#not to mention i have published legal essays

[waterloggedsoliloquy]

mutual 1: sorry the update for my webcomic this week is a bit late! i really had to rush it so it prolly looks really sloppy lol [some of the most sophisticated comic art ive ever seen]

mutual 2: call me uterine lining the way astarions cervix got me bleeding profusely

mutual 3: do you think nanowrimo will give me a posthumous pity publishing deal if i mention it in my suicide note

mutual 4: okay fine i finally started revolutionary girl utena

mutual 5: does columbo know the service he did for butch lesbians. for all of us

mutual 6: wish you were here [blurry picture set of conifer woods in early autumn evening, taken as if frantically running down a winding trail]

mutual 4: im pretty hardy i dont need the trigger list but thanks for looking out for me guys

mutual 7: good morning lovelies another day the wizard tried to best me and another day i successfully locked him in the spare bathroom lol hope u like drinking shampoo fucker

mutual 8: here is a zip of every yuri manga scan i have and here is a backup in case i get dcma'd. the himejoshi lifestyle will never die

mutual 9: i wish i could go back in time to the shinzo abe assassination and ask to hold the doohickey

mutual 10: here's my essay on how wanting to be loved is the same as wanting to be eaten. three paragraphs in you'll find out that this is 100% tied to an obscure beauty and the beast manga i've been reading lately and how much i want to fuck the beast

mutual 4: oh thats why there was the trigger list.

mutual 11: YOU CAN'T LOCK ME IN THIS BATHROOM FOREVER

mutual 12: why do i have to defend my thesis to people i dont even respect. im not dickriding you just give me the degree

mutual 13: its just me and this scab ive picked into my scalp against the world

mutual 14: my little dragon got glazed and is ready to go into the kiln! everyone wish him good luck!

mutual 3: nvm i am a beautiful genius. perhaps the most beautiful genius of all

mutual 15: i think we should give david lynch rpgmaker and whatever happens happens

mutual 16: kpeyboaatrds brpokem gpuys

mutual 17: also heres my work in progress glossary of mixtec words! i still have a long way to go but i love being able to preserve my roots even in this small way

mutual 4: i just finished the black rose arc. question: what

mutual 18: i need emet-selch to be my wife

mutual 19: i need glados to be my husband

mutual 20: visited the ocean today!!! <3 beach pics!!! there is a darkness growing within me

mutual 21: the forms for my legal name change came in. pls vote in this poll of what my middle name should be: Dill Pickle (Dickle for short), Optimus Prime, Tumblr User Gorgonicteratologist, Smeve

mutual 22: just finished my 100th book of the year! this weeks read was the uses of enchantment by the psychologist bruno bettelheim,

mutual 23: reeses penis butter cups lol

mutual 4: i need to hunt akio for sport

mutual 24: oouugghhrgh. hot. dog.

mutual 25: your favorite character or fictional other would want you to brush your teeth and wash your face so you're well rested and wake up feeling refreshed! make them proud!

mutual 26: being a delivery driver isnt the worst job ive ever had but i do keep wondering what itd be like to drive off into the wild blue yonder one day and not come back

mutual 27: weird dog? [phone picture of critically endangered stork]

mutual 28: i think the two phone line polls in front of my house are having a lovers tryst. no way to prove it tho

mutual 4: WHAT

mutual 29: while you bitches are balduring your gates or finalling those fantasies im doing what a REAL gamer does. playing a b tier rpg that came out in 2004 for the 18th time

mutual 30: ^ real. hamtaro ham ham heartbreak is a masterpiece of interactive art. im not even going to call it a video game at this point

mutual 4: THAT'S HOW IT ENDS?! ANTHY?

mutual 31: can you help me pick which drawing looks better: 34% overlay or 36% soft light?

mutual 32: new video essay out. its called disability in video game narratives: final fantasy 14's most reliable fault. i churned the script out over an all-nighter and my mic crapped out halfway through but by god i did it

mutual 33: my new zine bundle is out! if you buy it you also get a discount on all my game jam games! i really cant wait for you to play them!

mutual 4: yall should watch revolutionary girl utena

#cecil drawls #long post #i love you guys

[centrally-unplanned]

I was listening to this cast by The Weeb Crew, with SteveM as a guest, going through some other Evangelion video and dissecting the mythical memetic tropes it buys into. Which was a lot of fun, I recommend the cast, and the video they are critiquing is a bit of a grad-bag of zombie memes about Evangelion from the 2000's, which yeah have aged poorly.

One of the ones they get into is the idea that Evangelion's TV ending was "intensely unpopular", and Anno & crew were getting like bombarded with death threats and stuff. Which happened at some level sure, but certainly wasn't the median response. The video actually sites the "emails" shown on screen in End of Evangelion as evidence:

And like, bro those emails are fake! The staff wrote them for the movie, they didn't use real death threats or fan mail, that would be a huge legal liability. Not saying they are analytically useless or anything but, you know, you need to know that.

Anyway, SteveM mentions that of course there was pushback against Eva's ending, but actually the big wave wasn't interior to the fandom - instead it was sparked by Eva "going mainstream" discourse-wise. In particular a review essay by social critic Eiji Otuska (who is also a former lolicon creator ding ding ding) that was published after the finale aired sparked a widespread discussion in the media by other critics. He links to the essay in their discussion....except he doesn't. He thinks he did, and then when they look, its just someone else mentioning it in an article in 2003:

Bitter disputes broke out on online bulletin boards, with some critical of the producers for failing to provide a clear-cut end to the story, and others who praised the finish for being "typically Evangelion-like." But when commentator Eiji Otsuka sent a letter to the Yomiuri Shimbun, complaining about the end of the Evangelion series, the debate went nationwide. "The debate that erupted over the ending went way beyond our calculations," Gainax's Sato chuckles. "Anno probably knew what was going on. He realized that media other than anime had taken notice of Evangelion."

Which triggered in me the thought - why doesn't he have it? He references it in his own work after all. As you can guess, after some searching I am pretty sure I know why; no one has it. Its never been scanned or reprinted in an accessible format! It definitely is important in the history of Evangelion - I have seen this claim in other contexts, the essay that sparked a discourse, and you can find many works about Evangelion citing Otsuki (generally later works, like an article published in September of 1996 which you can buy) But what the article article said is only discernable via the clues dropped from second-hand accounts.

So can we find it?

First of all I need to figure out what is even being referenced. Searching through contemporary Japanese sources, I dug up an extremely handy find:

A somehow-still-existing 1997 fan page by a Japanese otaku (I'm giving you this stuff auto-translated btw, what would you do with a wall of kanji?) who extensively catalogued every media mention of Evangelion. I am sure they missed some, but they didn't miss a big one like the Otsuki letter - which we know from the above interview appeared in gigantic newspaper Yoimiuri Shimbun:

This gives us three candidates; given that we know it was written after the finale aired, and that was March 27th, 1996, our most likely candidate is the April 1st essay; I was able to find a secondary source mentioning the review was "immediately" after the finale, so I think that nails it.

Which alas does not bring up anything! Try as I might I cannot find any extant blog post, or scanned image, or long quoted form. But after trying the usual methods I did realize something - unlike my average document hunt, this is Yoimiuri Shimbum, a newspaper, a big newspaper. Which means they probably have their own archive, which I might be able to access. and low and behold, they do! And my university research services actually have an account!!

Incredibly blessed by this stroke of luck, I went digging for everything containing "Evangelion" and "Eiji Otsuka" in 1996, and found it:

And it's fucking blank. If the article is scanned or anything it will have that "Japanese Text" you see on the first result, or "Scanned Image" tag or something. I swear its like the only ones not scanned, all the random ads and list of best sellers are all there, but the entire cultural essays section is just an archival void. Shot in the skull right at the finish line.

Alas I am out of ideas of this one - its a newspaper, no one is selling this on Yahoo Auctions. Though hey, at least now we know the title:

"オウム」を超えるはずが... / It should surpass Aum...", 876 characters long.

"Aum" by the way is Aum Shinrikyo, the cult terrorist group that conducted the 1995 Tokyo subway sarin gas attack. Which you can imagine really took the chattering classes by storm; it was the culmination of a series of "extremist" actions that began in the 1980's that built up a narrative of societal decay and alarm. It really isn't surprising that Otsuka linked Evangelion to Aum Shinrikyo; the apocalyptic connections were obvious, there was even an episode of the show that had to be changed due to the attacks as the production team thought the events were too similar. And additionally, if this essay was gonna spark a "societal backlash", it has to say something controversial right? I have definitely seen other critics like Hiroki Azuma discussing Eva in relation to Aum as a "social phenomenon" - I am betting Otsuka is the source of that comparison being so ubiquitous.

From other sources like people on twitter and other articles, I can pick up a few other details on what it contained; apparently he referred to Evangelion's finale as a "self-help seminar" for otaku and lambasted the idea of airing one of those on TV. And from his other writings I think you can certainly piece it together - essentially seeing Evangelion's self-involvement and hyper-introspection as a product of the same societal malaise that birthed Aum Shinrikyo, while failing to deliver a solution that could "go beyond" that. Which, the shit you said about media in the 90's, I want a hit of what he's having! But while today its quite obvious that groups like Aum were, sure, saying something about society but turned out overwhelmingly to be fringe weirdos as opposed to canaries in the mental institute coal mine, at the time this was very much the zeitgeist.

Still, I don't really care all that much what it says - its an important artifact! It started the "Eva discourse boom" that broke out of otaku circles and launched Evangelion into a cross-societal phenomenon! We should have a record of it, it should be preserved. I will ruminate on it, and see if any other ideas pop up. And meanwhile if anyone out there happens to see what I missed definitely let me know.

#evangelion history #Ash anime deep dive bullshit #mini-essay

[danielfuckingricciardo]

Why Anita Driver should be Stopped - An Essay(ish) Post

Hi. So I don’t often do long posts like this, you probably know me as a fic writer and shitposter, but this situation has been irking me since I first read about it and so I only felt it right to explain why.

First off, I wanna say that I understand what she’s doing (I’m going to refer to Anita as she/her throughout this though I have no clue on the author’s actual gender identity). I think she’s very intelligent, using pastiche and parody to create content tailored towards a certain specific audience.

But as someone who knows their fandom history, and has moved in fanfiction circles for over 10 years, the attention one specific book I’m not going to refer to by title because I may throw up in my mouth a little, has received has me very worried for F1 RPF writers as a whole.

RPF has always been a main stay of fanfiction culture. Though there are many ‘antis’ who think it’s wrong and inappropriate to write about real people, RPF fandoms, think One Direction, BTS etc have always been some of the biggest out there.

And I’m sure you’ve seen as popular fan works such as the ‘After’ series by Anna Todd and ‘Fifty Shades of Grey’ by E.L. James have transitioned from fan work into published original novels.

Because of this, fan works are booming. Fanfiction is less of a dirty little secret now, confined to locked sites and email chains, but is something that many people know about even if they don’t consume it themselves.

And so, enter Anita Driver. Capitalising on the BookTok trend of ‘spicy’ fiction (what I would call erotica), the author has taken it upon herself to self publish a novel in that similar style but using Daniel Ricciardo not just as inspiration, but as the main protagonist.

I get what she’s trying to do, I really do. I can see that it’s parody, it’s not meant to be taken seriously, but firstly it’s illegal and secondly it really puts fanfiction communities at risk.

Part One: Defamation

Legally, you can’t take someone else’s identity and profit off of it without their explicit consent to do so. There’s a reason Harry Styles became Hardin Scott, and Edward Cullen became Christian Grey. That’s someone else’s intellectual property, or their identity. You cannot legally make a profit out of that. The subject could quite easily build a lawsuit against the author, and the author would have no grounds for defence. There’s a reason AO3 do not allow you to share fundraising links or anything else similar to that, and it’s to protect themselves and the authors against possible lawsuits.

I’d also just like to add that there’s plenty of erotic F1 inspired books out there. I haven’t read them myself but I know that the ‘Dirty Air’ series draws inspiration from current drivers on the grid, but doesn’t explicitly mention anyone real by name! Every character is the intellectual property of the author, it is original fiction that can safely make a profit.

By using Daniel Ricciardo’s image and personality, Anita Driver is putting herself at risk, in this case, not for theft of intellectual property, but of defamation. I haven’t read the book, of course I haven’t read the book, but I can easily believe that the content within could be considered to be defamatory as it may damage public perceptions of him. Now I’m no expert on law, I took a semester of media law and that’s it, but people have definitely sued for less.

In U.K. law (which I’m going off because I know the most about it) “A statement is not defamatory unless its publication has caused or is likely to cause serious harm to the reputation of the claimant.” (x) It could easily be said that portraying Daniel in this way would cause damage to his reputation. We know his image isn’t squeaky clean, but having this book using his name could easily lead people to believe that he was in some way associated with its production. I don’t think anyone would like their public perception to be that they actively encourage and fund the production of erotica about them.

In a lawsuit, Amazon could also be held liable for this, as their website is the main distribution platform for the book, and Anita Driver is a pseudonym and and an unknown.

“It is a defence for the operator to show that it was not the operator who posted the statement on the website. The defence is defeated if the claimant shows that it was not possible for the claimant to identify the person who posted the statement.” (x) If Anita Driver remains anonymous, Amazon could easily be held liable in a court case. Because of this, it would be in their best interests to remove the book to avoid this. (I do not like Amazon, and while they would easily be able to fight the court case with their billions, it would be much easier for them to remove the book and avoid any possible cases.)

So honestly, it is easy to see why this book is a danger to the author. Now I’m not saying that Daniel would necessarily sue. I think he’d probably just laugh it off even if it does make him feel uncomfortable (which it probably does, it would me!) because he has more important things to do. But I honestly don’t know how F1 and Liberty Media might react to this, they would definitely be more likely considering Daniel’s Reputation in turn reflects their own.

Part Two: Danger to Fan Works

This leads me in nicely to part two, actually, because legal threats against fanfiction writers have been a real problem to various communities over the years. Anne Rice, creator of the ‘Interview with a Vampire’ series, had all works purged from the internet in the early 2000s, and threatened writers with legal action if they continued to post fanfiction.

Fanfiction has always been a niche. It’s a small part of the internet for those who want to put their blorbos in situations, or just to think about them fucking nasty. But fan works haven’t always been accepted. Many people still look down on fanfiction, particularly those feature OCs (original characters) or reader inserts.

Anita Driver’s book would be more at home on Wattpad than Kindle Unlimited. It is a fan work. It is written by fans, for fans, and should be kept to that specific audience (without paying for it of course, because as I said, it’s very illegal!)

A work of fanfiction being a book is nothing new, as I mentioned earlier, the ‘After’ series and ‘Fifty Shades of Grey’ started out life as fanfiction. But when published, they were no longer fanfiction, they became original works of their own.

Putting fan works out in the open like that only threatens the F1 RPF community. It leaves us open, vulnerable, more so than normal. Sites like AO3 can only protect us to a certain extent, we can lock fics, sure, but that only stops those who don’t have an account from accessing our works.

If this one book is out there, who knows what may happen next. All it takes is for someone to say ‘I don’t want works featuring me published online and I will threaten a lawsuit’ and we’re back to email chains and password locked neocities webpages.

So it genuinely makes me worry.

And with the recent development of Dax Shepard sharing the book with Daniel himself, I feel that it’s all just too close. Fanfiction is never meant to be seen or read by its original subjects. Sure, they may actively seek it out if they want to, but unless they explicitly consent to it, they shouldn’t be seeing it. Daniel has had no say in the matter, it seems. It is being forced on him, which is going to look bad for the fanfiction community as a whole.

Part Three: Conclusion

Honestly, I don’t know whether I’m just being overly freaked out by this whole thing, I hope it just nicely blows over, the book disappears from people’s minds and we get to just keep our niche little side of the internet safe. But part of me is scared.

I’m scared for what may come, if the book is popular, will people try and emulate it? Will people start ripping fics from Tumblr/AO3/Wattpad to sell on Amazon to make a quick buck off the back of this? And will we have another Anne Rice type situation which kills the community completely?

I don’t know. And that’s what worries me. I hope that this whole thing blows over, that Daniel isn’t too freaked out, and that Anita Driver stops using ai image generators to make her book covers (Lance has waaay too many fingers on her most recent one. Caught you out babes x)

This is the end, for now. I suppose I’ll probably add to this if there are any more developments, and if anyone has anything to add (maybe some better law knowledge because mine is basic) please feel free!

Thanks for reading.

#f1 #formula one

[letters-to-lgbt-kids]

(CW: abuse in a fictional book, including sexual abuse)

My dear lgbt+ kids,

In this letter, I want to share some worries I struggled with while writing and publishing my second novel. (I will write this assuming that you have not read it - I know most of you can not read it as it is written in my native language German!)

