably the main compliment I’m willing to give it. But there are others, as well as some not so complimentary things to say here as well. It all starts with the explanation. I guess that’s what Dmitri learnt from his earlier works – if you want to ‘make it clear’ leave no room for any explanation except your own. Also, offer said explanation explicitly, leave nothing to chance when it comes to meanings. Explicit trumps implicit. Tell people in the audience what to think and hence, for the most part, feel. The good, maybe even great thing is, that Chernyakov’s not deaf. So, his explanations and mental build-ups tend to coincide with the musical material perfectly or at least seemingly seamlessly.

Most modern ‘director’s’ opera productions, I’ve seen, tend to share one feature (or a bug – depending on one’s point of view) – too much stuff going on on stage all at once. The productions either try to retell the libretto in some modern environment or tell some other unconnected or semi-connected story. And the logic of the story director wants to tell usually trumps everything else including the logic of the emotional story unfolding through music. Hence pseudo intellectual messy McMessness on stage!

Unlike a lot of modern director-driven opera productions Chernyakov’s creations are the opposite of a disorder. Being a self-professed control-freak, Dmitri Feliksovich admits his ultimate desire to guide not only the singers but everyone on stage and around it practically through their every breath. It certainly makes his productions unique but also deeply dependent on both his physical and metaphorical presence while also making them decidedly unsuitable for the repertoire theatre system to which most Russian theatres firmly adhere. Whether the way Russian ‘ballet and opera’ (in that particular order!) theatres operate is a good or bad thing is beside the point right now.

In his Tale of Tsar Saltan Chernyakov glibly commits the worst (according to traditionalists and purists) sin – he comes up with the story which ‘makes sense’ for a certain subset of modern people. His ‘Gvidon’ is an autistic child, whose mother – ‘Tsaritsa Militrissa’ – through fairytale tells him the story of her failed relationship with his father – ‘Tsar Saltan’. On its head the idea seems credible and Chernyakov, with a lot of assistance from his constant ‘partner in crime’ (Dmitri’s words not mine!) lighting artist Gleb Felshtinsky and the rest of their team, realizes it really well all together. For my personal liking, I’d prefer to have the idea less hammered though… Like not only autistic children understand the world through fairytales – I did it myself, most children, I believe, did and way past the age when they can ask a ‘where’s day, mummy?’ question. So, I’d let it to the audience’s imagination or understanding to decide mostly because I find the story where a child wonders why their father abandoned them even though they’re no better or worse, no less or more special than other children whose fathers didn’t disappear from their lives a lot more potent and nuanced.

Also one of the main points in the story (it’s in Pushkin’s original text and is a quote that literally all Russians know) is that ‘Tsaritsa’ promises to give her husband a ‘bogatyr’ – basically a baby equivalent of a knight in shining armor… And she does. Only then her jealous sisters (do not even start me on them!) with their co-conspirator ‘Babarikha’ lie to ‘Saltan’ in the letter that she bore ‘not a mouse, not a frog but some unknown little beast’… The trouble is, I’m sorry, as far as the 19th century metaphors go, Chernyakov’s interpretation of the plot with the autistic ‘Gvidon’ (outstandingly played and sung by Bogdan Volkov) kind of turns everything on its head because technically the sisters didn’t lie to ‘Saltan’ at all, while ‘Militrisa’ broke her initial promise of producing a ‘bogatyr’ for her husband. By the way, she – ‘Tsarisa Militrisa’ sung by Svetlana Aksenova was IMO the best part of the whole opera both voice and acting wise while I personally liked Olga Kulchinska’s ‘Tsarevna Lebed’ a bit less.

One more crunch for me was the finale where the father ‘Tsar Saltan’ decides to return into ‘Gvidon’s life. If it was up to me I’d left in the child’s imagination, where the rest of the story after ‘Militrisa’s initial explanation basically took place, and as a result this particular part seemed emotionally fake-ish at least for me. Maybe, I’m just way to cynical!

During his public talk at the recent Digital Opera 2.0 conference, Chernyalov was asked why he became a director and why he does what he does (standard stuff) and he said basically because it’s impossible for him not to, that it’s passion through and through and somehow I believed him. Later on, during the last round table on the modern state of opera critique Q&A there was a tired and expected argument between the panel (in favor of modern, director’s opera) and some members of the audience, who favored the so-called traditional approach. During the exchange (rather heated and a bit hysterical at times on one side and sneering and condescending on the other – which was which – your guess), I realized two things – first that the panelists were wrong in assuming that the other side wanted the endless preservation of the old Soviet times made Socialistic Realism’s operas. Nope. They want new renditions. Because yeah – if you repeat the same performance for years and years, it either dies or turns into the kabuki theatre. Everybody can sense that. Those traditionalists want new renditions (maybe even with all the new, digital technologies used in them) but made like the old ones once were… According to the same literal aesthetics of ‘we will show directly what’s written in the libretto please and thank you, no more no lees and will make it beautiful, damn it!’