It's called "Wunschkind" (which translates to "wanted child") and is a psychological thriller about an abusive relationship. The main characters are the 35-year-old Royden and the 19-year-old Noah. They started dating 5 years ago when Royden became the legal guardian of Noah who is disabled.

There is more to the plot but that's all you need to know for this letter.

I explicitly used the term "abusive relationship" here but you probably would have guessed that even if I didn't - you just need to do the math to see that this can't be a healthy relationship. 19 minus 5 equals" definitely not the age group a 30-year-old should pursue sexually".

Yes, the book title "Wanted Child" is meant to have a dark double meaning.

Just like in most abusive relationships in real life, the abuse in the novel (after a phase of intense adoration and love-bombing) starts out as emotional abuse and social isolation of the victim and slowly escalates to physical and sexual abuse. And that's one of the reasons Noah, just like most abuse victims in real life, does not understand right away that he is being abused.

This book was a passion project for me. I wanted to show why abuse victims oftentimes can't "just walk away". I wanted to show why leaving an abuser is much more difficult than a usual break-up and why abuse victims often do not realize they are being abused until the abuse becomes life-threatening. I also wanted to show how abuse intersects with discrimination (like ableism, racism and homophobia) and the additional struggles that victims in marginalized groups face.

And yet, even with a clear vision of why I am writing about abuse, there was an internal struggle I had while writing it. I worried: What if someone reads this and thinks those two characters are meant as a representation of a healthy gay relationship? What if someone takes this as me promoting or glorifying abuse?

There were certain steps I took to help readers make an informed decision to buy and read this novel:

explicitly using the term "abuse" in the blurb

mentioning the age difference in the blurb

To avoid needlessly triggering readers, I also decided to:

not actually show the sexual abuse on the page (writing scenes that take place before and after - but no actual rape scene)

having a third character show clear discomfort with their relationship dynamics and later explicitly label it as abusive (to counteract the main character who is at this point still denying that he is being abused)

Abuse is a sensitive topic and needs to be handled responsibly, not just carelessly thrown around as a cheap plot point. But with all those conscious decisions on my part - couldn't someone still read it and take it totally the wrong way? Could someone read it and still say "Ew, this Oliver Ernst guy is clearly okay with adult men abusing minors, why else would he write a whole book about it" or even "I actually think their relationship is hot, it's just an age difference kink :)" (and did I have literal nightmares about potentially receiving feedback like that?)? Yes, yes, and yes.

But - and this is an important but - as a writer, I need to trust not only myself to get my point across, I also need to trust my readers. I need to trust them to pick up the point and understand it.

If I don't trust them, I would need to chew up the darker themes until they are super easy to swallow - but who wants to eat something pre-chewed? In that case, I could only write books that either go "Everyone is super nice. Nothing happens. The end." or "Here is a fictional book about a dark topic! but it's actually an in-depth nonfiction philosophical-psychological essay about said topic with no characters or plot." I don’t want to do either.

So, I will keep writing about important topics, even if they are dark - while doing my best to help readers make an informed decision about reading them and avoiding needlessly triggering content.

With all my love,

Your Tumblr Dad

[jackdaw-kraai]

New Patreon Post? New Patreon Post.

It was probably high time I told y'all about the fact that I have a patreon again and attempt to do so in a way that's not completely gauche, SO. Let me tell you about about what it is, does, and after all that, why you should at least look at it even if you would sooner gargle orange juice after brushing your teeth than give me money.

Patreon, as you probably know, or maybe not, is a site that kind of works on the old idea of patronage. AKA, artists get paid money to do what they love so they don't, y'know, starve. Except instead of one rich fuck, it's funded by many far-less-rich people, because fuck capitalism. In practice, you subscribe to an artist, pay them however much a month you want, and the amount determines which tier subscription you have and what rewards you get access to. As you've probably guessed, I have such a system in place.

So *slaps roof of patreon* lemme tell you what this bad boy can fit in it. It can fit LORE for one, like, all of it. This is where I post 4K long essays on the specific kind of fungus that grows only in the driest place on a fictional planet, digests rock in order to get nutrients, and feeds an underground ecosystem through the mycelium that bore through the rock and into the networks of underground rivers that exist there and thus is a keystone species for an entire biome. I also post fictional transcripts of drunk history videos with a delightfully crude historical archivist, that tell stories about how a fictional train network got created by a trainwreck of a human being that involves a contest, a technically legal museum heist, the mob, a trained cat, and a disastrously gay aristocrat. And then another about that guy's mob enforcer sister who once killed a man by putting him in a headlock and flexing her bicep and also her absolutely pathetic wimp of a husband who loves his built-like-a-semi-truck wife very much.

That's not even mentioning the extensive articles on my own conlang, including IPA annotations, detailed character descriptions, redacted reports from amoral scientists who are about to greatly regret everything they ever did, and excerpts from an essay on forbidden magic by a scholar from outside the community.

Mind you, almost all of those are in the lower tiers of the patreon, the tiers that you can get for only a handful of dollars a month, yes, a literal handful. I haven't even gotten to the high-tier stuff. Higher-tier rewards include: ability to vote in polls that make me answer spoiler questions, access to secret lore like how the magic in this world works and what occult elements are at play in the story, and even creating a character together with me if you really decide to be insane with the money you throw at me. I've already done this once and it was great fun to create Sol with someone, an absolute unit of a black lesbian fighter pilot with the soul of a gentle giant.

With all levels though, you also do this: you support my ability to write, and keep writing, as I begin to plan out my own original fiction ideas and further career steps into becoming a published writer. You support my ability to experiment with my writing style, my interests, and help me keep my head above water in a world that's increasingly hostile to artists and writers. You support my ability to live a small, comfortable life that lets me create wonder and magic in a world that desperately needs some of that.

And, as I promised above, even if you don't want to, or simply can't give anything (Gods know that everyone is struggling to get by these days) then it's still worth looking at the public-facing page, because instead of boring-ass tier descriptions, I gave each tier a little blurb of text that is a part of a larger, fragmentary story of Keshiro, Storm Wraith's, last great adventure before he left the Desert. It's a story that currently only exists in said blurbs, but is planned to be written out in full, and when it is, it will, of course, be posted for free on Ao3, no caveats or strings attached. Until then... give it a read. Tell me what you think. I'll see you there.

The link to my patreon page, see what you think.

#the guides verse #guides verse #patreon #guides lore

[thiswaycomessomethingwicked]

I am recently going through all your Ficino posts with great joy (I need a new historical rabbit hole!). Do you have any preferred sources to recommend if I want to start reding or listening in for more grounding on his life, weirdness, philosophy, and all the other funky queer Florentine folk surrounding him?

yessss come down the rabbit hole with me! He is such a delightful weirdo <3 Get ready to learn so much about Saturn and Saturn's Malice (which is not in the room with us, calm down Ficino).

He's a hard one because, in English, there aren't really any biographies on him. (Italian, obviously, is a different story.)

A lot of the grounding works - good essay collections, academic texts etc. - are prohibitively expensive. They can range from $100cad to over $400cad, depending on the work. This is because most are purely that: academic texts. Meaning the print run was like 100 copies and all were bought by university libraries lol

He is also not a well known figure outside of those who study quattrocento Italy or those who study Platonism and other philosophical movements. Some of those who operate in the occult world are familiar with him due to his writings on astrology and natural magic.

Florence also had a huge flood that tragically decked a lot of their older archives and that has also sadly impacted many historians' work in the early modern field.

Now, all this said, I'm going to give you my current piecemeal recommendations:

Eight Philosophers of the Italian Renaissance - Paul Kristeller - a classic survey work based on a lecture series he gave in like the 60s, I want to say. It's very much "what it says on the tin" and provides a healthy overview of eight philosophers of the Renaissance. Ficino is one of them and it's a good place to start on who/what/where/when/why.

Others are those like Bruno, Pico Della Mirandola, Valla, Petrarch etc. All worth knowing something about because they either knew Ficino or influenced him or were influenced by him.

Kristeller wrote a lot on Ficino and is one of the "founders" I would say of the 20th century revival in the interest in Ficino. So, noodle around his works as there is always something interesting in them. They are dated, he was writing in the 60s - 90s, but it's broadly good stuff.

---

Volume 1 of Ficino's Letters, 2nd edition (make sure it's the second edition). This has great front material that goes into him and his life, positions him in the period and those who he knew and was corresponding with.

I will say, they do write in the introduction: "He [Ficino] was apparently the least active of men. It is probable that in his sixty-six years he never set foot outside the territory of Florence and the record of his life is little more than a chronicle of his books."

Which I take umbridge over as his life was very interesting, people just haven't dug into it to the degree they should.** Like, what was going on in the 1480s with all those land disputes over his father's will between him and his brothers? We need details! We need the family gossip! Alas, we don't have it as it may not exist, anymore, or the related legal papers are in an archive and it's not been made available to the public.

--

**Note: Paul Kristeller, and others, make occasional references to someone who was working on an English biography of Ficino. But this would have been in the 80s and 90s and nothing appears to have come of it. So I presume that project is languishing in someone's desk drawer.

There was talk of Arthur Farndell publishing a biography but I haven't seen any signs of it - last I heard mention would have been in the early 00s. Farndell's done most of the modern translations of Ficino's works, so he's quite prolific and you'll see his name a lot.

--

Ficino's Letter Collection (the remaining volumes) - there are 12 volumes of letters that Ficino began pulling together in the 1470s, but he regularly added to, edited, and tweaked the collection over the course of his life.

Letter collections of this sort were a genre of writing at this time and would have been understood to be a vehicle for expounding on philosophical or political issues rather than literal transcriptions of letters written to people.

Which is to say, Ficino did write some iteration of the letters included to the recipients identified. But what was printed, the manuscript editions we have, are highly edited for the purpose of public edification. This does make it super interesting to see what personal details he chooses to leave in.

For example, November 10, 1476 Ficino writes to Cavalcanti about some theological works he was putting together. Ficino also notes that he is returning to Florence soon, he had been at his father's country farm/house/thing, and he intreats Cavalcanti to also return to Florence so "we may at least be close companions in the city, even if we have not been close companions in the country this summer."

Now, as an addendum after the farewell Ficino includes this gem:

"But why do I write nothing about the recent birth of your third daughter? Because you did not write a word to me. Do you wish me to tell the truth? I will not write a word about this before I hear whether I am to congratulate or to console you. But rejoice in the gifts of the Great King, whatever they may be, for nothing from the great is mean or worthy of scorn."

What an interesting bit of personal correspondence to keep in a letter set meant to bring people closer to Platonic ideals of love, civic duty, and their relationship with the divine.

But all of Ficino's letters to Cavalcanti are odd like that. They're half personal correspondence ("I'm sad and bored, please write me!!!" or "I have Luigi Pulci. So much. Have I told you that recently? Hate him. I love everyone in the entire world with every fibre of my soul except Gigi. Fuck Gigi." etc.) and half actual philosophical musings.

Anyway, the letter collections are worth reading. Each volume also includes relevant historical details on what was happening in his life or the broader world at that time. So, for example, the back matter for Vol 4 dives into the Pazzi conspiracy since that is relevant to the letters of that volume (and Vol. 5 to be fair).

---

De Vita (Three Books of Life) - Carol Kaske and John Clark - This is Ficino's "medical" text plus the third book which is where Ficino is like "and this is how you use magical properties of certain stones, sigils, planets, and daemons to heal yourself" and other normal things like that. (He broadly fits into the mode of natural healing magic that was very common for the time - magic/medicine/science all being tangled together in the medieval and early modern period - however he does go a bit further than some. This is the book that got him into hot water with the Church.) Ficino was the son of a doctor and studied and practiced medicine so it makes sense he added medical texts to his repertoire.

I have version put out by The Renaissance Society of America: Renaissance Text Series with critical notes and introduction by Carol Kaske and John Clark.

High recommend, if only for the front notes and introduction. They do a great job positioning Ficino in the broader intellectual landscape of the time. They do a bit of attempting to track his education which wasn't as formal as one might think (he attended the University of Florence but I don't think he ever graduated. He was self-taught in many respects). They also get into what his thoughts on magic were and how they fit, or didn't fit, with the broader framework of faith and magical practices of Ficino's contemporaries.

In addition, they get into how his medical and magical thinking differs from others, where he was innovative, where he leaned on existing traditions, and the repercussions of having published this text.

---

The Bookseller of Florence - Ross King - this is a great, vey accessible book. It uses Vespasiano's life, a contemporary of Ficino, as a lens through which to explore the manifold changes in manuscript/book creation and distribution that were happening over the course of the fifteenth century.

The book also weaves in the shifting intellectual, religious, and political movements and the big, and small, players that participated and influenced these changes. Naturally, Ficino makes appearances throughout and he is described delightfully.

But I highly recommend it as a means to get a backdrop of the intellectual and political world Ficino was born into and operated within. Also, there's fun gossip about people in it and that's always a plus.

An example of some humourous bits:

"Ficino was scholarly and pious, [Luigi] Pulci (known as Gigi) boisterously scandalous, famous for his insults, invective, and sarcastic humour; he also had an unblushing fondness for taverns, brothels, and black magic. He lived up to his surname (Pulci means "fleas")--a maddenly irritating parasite. As one Florentine frantically complained in a letter to Lorenzo [de' Medici], "Gigi is annoying, Gigi has a bad tongue, Gigi is crazy, Gigi is arrogant, Gigi spreads scandal, Gigi has a thousand faults." Ficino triumphed when Gigi wrote a series of sonnets scorning pilgrims, miracles, preachers, and the doctrine of the immortal soul--and, in doing so, Ficino declared, made himself "odious to God" [...]"

Phenomenal. None of them should ever change. Also just the mental image of this pissed off Florentine frantically writing to Lorenzo "Get this man OUT of our City or so help me God!!"

---

Friend to Mankind: Marsilio Ficino - editor Michael Shepherd - ok so this is an essay collection that is really hit and miss. More misses than hits, now that I'm looking at it. I wouldn't recommend going out of your way for it, but if you see it in like a bargain bin or something it's worth picking up.

That said, there are a few essays in it that are worth finding, if you can:

"Fellow Philosophers," Linda Proud (this one is Great if you want the hilarious hot gossip of Pico Della Mirandola, Poliziano, and Ficino squabbling over Plato's concepts of Love. Well, Pico and Ficino cat-fight over it, if in a loving fashion. Poliziano eats popcorn and laughs.)

"In Praise of the One - Marsilio Ficino and Advaita," Arthur Farndell

"Ficino and Astrology," Geoffrey Pearce

"Ficino on the Nature of Love and the Beautiful," Joseph Milne

---

On the Nature of Love: Ficino on Plato's Symposium - translation by Arthur Farndell

It is 100% worth reading Ficino's commentaries on Plato's Symposium if only because I am convinced he wrote the entire thing as a love letter to Giovanni Cavalcanti.

---

Marsilio Ficino and His World - Sophia Howlett - if you can find this at the local library or used somewhere and it's not $150 I recommend it. This is the overview book that I think you're after that doesn't really exist in English, aside from here.

---

Marsilio Ficino: His Theology, His Philosophy, His Legacy - editors Michael Allen and Valery Rees - This is another expensive one, sitting around $250/$300 - but I've read excerpts from it and all that I have read is amazing.

It's an essay collection covering his thoughts on Hermeticism, Plotinus, the soul and primacy of will, musical therapy (Ficino was very keen on musical therapy), Jewish concepts of the prisca theologia, the 15th c. Plato-Aristotle controversy among other philosophical items. There are also essays exploring his influence on art, thinkers, and writers both in his own lifetime as well as throughout history.

---

Plato's Persona: Marsilio Ficino, Renaissance Humanism, and Platonic Traditions - Denis Robichaud - I just spent too much money and bought this book. Will report back as I read it - however, based on the excerpts I read online, I'm super stoked.

Robichoud seems to be exploring how Ficino wrote and created his sense of self through interpretation of Platonic writings and thought. There's lots of stuff about how Ficino interacts with Plato and interprets and understands himself as, like, Plato's "spokesperson" if not a full extension of Plato himself.

---

I hope this helps! Ficino's such a weird little man and I love him. I hope you enjoy going down the rabbit hole as much as I have - and I'm always here to talk Ficino, or anything early modern Italy really. <3 <3

#ask #reply #marsilio blogging #marsilio ficino #early modern italy #early modern florence #renaissance #renaissance florence #renaissance italy #marsilio sourcing

[ionlydrinkhotwater]

TEARS WAITING TO BE DIAMONDS ESSAY BY @pap3r-cr0wn

It's long but worth it

Unearthing Diamonds:

Discovering the Hidden Storyline within TWTBD

This meta is based on my interpretation and reading of TWTBD, IOL, etc. Your mileage may vary.

I also wrote this while sick and during breaks at work, so I apologize for how rushed and messy it is.

Scope:

I will rely exclusively on what is written in IOL and TWTBD to support my arguments. I know that SRB has commented on her stories and answered fan questions, but I won’t be using those. Unlike her published stories which have gone through her drafting and editorial process, her responses to fans have not and are therefore, subject to change. Therefore, I consider only the published stories canon and author comments as highly persuasive, but non-canon.

On Elliot Being a Traitor:

Upon hearing the leader of the cart soldiers refer to the imprisoned dwarves as traitors, Elliot expresses skepticism towards the use of this label and invites the assembled soldiers, as well as the audience, to consider the following:

“What do we know about their trial?”

“Who’s to say they’re even traitors?”

Elliot Schafer in TWTBD

Thus, when the same label is applied to Elliot (in some cases, by Elliot himself), it should be remembered that the reader was encouraged at the start of the story to not simply accept the accusation of treason at face value. In fact, I will argue that almost nothing in TWTBD should be taken at face value.

On the Crime of Treason:

Treason is an attention-grabbing crime that most people think they understand, and, if the casual way it’s invoked by the media is any indication, almost no one actually does. It also has two dimensions to it: the legal and the political. I will begin by explaining the crime of treason from a legal perspective (both in the real world and within the story) and then I will move on to its use as a political tool. I will show that Elliot is not a traitor and that his admission of guilt is suspicious.

How is the crime of treason defined in the Borderlands? We cannot know for sure, but we can infer that the legal system within the Borderlands probably bears some resemblance to the UK legal system with some influences from Ancient Greece and Rome. Here is a quick list of text-based reasons for why I believe this is the case:

We know that within the Borderlands camp, most of the humans who immigrate from the other side of the wall are from the UK. The UK students, including Elliot, encounter no significant language barrier when they enter the Borderlands, and the nomenclature, slang, and even D&D-inspired surnames are reflective of UK/Western European conventions.

The sport of Trigon has its origins in Ancient Rome.

Adara mentions using silphium as a contraceptive in IOL which is one of the uses the Ancient Greeks and Romans used it for (among many other things).

Rachel Sunborn is an archetypal Spartan mother from those ancient joke books (I admit, this point is not dispositive, but I wanted to point this out because it’s funny).

NOTE: I will dispense with the treason laws in the UK that are tied specifically to actions against the monarch and their family.

For the sake of this analysis, the definitions of treason in ancient Greece, ancient Rome and the UK that actually apply to Elliot’s so-called treasonous acts in TWTBD are not so different that I need to deal with each individually. Instead, it’s more useful to look at their essential components to see if Elliot meets the definition of traitor under the law. For that reason, I will use the UK’s Treason Act 1351 since the elements of the crime are similar.

The Treason Act 1351 from the UK states that an individual is guilty of treason:

“if a[n] [individual] do levy war against [the state] in [the] realm or be adherent to the [state’s] enemies in [the] realm, giving to them aid and comfort in the realm, or elsewhere”. (I changed any reference to gender and to the King).

Elliot states the following in TWTBD:

“I’m guilty. Our side was wrong. So I gave away military secrets. I stopped a war. I’m a traitor and I should be executed….”

So, Elliot’s guilty as charged, right? Well, not necessarily.

Legally, the crime of treason is actually very narrowly defined, and, considering the severity of the punishment and the scope of the crime, it’s not without good reason. To quote the famous English jurist and judge, Sir William Blackstone in his Commentaries on the Laws of England and, specifically, on his commentary on high treason: “b[y] enemies are here understood the subjects of foreign powers with whom we are at open war.”

Incidentally, this is also how the term “enemies” (or sometimes “aggressors”), when used to define the crime of treason, is generally understood in many other jurisdictions (including the U.S.). This is why I said that most people don’t really understand the crime of treason because they don’t realize just how specific the set of circumstances must be for someone to meet the definition of treason under the law. Elliot states that he stopped a war so he certainly didn’t levy it against the Borderlands. Additionally, it is not enough for Elliot to aid a foreign power to be guilty of treason, he had to aid a foreign power with whom the Borderlands was in an open war, and textual evidence in TWTBD does not support that conclusion. Surprisingly, a key witness testimony for the Elliot’s defence comes from Prince Mark. While describing Luke, Mark says:

“The champion had brought a golden age of peace to the Borderlands.”

Based on this piece of testimony, we can conclude that the Borderlands was not in open war with anyone recently since that would be incompatible with the idea of a “golden era of peace”. We also don’t need to rely exclusively on Mark’s word either. If the Borderlands was involved in a war recently, I would assume that someone in the story would mention it (considering we’re in a military settlement, in a military-run state) or even make a passing reference to it. Recall that Elliot stated that the Borderlands was in the wrong, and that by passing along military secrets, he stopped a war. If we entertain the scenario that the Borderlands was in open war with a foreign power, and if these military secrets are so significant that possession of them by that foreign power can end the war, then Elliot’s actions either forced the Borderlands to surrender or resulted in a military loss. This is very unlikely. Aside from how dangerous this would be for Borderlands soldiers against whom the military secrets would be used if they were in open conflict (which Elliot would not let happen), it also would not fail to be huge news. Moreover, it would be odd for Mark to omit a recent military loss when speaking about the accomplishments of the Sunborn champion or even Commander Woodsinger, for whom he also expresses admiration. Instead, everyone, even those close to Elliot (like Myra) seem to have very little idea about what really happened. Elliot’s confession is also suspiciously lacking in details when he describes his so-called treason. Therefore, when Elliot says that he “stopped a war”, he means that by divulging military secrets to the other side, he prevented one from happening. This is the explanation that aligns best with the circumstances described in the story of TWTBD and what we know of Elliot.

But it also means that Elliot didn’t commit treason.

I can now imagine that some readers might reasonably point out that my argument so far relies on a legal definition of treason that may not apply at all in this fictional world. It’s possible that Elliot’s actions meet the definition of treason under the law of the Borderlands because it does not require the side to whom Elliot gave the military secrets to be in open war with the Borderlands.

Fair enough. Regardless of whether Elliot is actually guilty of treason or not (he isn’t), I will now argue that Elliot’s attitude of contrition and his confession of guilt are suspicious in light of the events of IOL and when the political dimension of the crime of treason is considered.

There are two salient incidents in IOL that illustrate Elliot’s relationship to the Borderlands justice system, the politics of the Borderlands and the state.

The first incident is when Elliot, Luke and Serene prevent a war between the human and elf alliance and the dwarves by stealing a treaty from Commander Rayburn’s office and showing it to the elves. In law, we have something called precedent. A precedent, in extremely simplified terms, is a previous court decision which is used as either a binding or persuasive authority to determine a ruling for a subsequent case involving similar facts and/or legal issues. Building on our previous discussion about the surrounding facts involved in Elliot’s so-called treason, we can draw a fairly strong comparison between the facts involved in this incident and what Elliot describes in TWTBD: the Borderlands were wrong, Elliot (along with Serene and Luke) delivered information to a foreign power, and they stopped a war.

When Elliot and company are confronted with how they obtained the treaty, Luke lies and says that they found it in the Sunborn library. Interestingly, the only consequence Elliot fears he and the others will suffer for what he terms as “technical treason”, is expulsion. Elliot also thinks this:

“…nobody wanted to discuss where the treaty had actually been. And nobody was going to expel a Sunborn.”

The second incident in IOL that illustrates Elliot’s relationship with the Borderlands’ legal and political system is Colonel Whiteleaf’s rebellion. Arguably, Whiteleaf’s actions are far closer to treasonous than anything Elliot does (levying war) and Whiteleaf’s reasons are far less sympathetic (entitlement and misogyny). As a member of the military, Whiteleaf is at least guilty of mutiny. Despite this, Whiteleaf suffers no legal consequences for mounting two violent attacks on the Borderlands camp and attempting a coup. Elliot uses the information he and Myra found about Whiteleaf’s family to blackmail the colonel into surrendering peacefully. While it’s annoying that Whiteleaf can walk away relatively unscathed from what he did, the system of the Borderlands protects people like Whiteleaf so he would have gotten away with it even if Elliot and Woodsinger attempted to bring him to justice. I think both Elliot and Woodsinger understood that the legal system in the Borderlands is a sad joke. This is why neither of them weaponized it when they had the chance. For better or worse, the laws of the Borderlands do not apply equally to all citizens. If you have the right last name (like Sunborn or Whiteleaf), even treason (technical or actual) can be hand-waved away. Instead, knowing that Whiteleaf would walk away from his actions without facing any real consequences, Elliot was able to eke out the only win he could get. In order for Elliot and Woodsinger to create a Borderlands where there is equal accountability, they have to play within the system for now. While I tend to roll my eyes when I hear things like “incremental change” and “working within the system”, it would be unfair to impose the way our world works on the Borderlands. Recall in IOL when Dale said:

“…the Border guard established a law that must be kept throughout the land, and enforce that law.” and “The backbone of the Border guard are the families who settled in the fortresses built along the Border itself centuries ago…”.

NOTE: Dale is a moron, so I assume, considering the many influences from Ancient Greece and Rome in the Borderlands, that when he says “centuries”, he is referring to a time period spanning thousands of years, not merely hundreds. While it is also possible that time is reckoned differently in the Borderlands, I doubt this considering the timing of the “school year” and Christmas celebrations align with our world.

Elliot has no choice but to work slowly and use the system since there is almost no infrastructure in place to support really significant reforms and even if there were, the populace of the Borderlands appear to lack any real political imagination or even political consciousness that would support huge societal/political reforms. This makes some sense when we consider that they have lived under the same system of military-run governance for centuries, under the same old families, and that, for those who come from the other side of the wall and who have lived under different systems than those of the Borderlands, they can always leave or turn to banditry. When marginalized groups in the Borderlands face hardships due to social inequality, their reaction isn’t anger towards the system, instead, they are socialized to view it as a result of a personal failing. Hence the defeatist attitude of the council course teachers.

This is why Elliot blackmailed Whiteleaf into performing a bit of political theatre because Elliot actually understands how Borderlands politics work. The people of the Borderlands seem to enjoy (and fall for) fairytales. Therefore, Elliot re-directed Whiteleaf’s (unearned) prestige and privilege into crafting a tale where a worthy warrior of an old family concedes to the superior leadership skills of his female rival-foe and they put aside their differences and a general amnesty is declared. It works. Not only does this stop the violence, but this actually helps to create a legitimizing story for Woodsinger’s regime as well as act as a deterrent to others who want to attempt a coup. It would be easy for Elliot and Woodsinger to give into a justifiable desire for personal vengeance (like when Adara tried to avenge Ben), but as we saw with that situation, this only results in never-ending cycles of violence and nothing changes.

Treason as a Political Tool

Treason is a political crime. Historically, it was used to legitimize and lionize the state. As a weapon of the state, it’s almost always ill-suited to purpose. When it is used in a court of law where the rule of law actually prevails, it usually fails because there are other crimes that fit the actions of the accused better. The main reason treason is brought up is as a form of political theatre. Usually, the times when people were successfully tried and found guilty of treason were when the treason laws were wielded by tyrants and/or in a climate where the rights of the accused and procedural justice were put aside in favour of high emotions and political fervour. A good example of this is how Henry VIII (and other English kings) used treason laws.

The Elliot Schafer we know has a healthy skepticism towards institutions, talks openly of revolution and, considering his cultural identity, probably has a justifiable dislike for zealous nationalism and capital punishment. Even if he was guilty of treason under the law of the Borderlands (and I still think he isn’t), he would be more likely to denounce such a broadly-worded treason law as corruptible and a tool for the state to exercise arbitrary violence on its citizens.

So why would he suddenly say out-of-character things like: “I’m a traitor and I should be executed.”?

Why would he offer his life to legitimize a legal system he knows is broken and biased?

Why would he want an execution to put an end to his dreams of peace and revolution?

Why would he want his execution to serve as a deterrent to others from doing the morally right thing when the state is in the wrong?

He wouldn’t. So, what’s going on here?

“What do we know about their trial?”

“Who’s to say they’re even traitors?”

Elliot Schafer in TWTBD

The Smokescreen

The interesting thing about confessing to a crime is that, in most legal systems, you avoid a full-blown trial and go straight to sentencing. Without a full-blown trial, there are no witnesses, no discovery process to find the facts of the case, and any on-going investigations are closed so that resources can go to other unsolved cases. I bring this up because I think it is relevant to Elliot’s case.

Here is my theory:

Elliot Schafer is not guilty of treason. He is guilty of a different crime and, in order to avoid the scrutiny and investigation that would commence if he was charged with that crime, Elliot with Woodsinger’s cooperation, confessed to committing treason in order to create a smokescreen to hide his true crime, a smokescreen he continues to utilize.

Recall what I said:

Treason is an attention-grabbing crime.

The people of the Borderlands lack intellectual and political curiosity (“…nobody wanted to discuss where the treaty had actually been.”)

People in the Borderlands don’t seem to understand what the crime of treason actually entails so they would accept Elliot and Woodsinger’s story at face value.

BOTH Elliot and Woodsinger understand the system and people of the Borderlands. They know that if Elliot says he’s guilty of treason, all people will care and gossip about is how he avoided execution.

What is the crime that Elliot Schafer committed?

What would merit a smokescreen like this?

The answer reveals the entire hidden plot line to TWTBD:

Elliot is guilty of espionage. To be honest, the type of espionage that Elliot committed may only amount to a misdemeanour, since the foreign agent to which he gave the military secrets was not an “enemy”.

“Confusion and misdirection were coward’s weapons…. Mark saw right through Mr. Schafer.”

Why would Woodsinger cooperate?

When Elliot has an emotional meltdown in Woodsinger’s office, Woodsinger says this to him:

“It is possible that I believe you might - might - have the potential to be even more useful than a capable medic,.”

In the Borderlands, Luke and Serene are heroes because they protect people and save lives. Woodsinger, whose politics are more aligned to Elliot’s than any other character in the series, recognizes that Elliot is a hero too. In fact, in terms of numbers, Elliot has saved more lives with his treaties and blackmail than any individual warrior could hope to do.

Recall that Woodsinger also appointed Elliot to be a teacher, which is a job he still has in TWTWB. Even before Elliot realized it, she was helping Elliot to plant the seeds of revolution and reform in the younger generation, before time could calcify their worldview. Even though Woodsinger is firmly fixed within the establishment, I think she is a revolutionary and a reformist herself and Elliot’s actions reignited that spark in her.

Basically, they’re a less problematic M and Bond.

Why would treason be preferable to espionage?

Elliot stated that he gave away military secrets. This raises a few questions: How did he get his hands on these secrets? How did he get the information to the other side? Who was his contact on the other side?

Even the charge of espionage would draw attention to Elliot’s and Commander Woodsinger’s operation. While it’s true that people in the Borderlands are shockingly uncurious, I think anyone would be curious about an underground spy network with potential connections to Commander Woodsinger.

Here is what I think occurred:

Luke and Serene were off on a mission, so Elliot could not rely on them. The Border guards were doing something suspicious. I assume they were doing something that would create a misunderstanding that could then be used to justify a war. Elliot had to act quickly to stop this, and so, his methods had to be cruder than usual. As a result, Elliot, Woodsinger and their contacts were almost compromised. Elliot and Woodsinger used “confusion and misdirection” to protect their contacts and their intelligence network by having Elliot confess to treason and claim responsibility for the entire thing. They were also careful to keep their story as vague as possible to avoid too much scrutiny. Woodsinger capitalized on the fact that Elliot confessed to the crime to lessen his punishment to exile. Elliot’s exile to Westering is now his cover so that he can get on with his real mission which is to run an intelligence network bent on achieving world peace, investigate criminal activities occurring in the more remote and lawless fortresses, and radicalize school children on the side.

Apparent Discrepancies in TWTBD:

In this part of the meta, I’m going to go through the story of TWTBD and point out strange moments, questions, and discrepancies that hint that things are not what they seem and also, that knowing how doors work is the key to unlocking (pun intended) the real story of TWTBD.

And don’t worry, I will address the Luke and Elliot thing too.

I will then provide my reading of the story which explains how everything actually makes sense.

The World Through a Keyhole:

We are told the story through the limited perspective of Prince Mark, a sheltered royal living under a rock and everything he sees is filtered through his myopic worldview and trauma.

When the story opens, he mentions that his nurse is speaking to him from behind a locked door. Mark also mentions that his key is the only one that opens his door.

The order of events after Mark opens his door is important and I will bullet point them here:

The door swings open;

Mark looks around and sees all the entrances cut off by his uncle’s men who are ready to kill him; “Mark attempted no escape”.

He pivots and kills his nurse.

Mark is attacked from behind and knocked unconscious.

QUESTION: How was Mark attacked from behind when he is standing at the entrance of his room that only his key can open?

NEXT:

When Mark temporarily regains consciousness, he feels himself being bundled onto a cart and one of the voices says this line to him:

“This is all I can do for you. Courage, my prince. You’ll need it where you’re going.”