And here, I believe, we come to the crux of the problem (I’m sorry for the long lead-in) – I can’t really imagine a truly talented young director (or two) starting their career in operatic theatre with a Dmitri Chernyakov-style passionate dream… to make productions just like Franco Zeffirelli or Boris Pokrovsky if we want to stay on the Russian turf! As a result every season we get some (in Russia I’d say ‘a few’, but there’s Germany and co) examples of director’s opera – some horrendous, some musically deaf, some interesting, some not so much and some great versus some (in Russia I’s say – most) neutral (and often neutered) or purely ‘classical’ stagings of various operas. Most of these ‘classical’ renditions are either bad or boring (I also need the word for «пошлый» in English here!). Result? Very few people are ultimately satisfied.  

However, after all said and done by me and other people you should really just see (and hear) it for yourself. They say it’s Dmitri Chernyakov’s best work to this day:

#opera #my opera shenanigans #as promised #the tale of tsar saltan #my thought #director's opera #regieoper

[roxannepolice]

But yah rey as a character is just so frustrating you know? Cause like, yeah sure she could be complex with a powerful arc where shes forced to come to terms with the fact she wasted years of her life on self-imposed delusions in a cathartic way, or she could be a flat piece of marketing cardboard which Disney is banking on vagina+superpowers=profit without having to go through that persnicty character flaw overcoming or the like. Because like you said, hearing shes a nobody (which ngl, her assuming she was a somebody wasn’t really ever supported in tfa, just that her family was coming back and she desperately wanted them to) is apparently the worst thing but it changes absolutely nothing, not her approach, not her demeanor , if vaguely sad is the absolute worse a character is gonna experience in a goddamn space opera then yeah, full offense ill take the l on Mary sue discourse but her character will definitely be a boring ass wash. We all make fun of whiny new hope Luke but him being a kinda nuisance to both the audience and those around him is what made is transformation into full blown Jedi knight so powerful. With Rey so far what weve got is badass perfect cinnamon roll finally get her due as such, which is clearly working for some people, but I fail to see how that isn’t spectacularly tone deaf to make a protag in this genre such. Operas about drama, not patting you on the back. Rey (assuming she remains as is) would’ve been fine as a protag s the only piece of Star Wars media we ever got was a new hope. But rn she a chosen one architype (and I know that bunch of ppl are gonna go but the series ‘but shes not the chosen one, Anakin still is, the new series isn’t trying to make her one!’ but lets not beat around the burning bush, if u got a character that walks on water and the reason why is because god said so, ur dealing with a chosen one trope and if a character is star wars is made ultrapowerful in lore breaking ways because force said so? Yeah were dealing with a chosen one.) when we had both the deconstruction and the reconstruction done. Shes a straight hero when the success of the ot rest on hitting the formula near perfect the first time. What exactly is Rey, the individual character, bringing to the table? What makes her story supposedly so important the a perfectly good ending had to be made invalid to tell it? A bunch of ppl will say heroines’ journey! But if that’s the case I gotta say, wheres all the feminine shit? Im serious, if the heroines journey is reintegrating the feminine and realizing ‘oh shit mom had a point’ there where is both the feminine skills/coping mechanism and the mom? I mean I saw some ppl arguing for leia in a ‘reys Persephone!’ meta (she isn’t, you can make a much better case for ben himself as Persephone to be quite frank, yall are focusing so much on the trees ((girl gets abducted by guy)) that u forgot the forest existed, the actually story ((girl winds up queen on the underworld, well gee whiz which character just took control of that after leaving the world of living and a grieving divine mother behind, it’s a mystery apparently) behind, it’s a mystery apparently) ((but seriously though even if we hope for dark rey does anyone assume its gonna be taking control of a dark/dead coded org at least partially at this point, do you, do you really??). but given the fact she had what, one line of screen dialogue that’s breaking ur arm with that stretch. As far as skills go I guess you could make an argument for scavenging, but if that’s the case dlf did a shit job of conveying that as female-coded. Everything about rey in tfa seems deliberately androgynous, and yeah, she had her hair let down/mascara moment, but that’s tied to her ‘failure’ on the supremacy thus something nw.SPEAKIGN OF FAILURES ON THE SUPERAMCY AND LACK THERE OF. I find it kind funny that bunch of reylo bnfs (you know who they are) are all ‘hur dur fanboys/antis are dumb and don’t get story structure.’ And then going, ‘why are yall asking how/assuming rey fucked up in throne room/climax of her story in the second portion/darkest point of her character arc? Why do you hate women/ur own ovaries so much?’ because it like walking into a prefurnished house and being told by the relator ‘HERES THE LIVING ROOM’ and having no damn couch. It’s a living room, I expect a couch here. And in a movie where it’s the low point of a character arc and they drag puppet yoda out to tell me the movie is about failure, I expect a damn failure in whats clearly the climax of the characters arc for this movie. As it stands now there are three possibilities imo. 1st, rey had no failure, she is the pure badass maid o light ppl want and every inch the boring cardboard she is accused of by fanbros, remains static, and is relegated to an also ran to benlo taking the most compelling character trophy this trilogy in 10 yrs2nd possibility and the one im hoping for, failure speech wasn’t just thematic explanation but also foreshadowing, rey fucks up big and dramatic in a way that makes her manage to stand out as unique with both her contemporaries and her predecessors(last part, if its ever to much lemme know pls im sorry i just gotta get it out) 3rd and most likely possibility, rey isn’t the main character, benlo is and that’s why his failure both moral in the throne room and logistic on criat take center stage for the last third or so of the movie. Rey is merely a pov character to tell the dramatic villain protag story they wanted and have their very marketable unproblematic Disney heroine cake too.