QUESTION: Does Mark’s rescuer know where he’s headed?

NEXT:

When Mark recovers, he steals keys from the guard and feels ashamed about it. The text says this:

“A true prince would find a way to free his people, not only himself. A sergeant at arms helped Mark unloop the chains from around his chest and a private kicked him roughly off the cart.”

“Run fast, my prince!” shouted the sergeant. “Run far!”

QUESTION: Why didn’t they unlock all of their chains and then attack the cart soldiers and flee as a group?

It’s not as though each lock has its own special key (that wouldn’t make sense at all, and even if we allow for that absurdity, why wouldn’t they steal all the keys? Why wouldn’t all the keys be on the same ring?). Also, if they had unlocked everyone’s chains, it would’ve been easier to attempt an escape since all the dwarves on the cart are members of a troop and are capable fighters.

QUESTION: Why kick him off the cart and then shout about it?

They completely sabotaged Mark’s attempted escape.

NEXT:

When they arrive at Westering, the leader of the cart soldiers says about the dwarves in the cart:

“…. A troop of dwarves!….their king wants them to serve life for treason.”

QUESTION: Are we really supposed to believe that the baby-murdering usurper king is anti-capital punishment or something? Also, if the cart soldiers are soldiers, to which fortress are they affiliated? Obviously, they can’t be operating independently or they would be mercenaries.

Mark says “Surely traitors are executed.” when he finds out that Elliot was exiled for treason, so we know that in his kingdom, traitors are executed. So why wasn’t he? His uncle murdered all of Mark’s siblings-including his little sisters- because even an infant legitimate heir is enough to topple his plans. His uncle is brutal and thorough and yet he seemingly makes the colossal tactical error of letting a legitimate heir and a group of seasoned warriors out of his sight. Also, there’s no mention of the troop having any serious injuries, so are we to believe they surrendered and consigned themselves to slaving away in a mine without a fight?

NEXT:

The redheaded man had a ledger with him, and an extremely peculiar writing implement. The ledger crashed against the side of the cart.

QUESTION: Why did Elliot throw or smash his ledger against the side of the cart?

I know he’s melodramatic but what is this? He’ll even go so far as to climb the side of the cart too. What are you up to, Elliot?

NEXT:

Despite Arch’s offer to buy a few of the dwarves’ contracts, Elliot only takes Mark.

QUESTION: We know that Elliot ultimately saves them, but why didn’t he take a few of them anyway? Wouldn’t they have been helpful allies?

NEXT:

According to Piper, she was sent to the fortress with Elliot because she kept causing explosions.

QUESTION: Since when did that become an issue at the Border camp?

Elliot caused explosions all the time with his otherland gadgets.

NEXT:

Mark recalls this about the Sunborn Champion:

“Unrivalled in war, friend to elves and mermaids, hero of land and sea…. The champion had brought a golden age of peace to the Borderlands.”

QUESTION: So Elliot is a no-name traitor and Luke single-handedly brought peace and friendship to the land through the power of handsomeness?

It’s been seven years, so how’s the revolution going, Comrade Schafer?

NEXT:

When discussing whether Elliot knows the Sunborn Champion, Piper says:

“…but Mr. Schafer used to get letters from a lot of important people.”

To which, Illyria responds:

“Or does he say they’re from a lot of important people.”

QUESTION: How does Piper know about Elliot’s correspondence? Also, if she knows at least this much, why doesn’t she provide any names to help support her story? How would you know that someone is important if you don’t know who they are?

NEXT:

When Myra arrives at Westering, she is surprised when Mark refers to himself as a prince. Later, when Mark, Illyria and Piper break into Elliot’s office, they hear Myra say the following:

“-where could he be? asked Myra. “I have to explain. We never talked about the dwarven side of the family. We had a lot of impressive jewelry, but I thought perhaps that was normal for dwarves. I knew my parents married in spite of family opposition, but then- they weren’t happy.”

QUESTION: So what was the point of Myra in this story? To have her name invoked to gain the trust of a prince, arrive in person and have a disastrous interaction with that prince, feel bad about it, know nothing of her dwarven heritage and then, after feeling sad for Elliot, disappear from the story?

Recall that Myra says this in IOL: “We’re going to be sent to our new postings, and we have to decide where to apply.” and “I want to go live among the dwarves,…”.

This was an important part of Myra’s character arc in IOL. Her dwarven identity caused her a lot of hardship in IOL. She faced bullying and hid her face during the incident when the humans almost went to war with the dwarves. She mentions how dismissively Dale Wavechaser treated her because of her dwarven heritage. It was admirable that Myra wanted to live with the dwarves and to embrace that part of her identity and shed the human supremacist nonsense she experienced at Border camp.

I also refuse to believe that the Myra who helped Elliot investigate the discrepancies in Whiteleaf’s war stories (which Elliot used to blackmail Whiteleaf), would be so useless.

NEXT:

Elliot responds to Myra’s question about Luke’s letters:

“I haven’t read his letters. What’s the point? I know what they say. I chose to be a traitor to everyone. I chose the end of everything. I don’t need to torture myself past the end.”

QUESTION: But he’s still friends with Myra? What about Serene? Why is it only Luke who would care about the traitor thing?

Also, as I’ve established, Elliot is not a traitor, and in this scene, he describes a scenario which sounds a lot like what he, Luke and Serene did when they were kids.

NEXT:

When Piper finds a map she says:

“Mark!” Piper held up a map. “A days march from our Westering fortress is Deepfort. There’s a mine by Deepfort. Mr. Schafer noted it’s a gold mine.”

QUESTION: Recall when I said that knowing how doors work is important to this story? How did Elliot and Myra not hear Piper basically yelling out the details of their plan to storm a fortress when it is very clear that the kids could hear the literal emotions in Elliot and Myra’s voices when they spoke in low conversational tones?

“They (meaning the kids) froze on hearing Myra of the Diamond Clan’s voice, sweet and low…”.

Also, the scene immediately cuts to the kids at the fortress. Elliot had his hand on the doorknob (they saw it turn), so how did they get out of the office before he came inside?

NEXT:

When the dwarves leave the mine, a dwarven girl presented Mark with a battle axe that the dwarves made in secret.

QUESTION: What? How? Wouldn’t the dwarven prisoners be searched? Isn’t this a gold mine? What’s the axe made of? Gold? Humans wouldn’t have a weapon’s forge in a mine and certainly not a gold mine. Also, if the dwarves could make and hide weapons, why wouldn’t they use them to escape?

Also, the dwarves poured out of the mine after Mark shouts his family’s words (Light in the dark; clear as a diamond) at them.

QUESTION: Were there no guards down there? Aren’t gold mines deep and big? They may be familiar with the significance of those words, but how did they recognize it as a signal that they were being rescued?

Also, there is this line:

“Sword clashed against axe. Their cry rang out in defiance against the terrifying sky. “Light in the dark! Clear as a diamond!”

Mark also mentions that a Westering guard struck the axe from his hand, but the guard was killed in the next moment. Mark feared he wouldn’t get the chance to pick his weapon up.

QUESTION: So are the dwarves fighting alongside the kids? That would make more sense than Ilyria and Mark fighting entire groups of guards alone. But then, what weapons are the dwarves using to fight? More secret battle-axes? Again, if the dwarves had access to weapons, why didn’t they use them to fight the humans and escape?

NEXT:

Piper asks: “Can someone take me to materials I might fashion into explosives?”

QUESTION: Didn’t Piper explode two fortified doors and part of the fortress’s wall? Did she already run out of explosives? How did she transport all the explosives she used before?

NEXT:

“There were more soldiers than Deepfort ones here. The men of Westering fortress must have missed them far more swiftly than Mark had hoped.”

QUESTION: Why would they send so many men to go after three missing kids?

NEXT:

Elliot says this to Captain Arch:

“I’ve gathered evidence of you skimming off the top, selling off weapons and grain supplements.”

Then Luke shows up and Elliot says:

“He’s only committed petty crimes…. He and most of his men need to be fined,….”

QUESTION: Since when is arms trafficking a petty crime? To whom were they selling the weapons?

NEXT:

Elliot says this to Luke:

“This is my pupil, Prince Marcus of the Diamond Clan….”

QUESTION: Why didn’t Elliot just introduce Mark as a prince like this to the class at the Westering fortress? Why didn’t he introduce Mark like this in his letters to Myra and spare her and Mark the embarrassment?

NEXT:

“It seemed Mr. Schafer had summoned forces from the Border camp…”

QUESTION: If Westering and Deepfort are remote fortresses, how did the Border camp forces arrive at such a convenient time? Presumably, Westering is closer to Deepfort than the Border camp.

NEXT:

“He would have to stay, with his strange new friends.”

QUESTION: So Captain Arch and his men had to pay fines for their petty crimes, but they are still at the fortress, right? Aren’t things at the fortress going to be really awkward for Mark and Elliot? Especially with Captain Arch?

NEXT:

The big picture questions I have are this:

What do Mark and Elliot’s stories have to do with each other?

What was the point of Myra in this story?

What can we learn about the 7 year gap between IOL and TWTBD?

The Hidden Story of TWTBD

For the first part of this, I need you to suspend your disbelief since it will seem as though I am making things up from thin air. Stick with me, and hopefully it will all come together in the end. Also, if you find this a bit confusing, I will have a summary of my full theory at the end.

The Timing of the Coup

Unlike the rest of his family, Mark is the only one who did not have an assassin planted in his bedroom. His baby sisters had their nurses, his older brothers and father had lovers (no mention of his mom). Why would Mark’s uncle choose to make his move now when he’d been so careful to plant spies and assassins in his family’s inner circle for years? Why didn’t he wait a few years for Mark to have a lover? Mark’s little sisters were infants so even in two to three years, they would still have live-in nurses.

I have a theory for why Mark’s uncle felt he had to seize the throne when he did. The first answer is that the king (under the influence of certain forces which I will explain later) has been looking into the issue of dwarf trafficking. Mark’s uncle knew his name would come up

(“…dwarves this fortress had been collecting for years. Perhaps his uncle had handed some over”),

and his brother would turn on him. The second answer is that a troop of highly skilled, loyal dwarves who Mark’s uncle couldn’t persuade to take bribes and who he could not count on defeating were enlisted by his brother, the late king, to go on a certain secret mission. That mission was to allow themselves to be captured by traffickers, pretend to be prisoners and, when the time was right, they would mount a rescue. If one of his main obstacles to usurping the throne was going to let themselves be hauled off by humans, especially humans he’s had dealings with before, then he would he would take this boon and welcome. There would be no rescue and he would abandon the troop to their fate.

Why would the late king sent the troop of dwarves on this mission and who influenced this decision?

Myra of the Diamond Clan. Here are a few things to keep in mind:

Myra is a former council course student, like Elliot;

She lived with the dwarves for a few years after completing her training at the Border camp;

We also know, from what Mark realizes when he sees the dwarves at Deepfort, that the capture and enslavement of dwarves in human mines has gone on for years. It also may go both ways as Celaeno says in IOL regarding the human prisoners: “We could sell them as slaves to the dwarves…”.

We are not told what Myra’s job or rank is in TWTBD.

Elliot has been collecting information on the Deepfort’s trafficking before the story of TWTBD started.

There is more and I will also address what Mark overheard Myra saying outside Elliot’s office, but I will get to that in a bit.

For now, here is what I think happened:

Myra, Elliot and Woodsinger all have their own very good reasons to be ideologically opposed to the trafficking and slavery going on between the dwarves and the humans (a de facto slave trade with the label of penal servitude slapped on top). On the surface, Myra, like most council course members, probably performs administrative duties and accompanies military officers on official diplomatic missions and negotiations involving humans and dwarves. In reality, Myra, a shrewd and brilliant scholar, serves as a diplomatic liaison between the dwarves and humans as a member of Elliot and Woodsinger’s intelligence network.

Let’s assume that Mark’s rescuer (who probably used a secret entrance or passage to get into Mark’s room to “attack” him from behind) is in contact with Myra and knows about the secret mission the late king gave to the troop of dwarves. He knows the cart left before the coup started. The rescuer used the secret passage to sneak Mark out of his home (and probably changed his clothes so he wouldn’t stand out). The rescuer intercepted the cart and told the cart soldiers -and by extension, the troop of dwarves- about the coup, the dead royal family, and the new king. The cart soldiers needn’t fear reprisal from the current regime since the new king considers these dwarves traitors who should spend the rest of their lives in servitude…and also take this other, unconscious dwarf. Then he put Mark in the cart, where Mark temporarily regained consciousness and said his line (“Courage, my prince…”).

The Behaviour of the Troop

The troop of dwarves found themselves in a pickle. Not only were they unable to prevent the coup and save the royal family, but now they can’t go back home. Their mission is also in a state of limbo and they also have the last surviving member of the royal family on their hands. If they wanted to, they could use their skills to attempt an escape, but they wouldn’t. They owed it to their people and late king to see this mission through and they had to be careful not to draw too much attention to Mark in case his uncle found out he was alive and tried to assassinate him. On the other hand, if the humans in Deepfort find out that they have the last surviving heir to the throne, Mark would become a valuable hostage. The humans might offer to “take care” of Mark for his uncle in exchange for the uncle giving them huge amounts of wealth or more slaves or they might keep Mark and make him a puppet king through which they can exercise undue influence on the dwarven kingdom and incite wars all of which will only benefit the humans.

Unfortunately, Mark’s just a sheltered prince with poor self-preservation skills. He is clueless about the mission he’s complicating with his presence. He also fails to realize that his existence is a potentially destabilizing force for both the dwarves and the humans.

So the kid steals the guard’s keys and tries to escape.

The troop of dwarves don’t bother to unlock their own chains or try to escape because they’re determined to see their mission through, but they let Mark believe they are helping him escape. The truth is, Mark, who is unused to the surface world, would probably just get captured again, and if he tries to return home, his uncle will murder him. A private kicks Mark off the cart and the sergeant shouts for him to run. I find it odd and careless that the sergeant refers to Mark as a prince here, but considering that the humans don’t show any indication that they know that Mark is a prince, then the sergeant was either careful not to say “prince” loudly, or maybe he used the dwarven term for prince? I can’t really explain that part. Anyway, I do think the troop intentionally spoiled Mark’s escape attempt in order to keep him alive. Yes, he and sergeant were beaten, but better beaten than dead.

When the cart arrives at Westering, Elliot immediately goes on an anti-trafficking spiel, crashes his ledger against the cart and singles out Mark.

Elliot knows about the mission (he is working with Myra and he is investigating Deepfort, after all). He sees Mark, and recognizes that he should not be there. There is something interesting in how Elliot immediately asks Mark if he’s twelve. It is as though he suspects something about Mark’s identity.

Mark mentions his affiliation to the Diamond clan right away, but Elliot only interrupts him when he refers to himself as a prince, as though he wants to undermine that statement and use the interruption as a distraction. More importantly, Elliot says:

“Any relation to Myra of the Diamond Clan?…”. I think Elliot’s interruption serves a lot of purposes here. It deflects attention from Mark referring to himself as a prince and I think that by invoking Myra’s name, he’s not only making a connection with Mark, Elliot is also letting the troop of dwarves know that he is part of the mission, that despite all the setbacks, the mission is still on and that he and Myra will be in contact with them. I also think that Elliot crashed his ledger into the cart and then climbed into the cart on purpose. To the Westering soldiers, Elliot is just being his usual melodramatic self, but I think he used his opportunity to pass a message to the troop of dwarves.

This is why the troop of dwarves are so silent throughout this exchange, why the sergeant turned from Mark and why Elliot didn’t take up Arch’s offer to buy a few of the prisoner’s contracts. Elliot basically let them know that he will look after the prince so they can get on with the mission.

A Little Bird Told Me…

Was anyone else suspicious about the private?

“We’re not unexcel.”

“Unethical,” hissed a private at Arch’s back.

“Funnily enough, when systems rely on free labour from prisoners, many get unjustly convicted. That is, say it with me now-“

“Unethical,” murmured the private.

“…a private appeared reporting a tally of the grain delivery from the villagers.”

This private is absolutely Elliot’s agent. Arch thinks that the private is under his command, but I believe that this private (and I imagine many people in various fortresses in the Borderlands) are actually agents of Woodsinger and Elliot’s network. It make sense as well since there are a lot events that come up later that would require Elliot to have someone who is an insider (or rather, infiltrator) in Westering. Also, upon mentioning my theory about the private to my twin, ionlydrinkhotwater, she brilliantly suggested that this could be Cyril Leigh from IOL. I have no proof for this, but I want it to be true. Also, considering that Elliot made Cyril take out library books for him, collect letters for him, and was probably one of the people Elliot had in mind when he told Woodsinger about the people he terrorized into spying for him, it would fit. It doesn’t matter who this private is though, because what’s significant is that this character shows how Elliot’s reformist politics have gained traction in the Borderlands, and that Elliot has someone planted within Westering’s power structure who can assist him with his investigations. It also makes Arch’s posturing about being in command of the fortress even funnier.

Speaking of Elliot’s agents, I also want to talk about Piper.

Piper and Elliot came from the Border camp together:

“After more incidents at the Border camp, I was sent away. Mr. Schafer was exiled here, so it worked out.”

“Certainly more peaceful than before you came with your explosions, and Mr. Schafer was exiled here for treason.”

I am suspicious that Elliot allowed his student to be sent away for causing explosions when he used to do the same thing when he was in training and he was never sent away. As I’ve already stated, Elliot is not actually a traitor and I don’t think Piper is at Westering because she was sent away as punishment. Piper is with Elliot because she is his protege and spy.

Like Woodsinger, Piper shares Elliot’s political views and unlike most people in the Borderlands, Piper seems to possess intellectual and scientific curiosity. Where else have we seen explosions occur in the Borderlands? The wall. In IOL, Elliot mentions that he was probably the only one who conducted experiments with the wall. I imagine that Piper has taken over that project. It also makes sense that Piper would go with Elliot to Westering. Not only because of mutual affection, but because Elliot knows that someone less scrupulous may try to use Piper’s scientific (and destructive) talent. The last thing he wants is for her to end up part of a Borderlands version of the Manhattan Project.

As a character, Piper seems to know everyone’s business. She succinctly summarizes her and Elliot’s situation - providing very little detail - as if she was reciting the cover story she is supposed to tell. She also knows Ilyria’s backstory in detail as well and she is immediately interested in Mark’s story too. Piper is like Elliot, if Elliot was instantly likeable and enjoyed explosions.

Even though Mark thinks Piper is skeptical about his story about being a prince, on re-read, that is only Mark’s interpretation. Unlike Illyria, Piper never says that she does not believe him. In fact, her first words to him are: “So you’re from the dwarven kingdom underground?” after he went into his spiel. Mark does notice that Piper stares at him in a wondering manner, the same way people do when he talks about being a prince, but Piper stares at him and Illyria that way for lots of reasons.

“Piper stared at them in a wondering manner. Usually Mr. Schafer did this too…”

Also recall that Piper asks Mark if he knows why people stare at him when he talks about being a prince. Both Elliot and Piper are interested in his answer. It’s clear from this exchange that Elliot knows that no one believes Mark, so it’s interesting that he doesn’t “defend” his student who is being treated as a liar and, from what Mark says here-

“…being surrounded by disbelief made Mark feel as if it weren’t real…”

He’s getting gaslit constantly. Elliot’s reasons are understandable for the reasons I outlined earlier. I think Piper was instructed by Elliot not to talk about Mark’s real identity and to keep an eye on any student who might suspect that Mark is telling the truth and try to use that information.

There is also this exchange:

Illyria says this to Mark and Piper:

“Mr. Schafer started the rumours he has been exiled to teach in this fortress outpost for a grand crime.”

Illyria’s getting a little close to the truth and it makes Piper uncomfortable.

“I don’t know,” murmured Piper.

She also says this:

“…Mr. Schafer used to get letters from a lot of important people.”

Firstly, it’s significant that Piper knows about Elliot’s letters. Elliot used to know about Woodsinger’s letters because he terrorized (Cyril, probably) his students to keep an eye on them for him and report anything interesting. It is how he knew that Woodsinger had reached out to Calaeno. Either Piper is one of Elliot’s messengers or she is spying on him. I don’t think Piper is sneaking around and finding out about Elliot’s letters behind his back though, because if that was so, then why, when Illyria expresses skepticism about Elliot getting letters from important people, does Piper not name anyone? She could have said: I saw his letters. He got a letter from so-and-so. Instead, Piper stays silent. Also, I doubt that Elliot goes around talking about how he gets letters from important people, as Illyria suggests. That’s really out of character. What I think happened here is that Piper felt a protective urge to defend Elliot when he was being badmouthed and because Illyria is sort of right about Elliot pretending to be a traitor, but then Piper realized she may have said too much and clammed up.

Recall that Mark barely needed to convince Piper to join his cause, unlike Ilyria who he had to convince. Her politics are an echo of Elliot’s and I also think she knows about Elliot’s plans for the dwarven prisoners (I’ll get to that later).

Mark, Illyria and Piper made plans to break into Elliot’s office when the opportunity arose. The text says: “Mark’s chance came when a visitor arrived.”

What was it about Myra’s visit that created an opportunity for Mark and friends to break into Elliot’s office? It’s especially odd since Mark left the room in an emotional and dramatic state after his brief encounter with Myra. Not to mention that Elliot came to his office shortly after the kids broke in. It doesn’t seem like Myra’s visit was that great of an opportunity so much as that Mark was at the end of his rope.

Here is my theory about Piper:

Piper knew about the mission involving the dwarves. She knew that Elliot already had the Border guard stationed near Deepfort. She knew that the Deepfort prisoner revolt (yes, that was going to happen regardless of whether Mark was there or not), was scheduled to happen tomorrow. Myra showing up to Westering was the signal that things were a go for tomorrow. That’s why Piper is the one who suggested they break into the office. She wanted her, Mark and Illyria to be the ones who kickstarted the revolt: to save Illyria’s reputation and to let Mark be the one to help free his people.

When Elliot and Myra reach his office, the kids can hear their conversation outside the door with amazing clarity. Presumably, Elliot and Myra could hear them just as well.

Interestingly, Mark states that Piper “roamed Mr. Schafer’s office at random”. She is also the one who just so happens to find exactly what they needed:

“Mark!” Piper held up a map. “A day’s march from our Westering fortress is Deepfort. There’s a mine by Deepfort. Mr. Schafer noted it’s a gold mine.”

Mark assumed Piper was searching at random, but that’s only what it looks like to him because he doesn’t suspect that Piper knows any more than he does about where his men are. I think that Piper looked in seemingly random (but actually very specific) places in Elliot’s office because she was looking for the map.

Not only does she happen to find the conveniently-marked map they need, she even knew it was a day’s march from Westering. Also I guess Piper put on her best NPC-exposition voice when she said her lines. Elliot and Myra definitely heard her and I think that was what she intended (once again, knowing how doors work helps us solve the puzzle).

At that point, I imagine Elliot and Myra had to engage in some awkward and loud small talk until they were certain the kids had escaped the office. I will get to what I think Myra and Elliot did later.

We can’t underestimate just how smart Piper actually is. Recall that Piper set up multiple timed explosives at Deepfort without the benefit of clocks or gadgets. She had to calculate and keep track of the rate at which her fuses would burn and when detonation would occur for each explosive in her head, in the middle of battle. She is also both confident and unfazed during the battle at Deepfort.

Finally, I want to address Elliot and Piper’s relationship. Woodsinger made Elliot feel like his skills were valuable, his interest in culture and peace were valid and she used her position of authority to protect him and give him the space to use those skills to make the Borderlands a better place. I think it’s sweet that Elliot is doing the same for Piper. In many ways, Elliot is keeping the promising to Piper that he Borderlands breaks with so many other kids. Otherland kids are lured by the promise that they are going to be badass heroes in a magical fantasy land and by the time they realize it’s never going to happen, they are jaded and bitter. With Piper, Elliot offered her the chance to join his intelligence network whose goals are social reform, justice and world peace which she can help achieve by using the skills everyone else dismisses. Piper is misunderstood and a displaced orphan. She’s living in a world that’s alien to her and fears her skills. It says a lot about her and about Elliot that despite all that, she manages to be one of the most cheerful, kind and brave people in the story.

What’s Going On With the Revolution?

The thing about agitators, reformers and revolutionaries is that once they start to gain real momentum, they get a target on their backs. It seems odd that Elliot isn’t dealing with assassination attempts all the time and that he isn’t famous either. The Borderlands has had the same system of governance for centuries (and probably longer). The old families should be horrified by Elliot and Woodsinger’s reforms. In a world in which there is lasting and substantial peace, the power and influence of the military will fade, giving way to a new power structure (hopefully more representative and egalitarian). Elliot threatens the power of the old families. He threatens to destroy the only system they have ever known and the privileges they didn’t even realize they enjoyed. I imagine he isn’t only trying to create lasting peace, either. I think that he, and his students (many of whom would be adults by now) are tackling social justice reforms on various fronts: gender, culture, science, justice, etc.. Are some of Elliot’s students writing best-selling anti-war fiction? Are some lobbying for reforms to the justice system? Are Elliot’s allies trying to motivate the villagers to consider other forms of governance that don’t privilege the interests of the military over their interests? What about worker’s unions? The traditionalists should be worried. It’s not just the human power structures that are under threat. I suspect Elliot is assisting Golden with the suffrage-elf movement and as I’ve argued here, he’s also helping Myra to abolish penal servitude and trafficking between the dwarves and humans. Yet, the only time we see Elliot in danger is when he specifically places himself in danger.

So, is the revolution a bust? Is the reason that Elliot is not a target, or even well-known because he hasn’t accomplished anything and he isn’t really trying to do any sweeping reforms?

Hell no.

Firstly, one of the reasons the traditionalists don’t know about the revolutions slowly spreading throughout the Borderlands is that I think at this point, they are underground movements.

Secondly, the reason Elliot is not a known figure, despite the reforms that have already taken place, is because Elliot pins them all on Luke.

Recall what I said earlier about Elliot knowing the Borderlands and how its people think and how they love fairytales. Remember how Elliot handled the diplomatic incident with the Elf-Dwarf treaty and Whiteleaf’s mutiny. Luke is a universally loved figure in the Borderlands.

“Unrivalled in war, friend to elves and mermaids, hero of land and sea…. The champion had brought a golden age of peace to the Borderlands.” - Mark, TWTBD

“I wish you would not start a revolution” - Luke Sunborn, IOL

Luke supports Elliot, but he is not responsible for the Borderland’s age of peace, the alliances between the mermaids and humans, and the many other things for which he is given credit and which is almost certainly the result of the hard work done by Elliot and many nameless others. I also don’t think Elliot gives Luke the credit because he loves him or thinks that Luke needs even more privilege and credit than he already has. It’s funny that Luke is known as the Sunborn Champion and held up as the ideal Sunborn son when he is actually the outlier of his family. Luke is actually the ideal son of the Borderlands: a good soldier, non-political, respectful to authority, patriotic and brave. If America’s highly mythologized version of George Washington was real, that would be what Luke is to the Borderlands. Elliot is more than happy to wield Luke’s privilege because it’s effective.

Luke flattens nicely into an uncontroversial symbol upon which anyone can impose their preferred worldview. The old families see Luke as the ideal scion of the oldest family and advocate for their interests. Nothing Luke Sunborn does could possibly threaten the power and security of the old families and the traditionalists, because he’s their man and one of them. For the non-political crowd, Luke Sunborn is a fairy tale hero. Whatever he does, it’s good and just and there’s no need for any deeper scrutiny. For those who actually support political reforms, Luke is a valuable ally who is willing to look past his position of privilege and throw his support behind reforms that will topple the system that has always benefited him. Finally, for those who violently oppose reform and threats to the oppressive status quo, the threat of violence from the Sunborn Champion will force them to think twice about trying to resist. Elliot may be a pacifist, but he doesn’t force that decision on others, and in international politics, the fear of war and threat of violence is one of the inescapable ways to enforce peace.

With Luke as a symbol, Elliot and Woodsinger have a lot of latitude to enact significant reforms in the Borderlands in the background before the old families have a chance to realize what’s going on. This may seem dishonest and manipulative, and it is, but the Borderlands does not seem to have the concept of transparency in governance, and popular voting. The idea of a woman of colour in power almost sparked a civil war that only ended through when Elliot blackmailed Colonel Whiteleaf. The methods are not ideal, but we know that Elliot and Woodsinger are sincere in their beliefs and that the other side is not willing to engage with them in good faith (or at all, really), so they have no choice.

I also think it’s interesting to note who is known in the Borderlands and who isn’t. Based on what Mark says, Luke Sunborn is famous, Elliot is not, Serene is famous, Golden is not, and he knows about Woodsinger, but he didn’t know about his cousin Myra. I think this is intentional. I think Elliot, Myra, and Golden are revolutionary leaders and effective reformists, but they use Luke, Serene, (sometimes) Woodsinger, and (eventually) Mark as public faces to sell their reforms to the general public.

Maybe someday when there’s a Borderlands University, there will be students writing papers on how history totally erased the actions of marginalized people like Elliot and Myra and Golden, and then they’ll de-platform some Whiteleaf apologist who’s invited to give a talk in DeWitt Hall on why the Colonel Whiteleaf Library should keep its name and not be changed to the Cyril Leigh Library, because history. Could happen.

What’s Going On With Elliot and Luke?

“But life teaches us that sometimes we must make compromises.”

It’s interesting that Elliot has both a personal and a political relationship with Luke. For almost seven years, he was able to have it both ways. He could utilize Luke as a symbol for his reforms and also just have Luke be his boyfriend. I think the he knew this was a delicate balance to maintain. I mentioned earlier in this meta that I think Elliot had to take on the mantle of traitor to protect his job (his real job: revolutionary leader, political reformer, diplomat/spy) and those who work for and with him (his network and contacts). Elliot realized that his symbol, Luke Sunborn, should not be attainted by association with a known traitor. The balance was destroyed and now Elliot had to make a compromise. He either sacrificed his professional and moral integrity by staying with Luke and jeopardize everything for which he’s worked all these years, or he can end his personal relationship with Luke and maintain Luke’s public image for the sake of the revolution.

Elliot chose.

Except he didn’t. I personally believe that in the seven years they’ve had to grow and cultivate their skills, Elliot and Luke became equally hyper-competent at their respective jobs. Luke is a superhero and Elliot is a master of intrigues. I also believe despite the passage of seven years, there’s some strains of stupidity that are chronic.

If Elliot wanted, he could have actually broken up with Luke. Instead, Elliot assumed that if he went off in exile and stopped answering Luke’s letters, Luke would eventually end things with him. He also refused to read Luke’s letters to confirm this.

Does any of this sound kind of familiar?

Recall in IOL that Elliot believed he would be doing the just and valiant thing if he broke up with Luke. Then he didn’t.

Elliot didn’t break up with Luke during his exile and he didn’t read Luke’s “break up” letters either. In that way, he kept their relationship in a Schrodinger’s box-like limbo.

Elliot has integrity and sincere political beliefs. I think he is willing to die or endure any number of hardships for the sake of his beliefs. Elliot is also human. So it’s really funny that breaking up with Luke seems to be the one line he can’t bring himself to cross and the one compromise he can’t bring himself to make.

I think when Luke appears and Elliot can’t help but call him by the endearment, “Loser”, it was Elliot’s way of giving up on trying to compromise between his beliefs and his personal attachment to Luke. I also think that seeing Luke have a big hero moment reminded Elliot that Sunborn charisma is a law of nature in the Borderlands and Luke cannot be cancelled so maybe he shouldn’t overthink this.

I also think Elliot is absolutely overestimating the political acuity of his opponents. He’s out here playing 4D chess and they’re choking on checker pieces.

“But I thought you said when you’re an adult, you must learn how to compromise?” When he looked around, Mr. Schafer was grinning.

“I didn’t say I was good at it.”

Why Did Elliot and Myra Say That?

“-where could he be? asked Myra. “I have to explain. We never talked about the dwarven side of the family. We had a lot of impressive jewelry, but I thought perhaps that was normal for dwarves. I knew my parents married in spite of family opposition, but then- they weren’t happy.”

“I’m guilty. Our side was wrong. So I gave away military secrets. I stopped a war. I’m a traitor and I should be executed….”

If Elliot and Myra were having a private discussion together, why would they say these things unless they meant them?

From Mark’s point of view, Myra appears to feel bad about not knowing her dwarven heritage and embarrassing Mark. However, based on what we know about Myra from IOL, we know that it’s unlikely that she didn’t know about her dwarven heritage since she lived amongst the dwarves after her training and, therefore, she would have known about Mark and the Diamond Clan. According to my theory, she is also involved in dwarven politics, as well.

I believe, like Elliot and Piper, Myra knows that Mark is a prince, but in order to protect him, she had to act like she didn’t. She feels guilty about having to be cruel to be kind. Another way to understand Myra’s words is to remember that she is now in a precarious position… politically. If Myra and the humans recognize Mark and it gets back to Mark’s uncle, not only would there be upheaval such as I described earlier, but the act of harbouring a royal fugitive could become the justification for a war between the humans and dwarves. Mark’s uncle is also Myra’s uncle and Myra and her dwarven parent may be seen as either a potential ally to the usurper king (as a diplomat who can get the human government to recognize his regime as legitimate) or as yet another enemy he needs to eliminate. I read Myra’s words as her explaining why she never had the chance to become close to her late relatives growing up. She may also be talk about whether her dwarven parent is in danger, or concerned about what happened to their relatives, or even whether her dwarven parent could have provided any information about what was happening with the royal family that led to the coup. At no point does Myra say that she didn’t know who Mark was nor does she reproach Elliot for not telling her about Mark’s identity. Most of their conversation is about romantic drama anyway.