Ok, so this discourse kinda died down by now, but thanks to that it’s possible to maybe have a calmer look at it I’m totally not trying to justify my late response.

Anyway, the good result is that quite recently my brother, who’s not overly taken with Rey - or the sequels in general, for that matter - said something which really stuck with me as a possible crux of the problem: 

She’s neither comical nor tragical. Just bland. 

This neither comical nor tragical really struck me. And the more I though about it, the more it was appearing to me that this qualm really applies to the sequels as a whole. The thing is that DLF are essentially telling a straightforward story that they’re trying to make captivatingly convoluted. And not just make, but keep this appearance over four years. And this is... a narrative teeth crasher. Like, when you’re honest about the endgame (in the context of the most structural meanings of comedy and tragedy), you can maintain a decorum, though you can also play with it, of course, whereas when you don’t want to be honest about the endgame, you end up mixing the styles somewhat messily. You can’t break or discuss with the rules without acknowledging them, so to speak. Because the originals were honest about the happy/hopeful endgame (the first episode is title A New Hope ffs), they could allow themselves deeply tragic moments like Larses’ deaths, Han getting frozen, destruction of Alderaan, etc. Because the prequels were open about being a tragedy, they could allow themselves lighthearted comic relief for the sake of lighthearted comic relief. 

The sequels... badly want us to consider the possibility of FO winning and Ben dying unredeemed while simultaneously insisting we root for those things not happening, while appearing conscious we’re definitely not buying the former and the latter only somewhat. And it’s tiresome. Dishonest. And indeed, bland. If the story is a tragedy it will be a bloodcurdlingly real one, if it’s a comedy it will be a borderline grotesque one. 

But yeah, returning to Rey, I guess as the main character she’s a lens which focuses the above problems. A very bitter tragedy of what her parents did t her prevents her from being comfortably comical whereas whoohooos I like thats and prancing like a husky on red bull over idols and visions because it’s for children so it must be hopeful prevents her from being intriguingly tragical. So I guess the intentioned effect was tragicomism but, from pov of an engaged casual fan that is my bro, it’s neither. 

As far as Rey’s heroine’s journey lacking some of the usual elements, I blame it on Disney being... a bit too ambitious, maybe. I think they tried to make a heroine’s journey that isn’t ostentaciously seeped in traditional feminine/masculine traits, maintains the structure without what could be called accidentals. On the one hand, I would point out that hero’s journey has pretty much desexualised itself over time, we are rather accustomed to “shero’s” journeys, but on the other... maybe Disney set out on a too novel a territory and may crack their teeth on it, alongside trying to out-Vader Vader at redemption. To elucidate, “toxic femininity” in which a heroine is supposed to find herself in the beginning of her journey, in Rey’s case is uprooted from any of our usual concepts of feminine-masculine social roles (it’s space, duh). My interpretation is that Rey’s version of toxic femininity kind of exists in contrast with Kylo Ben’s version of toxic masculinity - and since the apparent focus of the story is the attitude towards the past/parent figures, toxic femininity would mean her clutching onto the past. Which is why I predict that some act of IX will find Rey inebriated with apparent success in masculine world, meaning she’ll be the one rejecting the old gods this time - and I would point out that panel in Poe comic where she shows herself more sceptical towards idolisation of past don’t mind me, I’m just expressingmy trash dreams for a proper sith lady Rey.

Then again, Rian Johnson said she already found perfect balance between Luke’s clinginess and Kylo’s rejection of the past, so... idk, maybe I’m giving DLF too much credit again.

As for the Persephone thing, I guess the rub is that this reylo reading focuses less on the traditional reading of the myth (where Demeter is the actual main character and Kore is a Princess Peach MacGuffin) and more of an interpretation of it as one of the eldest (at least in Europe) versions of story depicting a transition of a girl into a woman, making Persephone more of a protagonist. 