As for what Elliot says, recall that Mark doesn’t note any emotion in his voice the way he does when Elliot speaks in the rest of the conversation. I think Elliot is wryly going through his cover story for Myra to demonstrate that he’s made his decision and he’s prepared to live with it. That’s why these lines so clipped, matter-of-fact and detail-free and it’s also why he ends them with a joke. He’s not confessing his sins, he’s going over the role he’s chosen to play, which is interesting because he and Myra were part of a play back at school, so this can be a tongue-in-cheek callback.

Elliot then refers to himself as a traitor a second time after Myra asks about Luke’s letters and this time, Mark notes the emotions in Elliot’s voice. The reason is that when Elliot called himself a traitor before, he was being glib because he (and Myra) knew it was just a cover story. This time, Elliot isn’t confessing to treason against the Borderlands, he’s confessing to betrayal against Luke (and presumably, Serene). He chose his political ideals over the two people he loved most, so naturally, he feels sincere regret about that.

The Deepfort Revolt

“…. Mr. Schafer frequently became distracted from lessons to stick his nose in things that were none of his business: grain, armaments.”

I am going to go over what I believe was Elliot and Myra’s plan in full (the kids are not involved):

Myra, through her contacts in the underground dwarven kingdom, convinced the king to join her, Woodsinger and Elliot in their plans to end dwarf-human trafficking. The King sends his most trusted troop to infiltrate Deepfort where it is suspected that dwarves have been kidnapped and sold for years now. When the troop eventually arrives at the gold mine, they get in contact with Myra and Elliot and confirm that not all the dwarves are condemned prisoners (penal servitude is unethical, but it’s not necessarily illegal, unfortunately) and many are actually kidnapped and enslaved dwarves (both unethical AND very illegal).

Meanwhile, Elliot connects the traffickers (the ones who operate the carts) with Deepfort. I suspect they are since they already promised most of the troop to Deepfort, which suggests they have an ongoing business relationship. I believe the cart soldiers are actually part of Deepfort, but their duties are probably listed as “delivering provisions” (hence the cart) or something innocuous on the records. Elliot’s spies tell him that the Deepfort has a lot of weapons despite the fact that the Borderlands is in peace time and a lot of weapons are in the hands of the cart soldiers. Elliot realizes that Westering, a “poorly provisioned” fortress, has been selling weapons (and grain) to Deepfort.

Elliot dispatches Private Cyril to Deepfort to tell them that their “redheaded trouble” (Cyril started the rumour in my theory and it’s why the cart soldiers had heard about Elliot) is keeping an eye on the books so they won’t be able to continue their arrangement for the foreseeable future. They can still sell them grain (helps maintain the illusion that the deal is still in place to the men of Westering, and allows Elliot’s spies to deliver a cart full of weapons to Deepfort). Meanwhile, Arch has no idea this happened and continues to send weapons and grain to Deepfort. Elliot cooks the books so Arch and the others don’t notice they aren’t getting money for the misappropriated weapons. The weapons that are sent to Deepfort (in the grain cart) are diverted to the dwarven prisoners in preparation for the day of the revolt. Recall what I said about Elliot probably having contacts in multiple fortresses? I have no doubt that he has one in Deepfort who is the liaison between the dwarves, Elliot and Myra. Remember how Mark thought the dwarves in the gold mines had fashioned weapons in secret from their captors? Remember how I said that wouldn’t make a lot of sense? Since the dwarves would be searched, there would be no weapons forge in a gold mine, and we don’t know whether the gold mine would yield a sufficient amount of other kinds of ore to create weapons. What would make more sense is if the dwarves received the diverted human weapons from Westering and re-fashioned those into crude versions of dwarven weapons using the tools they have on hand.

I’ll pause here to explain why all this cloak and dagger is necessary and why Woodsinger couldn’t just have the Border camp raid Deepfort and free the prisoners. The methods by which Elliot and Myra are obtaining this evidence is illegal and also involves a lot of espionage. In order to properly and justly convict the men of Deepfort and put an end to the trafficking, Elliot has to create a situation in which the Border camp has “just cause” to raid Deepfort and “stumble” onto the proof that the dwarves in the gold mines are not convicted criminals, but kidnapped slaves. If the dwarves in the mines just happen to revolt against Deepfort while the Border camp forces just happen to be nearby to provide aid (to Deepfort, on the official record) and they just happen to stumble on Deepfort’s dirty secret in the process, well, that would be a great bit of luck, wouldn’t it? I also think Elliot and Myra would want to give the dwarves an opportunity to practice some self-determination (through a revolt) rather than create a human saviour story.

As for why Elliot the pacifist would arm the prisoners, let’s recall that against a force of armed soldiers who do not recognize the personhood of their prisoners, the only viable way for the prisoners to have any chance at all of resisting their captors is if they are armed and able to put up a fight.

-Elliot wrote to Woodsinger to have the Border camp forces camped near Deepfort (not too close to raise suspicion; and with another mission as a cover to create plausible deniability).

-If Mark, Piper and Illyria hadn’t gotten involved, the plan would have gone like this: the dwarves would get some sort of signal to start the revolt (when the Border camp forces were already on the move), by the time the Deepfort men got their act together, the Border camp would arrive and force a surrender by Deepfort (Elliot would want to minimize the loss of life and violence). Meanwhile, at Westering, they would receive word that there was trouble at Deepfort and that the Border camp was getting involved. Since the men at Westering wouldn’t necessarily know about the trafficking stuff, they would assume that the Border camp was just helping Deepfort. However, what if the Border camp forces find out about the illegal weapons and grain? Maybe they should send a force over to Deepfort with the stated purpose of offering aid, but whose real purpose is to hide evidence. Elliot makes a note of which Westering men go to Deepfort so he knows who to bring in for questioning (since Arch would only bring those who know about the evidence to come with him to hide said evidence). Elliot knows that Arch is the ringleader, but it would be a good way for his accomplices to reveal themselves too.

-By the time the Westering forces arrive, the men of Deepfort are already under arrest, the dwarven prisoners are free, and also, they have some questions for the Westering men who’ve just arrived.

Things don’t always go the way you planned though. When Woodsinger hears the report of what happened from Elliot, I hope she reminds Elliot that karma is a bitch.

I want to be clear, I don’t blame Mark, Piper and Illyria for getting involved and messing up the timing. I said that I believe Piper knew (vaguely) about the date of the revolt, or rather, that Myra coming to Westering was the signal that the revolt was going to happen the next day. I do not think she knew about what role the Westering fortress was going to play. I think Piper knew that Westering fortress was engaged in financial grift, but I don’t think she knew that they were going to get involved in the revolt. Piper genuinely cared about Illyria and Mark, and like the mini-Elliot that she is, she schemed to get them involved in the revolt because she knew that it would provide them an opportunity to be heroes (they are her Serene and Luke) and redeem their reputations. Piper also wanted to join the fun because of her own politics and, she wanted the opportunity to set off a bunch of explosives in a fortress. I think she does not tell Illyria and Mark about Elliot’s plan because she, still a kid at heart, believes that she and her friends will have the situation settled nicely by the time the Border camp appears so they they can be the heroes. She, Illyria and Mark still have a lot to learn.

When she shouted about the map to Elliot, she was letting him know that she, Illyria and Mark would be at Deepfort within a day. It’s funny because she’s an explosives expert and she gave Elliot a countdown to get his ducks in a row before the blows the doors off his plans. She’s putting Elliot through the same crap he put Woodsinger through back in IOL. Elliot only has himself to blame for the fact that Piper subscribes to the Ask-For-Forgiveness-Instead-Of-Permission-school of dealing with authority figures.

Here is how the plan actually went down:

Upon realizing that the kids were going to get involved, Elliot and Myra have to scramble. Elliot couldn’t just prevent them from leaving because: he wouldn’t physically fight them to keep them there, he couldn’t get the Westering men to hold them in custody (they aren’t on the same side, and they would be put on their guard), if he did snitch on the kids, their already tattered reputations would suffer even more, the plans are already in place and they can’t delay them because of this disruption, and finally, he cares about Mark, Piper and Illyria and he understands they need to do this because it really would help them redeem their reputations. All he can do is what Woodsinger used to do for him: be really pissed off and do what he can to protect and support the kids.

Myra immediately leaves Westering and heads to the Border camp to let them know that the timing has moved up. Elliot tries to cover for the kids going missing, but it’s impossible. Unfortunately, Mark the “pretend prince”, beautiful, dangerous Illyria, and Piper the pyromaniac, are too inconspicuous for their absence to go unnoticed for long. Knowing that Mark is probably headed towards Deepfort to rescue the other dwarves and knowing that Myra has left for the Border camp (who are suspiciously close by), Arch and the other Westering men come to the conclusion that Elliot hoped they would (get to Deepfort; hide evidence of wrongdoing). The problem is that this happens way too fast and a force of soldiers are sent to Deepfort in pursuit of the missing kids. Remember when I said it was odd that Westering sent so many men after three missing kids? This is why they did so.

When Mark shouts “Light in the dark!” into the mine. The dwarves assume that this is the signal for which they were waiting. The sergeant, suspecting something is off, “shows no relief at the sight of Mark” and he says:

“My prince. I knew you would come. But I hoped you wouldn’t.”

This is an important character moment for Mark. He realizes his perception of the situation is catastrophically off, and that, once again, just like in the cart so long ago, he is forcing his people to go along with his dramatic, but ineffective attempts to rescue them.

Mark basically confirms that he is not part of the planned revolt when he admits: “I-I didn’t know there would be so many. I fear- we cannot all escape.”

The sergeant offers to give Mark a chance to retreat, but Mark, Illyria and Piper reject this. Mark (a noble himbo), decides that he’s going to fight with his people and die for them if need be, Ilyria (a marvellous them-bo) is confident in her martial prowess and Piper (keeper of the braincell), knows that reinforcements are on the way.

At first things are going okay, but then the Westering men arrive before the Border camp forces do. Elliot stops Arch from killing Mark. Mark assumes that Elliot is surprised that he got hit. We’ve seen in IOL that Elliot is very used to getting hit. At one point in the story, he basically goads some bullies into hitting him. I think the source of Elliot’s surprise is the realization that the Border camp forces are still not here, his students’ lives are in danger and his scheme is on the brink of falling apart in the worst way possible.

Elliot has to think fast to save his student. He knows that Arch is capable of reckless violence, so he knows there’s a chance that his words will result in his death, but he has to buy time for Mark to escape and for the Border camp forces to arrive. He plays the card he’d hoped he didn’t have to play.

“Stand back, Captain. I’ve gathered evidence of you skimming off the top, selling off weapons, and grain supplements. I will talk.”

Incidentally, Elliot isn’t just threatening Arch, he’s bluffing. I’ll explain how in a bit. It’s also important that Mark heard Elliot say this.

Luckily, the bid for time works and Luke-ex-machina (king of the himbos), arrives with the Border camp forces (finally!) and things come to an end.

Interestingly, Elliot says this to Luke:

“Don’t kill him,” commanded Mr. Schafer. “He’s only committed petty crimes…. He and most of his men need to be fined,…”

As I’ve said, arms trafficking isn’t really a petty crime and if he and his men were skimming off the top for months (or years), then it’s possible the theft here could rise to the level of larceny. Both crimes carry potential prison sentences. Depending on how you spin it, if the weapons were used by traffickers, then there are other crimes they can be charged with. Not to mention, is it really worth riding out and almost murdering a child and a well-connected individual (they’ve heard the rumours that Woodsinger reduced his sentence)?

Also, recall when I said that things at Westering should be awkward, and potentially dangerous for Elliot and Mark because Arch and most of his men were charged with petty crimes and made to pay a fine because of them.

But things won’t be awkward, because Elliot (and Mark) have leverage over Arch and his men. They can reveal that Arch and his men are guilty of far more serious crimes than they’ve been charged with, so the men of Westering better play nice.

This is going to be a bit complicated, so bear with me. Elliot diverted the stolen weapons and maintained the illusion that Arch and his men’s arms trafficking scheme was ongoing. To arrest  them for this is flirting with entrapment, which I don’t think Elliot would do and anyway, Elliot essentially neutralized whatever material harm was created by Arch and his men’s crimes when he diverted the weapons. Also, Elliot is the one who downgraded Arch and his men’s crimes and it can be argued that makes him guilty of obstruction. This is fine, because Arch and his men are dumb, and even if they were smart, they would know that they can’t take Elliot down without taking themselves down (and their downfall would be worse). Elliot can now blackmail them into doing good for the community despite themselves. It’s better than forcing them to languish in jail cells (dungeons?) doing no good to anyone. Maybe after being forced to do good, some might rehabilitate and choose to do good. Also, we know that Westering is poorly provisioned. Maybe Elliot doesn’t want to unduly punish the soldiers for their economic crime because he knows the incentive for grift only exists because of the unfair distribution of resources amongst the fortresses.

Is this underhanded and manipulative? Yes. But that’s what make IOL and TWTBD so interesting. All the characters are jerks, but it’s their motivations that separate the good jerks from the bad jerks. Elliot manipulates, lies and schemes in order to force people to help marginalized communities, be more respectful and inclusive and to save lives. Luke’s methods are more straightforward, but straightforward violence is still violence. He threatens violence against Arch to protect Elliot, who he loves. Arch uses violence and schemes to steal because he’s greedy and dumb.

Mr. Schafer: Mark’s Merlin

I can imagine someone asking, if Elliot and Myra were going to rescue the dwarves anyway, then what was the point of Mark’s actions? What is the point of Mark’s story?

IOL and TWTBD is not a typical mainstream fantasy where the hero solves problems with grand gestures and sword fighting.

Who was the main antagonist of IOL? It was trauma, and war and societal oppression. The battles and schemes are set dressings. Pivotal plot moments were when Elliot, Luke, and Serene made sincere connections with one another and others, overcame their prejudices, unlearned the things trauma and oppression taught them.

At first, Mark’s story is set up to be a mainstream story. But if it really was, the story would end with him leading his freed warriors into battle to take back his kingdom from his uncle.

Remember what I said about how Mark started the story as a sheltered prince, living under a rock? The title ‘Tears Waiting to Become Diamonds” is interesting when we consider the phrase: “Clear as a diamond”. Mark’s worldview is narrow and rigid at the beginning of the story. The light blinds him, the vastness of the world scares him and he operates from a sheltered, fairytale worldview. He doesn’t object to trafficking on principle, he objects to it because it impacts him personally, and he can’t comprehend the bigger politics and machinations going on around him. The “tears” in TWTBD obscure his sight. They blind him and force his perception into a limited fish-eye lens. Everything is either about him or it is incomprehensible and dismissible. In fairness to the kid, his whole family is dead, so I don’t want to unduly blame him for retreating into familiar patterns at the beginning of the story.

At the beginning of the story, Elliot is very Merlin-like (in the popular imagination of Merlin). He’s a scholarly, enigmatic figure from outside time. Of course, unlike with Arthur, I feel like instead of convincing Mark that he’s the one true king, Elliot would try to incept Mark with the idea of getting rid of the monarchy and having an elected, representative government or something.

It’s interesting that Mark says that Elliot is a bad teacher compared to Applegold. I’m sure Applegold is a fine teacher, but it’s Elliot’s words and lessons that Ilyria, Piper and Mark absorbed throughout the story. It’s cute how they echo his words like a bunch of undergrads after their first philosophy 101 lecture.

“You said freedom of expression is vital for the young mind!”

“Mr. Schafer’s ethics classes say the Border camp has strict regulations regarding prisoners,…”

“Someone should liberate prisoners put to work. It’s wrong to capture people for your own benefit,…”

The climax of Mark’s character development and his story is when he realizes he misunderstood how widespread and long-standing the dwarf-human trafficking actually was,, when Ilyria shared her story with him and when he was willing to intercede Arch’s attack to save Elliot, a human.

I also want to highlight an important moment when Elliot introduces Mark as “Prince Marcus” to Luke. Until this moment, Elliot was careful to hide Mark’s identity for his safety. I think Elliot told Luke who Mark was for two reasons. Firstly, associating Mark with Luke is a form of protection (that Sunborn name is really something), secondly, and more significantly, I think this was Elliot giving Mark a chance to decide what his future will be for himself. Elliot acknowledges that Mark has grown and learned a lot and now it’s up to him to determine what the next steps are. Mark could publicly proclaim himself a prince, ally himself with the Sunborn Champion and seek vengeance on his uncle. Instead, Mark proves that he really is Elliot’s student.

“Go back to my mines…. Claim you escaped from the humans. Go about your lives, but when you find loyal souls in our caverns, tell them your prince is coming.”