Like, y’know, this Persephone (D. G. Rosetti, source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proserpine_(Rossetti_painting))

I’m no expert, but myths can lose their original meanings because of power relations (anyone still remember about Dionysus, the god associated with excessive drinking, going through a very Christ-like death and resurrection?) and I think it’s possible that this is the case with the story of Persephone becoming a pre-scientific explanation of seasons changing over the year. So teah, that’s how I always understood the Persephone theme regarding Rey.

But yes, I must agree that I’m confused about Disney’s handling of the mother figure, which... Look, SW became a legend of a modern myth because of how epically Lucas handled the hero dealing with his very explicit father. So yes, I don’t understand what exactly is their game with Rey Nobody from Nowhere in this regard. It’s one thing that they had a cool idea with giving her no lineage, another that parent figures are an essential element of archetypal journeys and from symbolic viewpoint the case of a female character the biological relationship is even more crucial than in male’s. And I swear to all the ewoks and porgs in the galaxy, I do hope Disney’s idea of Rey healing the mother/daughter divide isn’t through her healing the divide between Leia and Ben. Again, this isn’t the idealistic sphere. Just... no. 

Anyway, I still maintain hope (this whole meta blog is built on hope) that Rey will indeed turn out to have a proper personal mistake which will make her stand out in the saga. I do have to admit, though, that I find your last theory very likely. I mean, even when I read all the reylo metas going oh, Rey is going to have such an exciting arc in IX, she has so much to deal with though of course it’s not going to compromise her morally, it will be sooo exciting, I just... f*ck’s sake, what you’re describing isn’t a dramatic character only a dramatised role model. It’s great if that’s your thing, but don’t claim it is space opera-worthy, in operas people drown themselves because of cursed sailors, kill over a break up, decapitate over a bad dream and get dragged to hell over a dinner, not persuade their fallen lovers to change their ways, let alone patienly wait for them the understand the error of their ways (and if they do it’s doomed to end in someone dying).

#asks #sw negativity #just because i love doesn't mean i can't be critical #heroine's journey #long asks anon

[knightofiris]

Okay, since so many people are talking about the Death Note thing, I wanted to put in my opinion. You can totally skip this since if you’re thinking I’m gonna jump on the whole white-washing thing because that’s a drum beaten so much and so loudly I don’t know what else I could add.

Instead I wanted to talk about how the characters are being portrayed and how it kind of scares me.

With the trailer we see Light, L, and someone who’s presumed to be Misa. One big red flag I saw was that it looks like it’s gonna take place in high school. While Light did get the death note in high school the majority of the series takes place while Light is in college/an adult. Looking back on it now, this was probably to take away the thought of ‘Well he’s young he doesn’t know what he’s doing’. But, this can easily be fixed so it’s not the crux of my argument.

What is the crux, and is also something I haven’t really seen many people talk about, how the characters look. Light looks very much like something you would see out of a cop drama about a school shooting imo. He’s pale skinned, has sunken eyes, and his face in the scenes they’ve shown don’t make him look all that appealing. See, the think I felt was so compelling about Light in the anime is how he looked, acted, and sounded like any normal person, he was even the son of a cop. In fact he was beloved because of how intelligent and charismatic he was. He was literally someone you would never expect to become a mass murderer with a god complex. It really feels like this Light is going to be the nerd that’s shunned by his fellow classmates and uses the death note to ‘fix’ the world by killing people that wronged him.

Another one is how the prospective Misa looks. Now, for one thing she looks like she’s gonna get the goth treatment. This may be because Misa was a Gothic Lolita model, but it feels like the goth is going to be part of her character and not just something she likes like with Misa. Misa may have liked gothic Lolita, but she was bubbly and air headed. Not to mention it seems like this Misa is going to be going to school with Light, where as Misa hunted him down with her shinigami eyes. This could work? But, I feel like they’re just gonna make her the love interest that ‘resonates’ with the main character and will be the only one that roots for him while everyone else bogs down on him. Also, if she has an abusive father figure that Light ends up killing with the death note I’m gonna throw myself into the sea.

Since we don’t really know much of L I can’t really say if he’s going to be a good adaptation of him. However, another theme of Death Note was not judging a book by its cover. While light was a good looking and charismatic killer, L looked like what most people would assume was a criminal. He’s sunken eyed, pale, and acts abnormally to modern convention. However, he’s dedicated to stopping criminals within the range of the law that Light crosses. While he will bend the rules to out a perp, he’ll never break them.

Hopefully the adaptation is good and works around the glaring red flags. But, I’ll save my full judgement for when the movie comes out. I just wanted to share some of my concerns that were really biting at me.

#Iris blurbs #negative post #I know it's a beaten down dead horse but I honestly saw no one talk about how the characters looked past the white wash