Well, well, well, look who’s showing an interest in popular underground movements and scheming. Mark now understands that as a prince, his actions have widespread repercussions. He also knows that his people deserve to live their lives and he won’t ask them to place themselves or their loved ones in unnecessary peril. Mark went from living under a rock to watching his people go back to their lives from the high vantage of a tower, under a vast sky. His perspective is wider, vaster and more inclusive of the rest of the Borderlands. Mark’s conception of home is also broader than before. Where once his idea of home was his home underground in his insulated kingdom, now it includes the surface, where his friends and allies and enemies are, Westering, the Otherlands. His view is unobscured and multi-faceted. It’s clear as diamond.

#iol #in other lands sarah rees brennan #in other lands #elliot schafer #luke sunborn #myra of the diamond clan #wings in the morning #tears waiting to be diamonds #twtbd #long post #twtbd essay #elliot is a genius #sarah rees brennan #sarahreesbrennan #sunbrat #commander woodsinger knew what she was doing having elliot teach the kids they need to hear what he has to say #elliot the spy #iol essay #serene heart in the choas of battle #serene heart in the chaos of battle #twtbd spoilers #sundaymorningtransport #luke x elliot

[ceterisparibus116]

For the ask game: 4, 13 and 35, please?

4. What’s a word that makes you go absolutely feral?

Perfunctory!

13. What is a subject matter that is incredibly difficult for you write about? What is easy?

Oh, no.

This is where I sound heartless.

Uh. Nothing is incredibly difficult? Like. Thinking specifically of Trust. That fic was difficult insofar as there was a lot of research that went into it, and it's the story where the legal plotline is the most central out of all my fics (and it's civil law, which I'm less familiar with), so there was a lot of work involved in figuring everything out, and there was definitely some anxiety over whether I was doing the story justice.

But I feel like this ask is getting at a subject matter that's emotionally difficult. Like, some writers talk about writing through tears, or having to take breaks from their stories because it's too hard on them. But that's just...not me.

The stories that I write are too controlled to really be emotionally difficult for me, no matter the subject matter. I know all the facts, and I don't write fics with sad endings, and I always know how the fics will end up, and therefore I know that all the stories (even the ones with very sad elements) will end up happy. I'm also bolstered by the hope that whatever I'm writing is helping people.* So although some stories are certainly heavier than others, I wouldn't say that they are "incredibly difficult."

*Okay actually, I mentioned this line and it spurred a whole new set of thoughts. Maybe the other reason why things aren't Incredibly Difficult for me to write is because my focus for writing all of it is: "How can I help my readers understand this differently" rather than me just trying to process my own stuff.

As in, there are bits of me trying to process my own stuff in all my stories, but it's far from central.

In fact, the only story where "my own stuff" was truly what I would call "central" was in that one fic where Matt's prepping for the bar. And sure enough, yep, that fic was not fun to write. It was way more of a catharsis thing that I just had to get through so I could feel better on the other side.

So. Huh. I guess that's a big factor. I wonder if I'm brave enough to write something else where "my own stuff" is more central....

[Ugh, I thought of one such an idea, and some part of me that's not the nice, logic-centered side of my brain recoiled. So. Yeah. Guess that's a thing.]

Thank you for this ask that led to a bit of a personal revelation, lol.

35. What’s your favorite writing rule to smash into smithereens?

Haha, I love this. XD

Actually, tbh, I think most of the writing rules I think about are ones that really do work for me, usually ones that I've found in books about writing or video essays about writing, where the rules are fully fleshed out, rather than on, like listicles.

I googled writing rules, actually, and one is "avoid using jargon" and welp lol yeah I tromp gleefully all over that rule for sure.

And in general, anything to do with word counts. I love fanfiction for the freedom to publish a story that's 100 words and the freedom to publish a story that's 1,000,000 words.

#personal #like a little extra personal this time I guess #writing #writing ask game #asks #ask me things i'm friendly

[thorraborinn]

When Elliott (Runes, 1959) says „in seventeenth-century Iceland people were still burnt because runes were found in their possession, and it was necessary officially to prohibit the use of runes in 1639“, do you know what he is referring to? His source is Arntz (Handbuch der Runenkunde, 1935, 2nd ed, 1944), as is Jones/Pennick‘s in History of Pagan Europe (only other place I found this mentioned so far).

I'm not sure. Best I could manage for finding it in Arntz was searching "1639" and "verbrennen"/"Verbrennung" in the Google Books preview, to no effect. According to Björn Jónsson á Skarðsá, Oddur Jónsson was whipped at the alþing for having papers/pages of "superstition" (hindurvitnis blöð) and the pages burnt, but he doesn't specify what was on them. The Icelandic Witchcraft museum says that those pages had runes on them but I don't know where they're getting that from or if it's interpretive, and in any case they certainly also had other things that were more explicitly forbidden so I don't think the presence of runes would tell us anything.

There was a strong association between illegal magic and runes at the time but as far as I know that has more to do with people who did or were suspected of doing magic also happened to be the ones who knew the most about runes. Mostly I'm talking about Jón lærði, specifically. It wouldn't be too surprising if bishops either thought of runes as the smoke indicating the fire of sorcery, or of banning runes as a way of preventing sorcery without them being sorcery themselves. When the same aforementioned Björn á Skarðsá wrote his essay on runes that survives in a bunch of manuscripts, he dedicated a whole chapter to explaining that no, runes are -- contrary to many people's belief -- actually not inherently evil. But it would surprise me if they managed to get them officially banned three years after Ole Worm published the first edition of Runir seu Danica literatura antiquissima, and more than a decade after Worm had started using Icelanders as informants about runes.

I don't think it's out of the question that some people may have banned or attempted to ban them within certain districts temporarily; I just am not turning up evidence for it. What I'm seeing more of is "These Icelanders said Jón lærði was using galdrastafir (=illegal), but the Danish officials determined they were just regular runes (=legal)."

Jón lærði complained about how nowadays (the mid-1600's) they prosecuted people over petty little harmless magic things, when in the good ol' days (the 1400's) you could get away with anything as long as you weren't causing harm to someone. If we're to take that seriously (as Einar G. Pétursson does in his edition of some works by Jón lærði, and points out that this makes sense with the coming of Protestantism) then the word "still" does not belong in the Elliott quotation. If there was concern about regular málrúnir, it was probably a new phenomenon.

Elliott could be pulling a bait-and-switch (or maybe Arntz is). Elliott is a serious scholar but heavily biased toward seeing runes as inherently, first-and-foremost magical. He might be allowing a failure of specificity to make one thing (["runes" = magic symbols] were banned) imply another thing ([málrúnir] were banned). If someone has access to the Arntz book it would be very helpful to see what he cites.

[mercyandmagic]

Hello! In Russia, they are interested in the regulation on the situation with MXTX, mainly based on your articles. Are there any news or promotions? According to rumors, it was supposed to be released in May, but since I don’t believe any version until I hear the news myself, I’m interested in your opinion.

Hello! Thank you for reaching out. <3

Yes, MXTX's original release was scheduled for May 2022, but she was released early on parole for 8 months according to court records released at the end of October 2021. She had a meeting about it sometime in December 4 2021, also according to the court records.

The next news was in February 2022, when TGCF was signed for a radio drama. Since MXTX is free, and there's no reason to think she didn't sign it. :)

Unfortunately, there is no news since. I don't know when she will return, though strictly in my opinion, I disagree with those who say she won't return, or will move onto a new name with no word. Much like Xie Lian, MXTX went through hell, but she's still her: the woman who said writing is one of her greatest passions. (Plus, Xiansheng Shenhai returned this spring after her own release in December 2021. She is now publishing her novels legally and was met with warm reception from fans).

Maybe MXTX is finishing TGCF edits. Maybe she's working on Grim Reapers Have No Days Off, or another work, or she's taking time for herself to heal from experience and (in my opinion) the unfairness of it all. But we just don't know.

What is not quite news, but worth mentioning: About ten days ago (June 20), one of her IRL friends did post a blunt and eloquent essay on Weibo. Mostly, it's about how exhausted they are with the private messages they keep receiving, from a deluge of those concerned to a tsunami of infuriating cruelty from antis.

A few lines stuck out to me:

"My friend wrote a few books, and even came out of cyber to her parents, even Xie Lian was not so unlucky!" (我的朋友写几本书，还给自己写出赛博爹妈来，谢怜都没有这么倒霉！Clearly, my translation of the second clause is not great but you get the gist; someone correct me if it is wrong).

"But she is a person. She has the right to privacy, can be autonomous, and can think. On social networks, she has the right to choose whether to live openly or share information, and she also has the right not to explain her choice. She will ask for help when she needs help, and she seriously considers the troubles she doesn't want to show. The rumors of catching the wind and catching the shadows do not prove that you are better than her." (但她是一个人啊，她有隐私权，能自主，会思考，社交网络上她有权选择是否公开生活是否分享信息，也有权不解释她的选择。她需要帮助的时候会求助，不想展示的烦恼也有她自己的考量，捕风捉影的谣言并不能证明你们比她高明。)

"At the beginning of this post, I mentioned the private message box. In addition to lying down with these things that give me ptsd to the present, there are also many restrained greetings and blessings. There is no chasing after, no self-righteousness, no holding the phone, as if holding a beating heart. That kind of indescribable emotion, that there are many people who are better than words, is the reason why I stayed tonight to edit this for a few hours. They made me always believe that terrycloth (T/N:???) is worth believing, and that readers who really love her know how to weave memories with the author and the book, and believe in 'respect before love.' People share the same heart and the same reason."

(这篇东西的开头我提到私信箱，除了躺着这些令我ptsd到现在的玩意，还有很多克制的问候和祝福，没有穷追不舍，没有自以为是，捧着手机，仿佛捧着一颗颗跳动的真心。那种无以言表的感动，还有许许多多行胜于言的人们，就是我留在今晚删删改改几个小时的原因， 他们让我始终相信毛圈值得相信，相信真心喜爱她的读者懂得以怎样的方式编织与作者和书的回忆，相信“在爱之前，是尊重”这件事，人同此心，心同此理).

End.

Basically, I'm cheered that MXTX has such good friends in her life, who respect her privacy and humanity before anything else and insist that others should do likewise. I think that all we can do right now is hope for the best, support her in any way we can, and root for her as a person first and foremost.

Selfishly, of course I hope she returns soon; she's a great writer! But more than that, I hope and expect that she will return when it's best for her, and to that time I solemnly toast.

#mxtx

[getstickbugdlol]

hi! I saw you mention in another post about booktok and publishing, if you're willing to share I just wanted to know your thoughts on that relationship & why it's not that great.

Or just criticisms on current publishing trends that you've noticed?

Like I feel like you have a lot to say, so I'd just love to read your thoughts on these topics ❤️❤️❤️

i have literally so much to say but i have to be careful what i can say bc of potential legal implications lol. i actually am toying with making like a critical essay about this topic specifically but my extremely general basic thoughts about no publisher or writer in specific are as such:

tik tok is not necessarily an algorithm that thrives on new content but rather content that is similar to other successful content

it is a platform that by design discourages critical engagement due to video length (unlike booktube) and serves you a lot of things like the thing you just watched

this drives sales in a way publishers have literally never seen, especially for backlist titles (books that published more than two years ago)

this is just me but these bitches on booktok have NO taste

booktok and booktube in and of themselves aren't necessarily bad/evil but i have noticed that anything that pops up and becomes an Online Community really quickly starts becoming unpleasant

I saw this when I joined the Book Community on Twitter, where it was in 2018.

Book Communities in recent years have become a lot more focused on the moral representation in books, whether that comes to representation, depiction of SA, etc. I personally quite disagree with this and I think there's room for things I don't necessarily like or agree with to be on the market and the point of every book is not actually to teach me a personal lesson about morality.

An important thing to note here is that Book Communities are largely made up of adult women in their 20s and 30s and skew heavily YA focused. Now I think it's fine for adults to read and write YA, however a lot of people who have made it their whole entire personality seem to be more interested in replicating the social structure of a high school cafeteria than a business

The publishing industry is also incredibly insular, notoriously hard to break into, and famous for only being accessible to those with generational wealth. This goes double for authors. As sales increase (literally all publishers had like RECORD sales in 2020 and 2021) the protections for authors and publishing workers alike are getting cut further and further. Most authors are working full time jobs along with being authors and being expected to do their own promotion etc

Have you seen those musicians who say their record labels are forcing them to put out tik toks? Yeah that's happening with authors too because it's an incredibly effective marketing tool.

In short I think it's bad because publishers aren't doing their jobs! They want tik tok to do it for them! I also think that the kind of communities that spring up around people who really love books tend to have a sort of puritanical aspect to them because it tends to be people focused on children's literature, which by definition moralizes, and they just don't know how to critically engage with literature intended for adults which aims to entertain but not to moralize. It's all around bad imo!

I fundamentally think capitalism is bad for art and nothing has convinced me of that like my time in the publishing industry ¯_(ツ)_/¯

I def have a lot to say on this so if you have any more questions please feel free to ask them! will keep priv if you want <3

[violetsystems]

I've been watching too much trash lately but I did catch Dream Scenario last night. Nicholas Cage plays a hapless college professor who suddenly and virally appears in everyone's dreams. He's been doing research about swarm intelligence and ants but hasn't been able to publish because he's largely useless as a person. Everything he does gets ripped off and manipulated. So even when the dreams he invades start to hit a fever pitch, he literally just stands there and everybody thinks it's funny. He isn't part of the nightmare and people explain it away like he's a comforting figure because he is so detached. He interprets this as being more neurotically useless in real life. It is only when he acts on his opportunity at fame where it turns around horrifically. He gets represented by an ad agency to pitch an ad for sprite even though he resists it as "selling out." A young intern invites him out after and mentions during drinks at a bar that she's not only interacted with him in a dream but had sex with him. She invites him back home to try to recreate the dream in real life. The way it plays out in her head in the dream is absolutely not how it plays out in real life. And this is totally his characters fault. It's cringe worthy in a feral sort of Nicholas Cage way. From there the dreams of everyone he invades become psychotic and horrific. And he becomes a pariah trying to defend himself as a victim for how people have projected their dream fears of him onto his real life persona. So basically it's a cancel culture film that would work better if his character was a more likable person. It ends somewhat messily but tragically optimistic. But well worth watching. I'm sure some wannabe acting coach will try to recreate this in the streets for their students when I'm shopping for toilet paper. But for the record, I'm not a writer. Neither are these people out here Stellar acting material. Just wannabe influencers who are worse than the dreamfluencers near the end of the movie advertising products in your sleep. French improv terrorist ad agency or not. Performance art should be left to the pros. Along with the legal forms you need to fill out when you target someone in the street without their consent. I've done enough prescreening essays in the last month to know that a job really requires you to write the truth instead of lying about it on a forum somewhere for internet celebrity fame. But like I said, I'm not a writer. I'm a target.

[chiffonlime643]

(i very tragically lost the first draft of this to the void by misclicking and i cried for around 10 minutes. it was like 5,000 words in. hopefully I can bring back the same energy from the first one.)

I AM SOOOO PISSED ABOUT THIS POST I CAN'T EVEN DESCRIBE IT.

To preface this, hello! My name is Chiffon or Neil, and I am a writer, currently working on writing a YA fiction novel. I have been writing for many years, and have taken a multitude of classes both in and out of school. Once I am a legal adult, I plan on publishing a poetry compilation and hopefully multiple fiction books in the future. This is technically an opinion piece, but I will be delving deep into why you cannot try to ignore this issue by just saying "thats just ur opinion let ppl believe what they wanna believe". If you want a similar opinion piece, check out YouTuber/animator Noodle's popular video on AI-generated in-between frames on already finished animation.

ALSO PLEASE DON’T HARASS THE OP IF THIS GETS NOTES

Now, time for the "opinion piece". In this essay, when I am talking about fanfiction, I am more specifically talking about fics that are not breaking the boundaries of who it is being written about, and is 10,000 words or more. However, all writing (excluding certain circumstances) is art in my opinion.

I am very frustrated by people constantly trying to state that "fanfictions are not real books," because... it's not that simple.

Fanfiction is a type of writing, and therefore, even if it’s unpublished or even not directly called a "book", and instead a "long-form writing" or a similar title, it falls directly in the same category.

Fanfiction typically can have hundreds of thousands, even millions of words, so that is the first box it checks; many professional, published novels can have 50,000 words or less.

Another box it checks is: if the fanfiction could be easily published professionally by just changing the characters' names and maybe their personalities a bit (see; 50 Shades of Gray), it should most definitely fall under the category of 'book'.

Before you say "well, most fanfiction is romance and smut so that makes it not a type of book," one, that is demeaning the art of writing, and two... Have you never heard of published romance novels? Have you not seen BookTok (I cannot believe I'm mentioning them) ranting and raving over books like Icebreaker? Currently, Icebreaker, written by Hannah Grace, which has multiple circumstances of sexual scenes and intimacy between the characters, has sold over a million copies. It's frequently seen in bookstores nation-wide and has thousands of five-star reviews. So, that disproves another argument.

Another issue with this opinion is, often, fanfiction is much more influential than published books (although more on the emotional and individual side of things due to less publicity than professionally-published books).

Also, the OP is not the sole decider of what is and what is not designated as an 'important' form of writing. And, from what I can tell, she has no obvious experience as a fiction writer from first glance. Admittedly, she could be an experienced writer, and if she is, I apologise for the assumption, but from my perspective, she seems to only read writings, not write them. I am writing this piece as though she is only a reader.

This is an issue because, yes, this opinion of "fanfiction isn't book" is just an opinion... But it's a harmful one, because it very clearly implies "fanfiction isn't real writing"... which is the most dreadful concept I have personally ever heard related to writing as an art form.

The OP, alongside many other Tumblr users (including me in the past) are or was a part of the DSMP fanbase (don't scroll I'm going somewhere with this). The fandom was especially popular during the years of 2020 - early 2022. A primary part of its fanbase was made up of fanfiction writers; great ones at that.

While there are thousands of well-written fanfics involving characters from the popular Minecraft server, for this specific situation, I will focus on one of the most well-known ones (no it's not heatwaves).

Passerine, by AO3 user blujamas.

Passerine is a seven-chapter fanfic that has exactly 76,373 words (for context, The Sun Also Rises by Ernest Hemingway has 67,707 words). It was extremely popular in the fandom for its gorgeous writing, its complex plot, and most importantly; the way it impacted readers.

While those who were a fan of the DSMP were heavily affected by it, anyone, no matter if they had or had not heard of the media it was based off of, could feel very strongly about the characters and the trials and triumphs (though triumphs may be few and far between) they go through.

The fic guided readers through a simple, yet content life between a family of royals in a happy kingdom in the distant past. It showed the children and the adults both as they grew up, though bringing a slight taste of grief to the readers, almost in preparation for what was to come.

As both parents would leave, though one was out of her control, it left the children to fend for themselves.

They stuck together, despite everything.

But as you read through the story, it consistently brings you hope, a chance for happiness, before stabbing it to death directly in front of you, leaving you almost numb with the pain you feel for these fictional protagonists.

Due to the beautiful, clever writing and the way it brought severe emotions to the reader with every word, it gained serious traction in the fandom, and it currently stands with 3,248,752 views (known as 'hits' on AO3) and 88,251 likes (known as 'kudos' on AO3).

Now, as you think about the popularity, impact, and talent within the fanfic itself; do you still think it does not count as "real" fiction? If Passerine could potentially be published just by changing characters around a bit- would you think the same?

Now, imagine a Shakespearian work; let's say... Romeo and Juliet, for example. If that never existed as a published work, and was instead a fanfic on AO3 that was exactly the same, save for it being written with modern language and terms.

Would it still count as the masterpiece the world sees it as now? Or would it be cast aside as a "wannabe-book" that only fake readers take a glance at? (also, fake readers aren't real??)

To put fanfiction, a popular outlet for writers to put their heart and soul into, into a box that reads on the outside "NOT REAL" and "NOT VALID"... well, that sounds more negative than positive, to say the least.

I believe that only those who have tried writing a fanfic or book before can give a genuine, serious opinion on this, because from the looks of it... some readers don't realise how much effort goes into the pages and the fics they read everyday.

Fanfictions are books. Trying to say otherwise is undermining and demeaning the time and effort put into those works.

#tumblr #writing #tumblr writers #poetry #creative writing #music #opinion piece #writers on tumblr #writeblr #writers and poets #writerscommunity #book #books #booklr #bookblr #reading #books and reading #booklover #long post #fanfic #fanfiction #ao3 fanfic #archive of our own #ao3 writer #fic #im putting so many tags bc i need ppl to see this #poets on tumblr #important #essay #personal essay

[juniperusashei]

Paris Notebooks: Essays & Reviews by Mavis Gallant - 4/5

Anyone who has visited Paris, or any part of France will no doubt be familiar with la grève. The French accept labor strikes as part of daily life. It’s no doubt politically effective, though as often as you’ll hear “train’s late? C’est la grève” seldom will the matter being protested be discussed. Reading Mavis Gallant’s first-hand account of the 1968 Paris Riot while missing a boat à cause de la grève was a microdose of the social climate she immerses herself in. Unsure if she mentions the historical context ever, her thoughtfully slipshod prose instead puts the reader in a time and place where the people rioting may not have known what the protests were originally about, either. She illustrates the occasional hypocrisy of the student protesters (“We ask, ‘Why Stalin?’ She hesitates, has been asked this before, says in a parrot’s voice, ‘We are prepared to admit his errors, but he was a revolutionary, too.’ Then so was Hitler.”) but for the most part remains a sympathetic, if detached observer to the myriad of grievances. The prose is sparse (it was intended as field notes) but still remarkably funny. The Events in May: A Paris Notebook is notable for having inspired a section of the film The French Dispatch, and I had read the first half in the Anderson-edited collection An Editor’s Burial. In its entirety it remained out of print until earlier this year, and while The Events in May is clearly the centerpiece of this collection, the other essays are worth mentioning.

The second longest piece in this book is a true-crime essay of almost 70 pages called “Immortal Gatito: The Gabrielle Russier Case,” which was also a surprisingly enthralling read. It tells the story of a female schoolteacher who slept with a 16 year old student, and the ensuing legal battle and eventual suicide of Gabrielle Russier. To make the case understandable for American audiences (the account was originally published in the New Yorker) Gallant expounds on the nuances of Napoleonic law, and somehow makes that interesting. For example, “in a French murder trial the jury is not asked to decide if the defendant did it but if he is guilty,” a nuance which creates nuances such as a man who stabbed his neighbor to death simply for being annoying (“the court expressed sympathy for persons who live in noisy and jerry-built apartment houses.”) But interestingly, this leniency is what caused the courts to come down so hard on Russier (a divorcée). Doubtlessly statutory rape is never okay, but in 1960s France, the same crime committed by a man against a girl would be treated with leniency; this double standard is what sparked a lot of the culture war surrounding this case. “Immortal Gatito” is not an essay I would have sought out if it had not been in this volume, but Gallant treats her subjects with both nuance and sympathy without necessarily forgiving their actions and it made for a fascinating read.

The rest of this collection was not as interesting as these two pieces, and it seemed a lot of them were chosen at random simply for being about Paris, almost as if to cram the book to justify the price. There are some introductions Gallant wrote to various biographies such as Paul Léautaud and Marguerite Yourcenar, but nothing as personal in voice as A Paris Notebook. Her voice throughout makes me want to read more, but I didn’t get enough of an impression from these alone. The last section of the book is reviews of other books, none of which I had read, and mostly biographies. Reading them felt Borges-level meta; though I didn’t get anything out of them, here I am writing a review of reviews.

#Mavis Gallant #Paris Notebooks: Essays & Reviews #The Events in May: A Paris Notebook #journalism #nonfiction #autobiography #biography #4 #december 2023 #2023

[lenbryant]

(Long Post quoting) NY Review of Books:

This year marks exactly four centuries since the publication of William Shakespeare’s First Folio, the giant two-volume set of thirty-six plays that reframed his work in “overtly literary terms,” as Catherine Nicholson puts it in our Sixtieth Anniversary Issue. Nicholson’s writing about Renaissance literature—including in books on the formation of a vernacular tradition (Uncommon Tongues: Eloquence and Eccentricity in the English Renaissance) and on The Faerie Queene (Reading and Not Reading The Faerie Queene: Spenser and the Making of Literary Criticism)—flashes with a rare combination of historical precision and fresh insight. Her essays for the Review so far include considerations of Edmund Spenser, John Milton, and what we’re able to know about childhood in the sixteenth century; a characteristically sharp line on Milton notes that his “nonchronological narrative design” in Paradise Lost “teases us to think, perhaps God is Eve-like.”

Nicholson’s essay on the First Folio, “Theater for a New Audience,” traces the contingencies that have helped to shape our idea of Shakespeare through the big posthumous book of his plays, revealing among other things how our understanding of foundational texts can be enlarged by studying the history of their reception. It also touches on a number of literary questions that could have formed a separate essay on their own, and this week she discussed a few of them with me via e-mail. -Catherine Nicholson Jana Prikryl: We have no evidence that Shakespeare, who died in 1616, had anything to do with the First Folio, which was published in 1623. In your essay you criticize Chris Laoutaris’s Shakespeare’s Book for speculating that the Bard himself instigated the folio project. It’s tempting to imagine something of the sort, since otherwise we have a Shakespeare who was recklessly indifferent to the survival of his own work. What’s your own theory for why he, as you put it, “seems to have had no such ambition”?

Catherine Nicholson: I’m not sure we need to think of Shakespeare as recklessly indifferent to the survival of his plays so much as possessed of a different sense of what survival might mean—firstly in the repertory of the King’s Men, and only secondly in the market for print. And survival within a theatrical repertory often entailed a great deal of change: lines, scenes, characters, and so on might be altered, cut, or added as a script was adapted to the resources of the playing company, the shifting tastes of audiences, and the demands of a particular performance occasion. The playwright might be enlisted in making those changes, or he might have no say at all. Since, at the time, playscripts were the legal property of playing companies, publication happened at a still further remove from authorial control. The version of a play fixed in a printed edition might be the one the playwright intended or preferred, or it might simply be the one the printer could get his hands on. And many, many plays never made it into the hands of any printer: the diary of the Elizabethan impresario Philip Henslowe mentions 280 plays, of which thirty survive in print. Some may have been printed and then lost, but it seems clear that most plays written in Shakespeare’s lifetime lived exclusively in the theaters. That environment must have shaped Shakespeare’s relationship to his work. No doubt he did sometimes find it frustrating to have his words altered without his say-so. Hamlet’s irritable injunction to the players—“let those that play your clowns speak no more than is set down for them”—gives us a glimpse of the sometimes fraught relations between writers and performers, especially those with the most license to improvise on stage. But that speech itself runs quite a bit longer in the 1603 quarto (Q1) than it does in the 1623 folio: in 1603 Hamlet goes on to recite a string of random comic catchphrases exactly like the ones he doesn’t want forced into his own play. I don’t have an opinion on which version of the speech belongs in a modern edition or performance: the folio version is certainly more elegant and concise, but the ironic effect in Q1 is one I cherish; it suggests that Shakespeare was wont to poke fun at any impulse toward authorial control, even his own.

I have a similar response to, say, Sonnet 55, which begins, “Not marble nor the gilded monuments/Of princes shall outlive this powerful rhyme….” That poem channels the voices of Ovid and Horace to make an extravagant claim for the undying power of Shakespeare’s verse, and it’s hard to read today without a shiver of appreciation and awe: he was right (so far)! But when I teach the Sonnets, I always point out to students that these are poems that circulated in manuscript for over a decade before making their way (with or without Shakespeare’s knowledge and approval) into print; moreover, they are in a poetic form that already, in the mid-1590s, was a bit passé and in a vernacular almost no one outside of England spoke or read. The idea that these verses would retain their meaning and value for all time—“Even in the eyes of all posterity/That wear this world out to the ending doom”—has got to be shot through with some pathos, implausibility, or even humor.

Can you talk a bit about the kinds of new readings that became available after the plays moved from performance to the page?

In some sense, the shift from playhouse to page must have seemed like an impoverishment: the media of performance are so vivid and multisensory in comparison to the medium of text. One of my favorite recent works of scholarship on early modern drama is Claire Bourne’s Typographies of Performance in Early Modern England (2020), which reveals how painstaking and ingenious early modern printers were in devising typographic conventions to make playbooks legible both as books and as plays. At the turn of the sixteenth century, the resources for communicating dramatic structure and dramatic action were limited: the first playbook printed in England, a Latin edition of Terence’s Comedies, included an editorial note telling readers what an act and a scene were and urging them to imagine actors moving on- and off-stage as they read. By the time Shakespeare’s plays were being published, printers had devised an incredibly sophisticated repertoire of typographic conventions, from act and scene divisions to speech tags, italicized stage directions, printed marks like dashes and pilcrows (the symbol that marks a paragraph break), and woodcut illustrations, all of which helped readers to imagine the text in performance.

But printing a play also creates all sorts of new opportunities for engaging with it, beyond the shared temporality of performance: reading a bit at a time, for instance; stopping to look something up; marking and returning to a favorite passage; noticing the recurrence of an image, phrase, or word across a wide expanse of text; annotating in the margins or copying passages out into a commonplace book. Add those modes of readerly engagement together, and you begin to get something like literary criticism: an approach to a play that can coordinate character and plot with features of the text that would be hard to pause over or even register in performance.

To what degree Shakespeare anticipated or sought that kind of engagement from readers of his plays is an open question. In his 2003 book Shakespeare as Literary Dramatist, the scholar Lukas Erne argues that the length of a number of Shakespeare’s plays suggests he wrote them, at least in part, with print publication in mind, lavishing care on passages he knew would likely never make it on stage. On the other hand, maybe the length of the plays as written reveals that Shakespeare was far less precious about his own words than we tend to be; he knew they might be cut and adapted for performance, and he wrote freely in expectation of that winnowing. In either case, the looser, nonlinear, potentially discontinuous temporality of reading allows for all sorts of lingering and reading across or against the narrative grain that I, at least, can’t fathom doing without. And the First Folio encourages that kind of reading—not simply of each play, but of the plays as a dynamic and interrelated whole.

In the first piece you wrote for the Review, on Edmund Spenser, you called The Faerie Queene “the emblematic textual commodity of an age in which book ownership expanded from the domain of aristocrats and scholars to become a bourgeois expression of taste.” When the First Folio was published twenty-six years later, would you say it was comparable in status?

I’d guess that both the 1590/1596 quartos of The Faerie Queene and the 1611 folio of Spenser’s Works were more immediately recognizable to readers and book buyers as prestige literary commodities. The full title of the latter—The Faerie Queen: The Shepheardes Calender: Together with the other Works of England’s Arch-Poët, Edm. Spenser: Collected into one Volume—takes for granted both the author’s preeminence among English poets and the value of assembling his writings into a unified corpus. Contrast that with the mocking reception in some quarters of the 1616 folio of Ben Jonson’s Works (“Pray tell me Ben, where doth the mistery lurke?” inquired one anonymous wit, “What others call a play you call a work”), which suggests the difficulty seventeenth-century readers still had in conceiving of vernacular stage plays as literature.

But there’s a nearly seventy-year gap between the first and second folios of Spenser’s Works, while the Second Folio of Shakespeare’s plays appears just nine years after the first, in 1632. And by the middle of the eighteenth century, their fortunes have decisively crossed: The Faerie Queene is, increasingly, a book to own—or, perhaps, to study—but not to read, while editions and adaptations of Shakespeare sell in a wide variety of formats and at a range of price points. In that sense, too, textual fixity or bibliographic iconicity isn’t the same as influence or survival: change remains the lifeblood of literary tradition. I don’t want to give away the brilliant ending of your piece, but its reading of The Tempest made me think of other times in the plays when characters rely overmuch on textual sources: the several letters intercepted in King Lear, the fatefully undelivered letter from Friar Laurence in Romeo and Juliet, the comically bad poems Orlando pins to trees in As You Like It…. Is it too much to say that it seems, in Shakespeare’s worlds, as if things written down are inferior to those acted out?

I don’t know about inferior—Shakespeare is keenly alert to the perils and pitfalls of dramatic reenactment—but certainly subject to error and misapprehension. Sometimes those misapprehensions are disastrous; other times (I’m thinking of poor Malvolio deciphering what he believes to be a love letter from Olivia, in Twelfth Night) they are deliciously comic; occasionally, as with the letter that mysteriously surfaces in the final moments of The Merchant of Venice, restoring Antonio’s lost fortune, they are redemptive. Like Spenser, Shakespeare seems to delight in scripting encounters that anticipate the possibility of his own misreading by others, and misreading is not always figured as a catastrophe; sometimes it offers the wayward path to a happy ending. #refrigeratormagnets

#shakespeare #william shakespeare #playwright #first folio #plays #dramatist #refrigerator magnets #refrigerator magnet #for educational purposes only

[prettyhighforawhiteguyblog]

Academic Dishonesty

By the way, children. "Academic Dishonesty" [with really big scare quotes] has quite the range of interpretations. Did you know that missing out on the joy of writing another pointless busywork essay to pad your A with by reusing old pointless busywork essays that you yourself wrote to answer other pointless busywork assignments that might be close enough to get you a decent enough grade with a little polishing up of the old turd is ACADEMIC DISHONESTY!!!!! [in SPACE, ACE ace ace... fuck I'm old] That is correct. You heard it here first. I am old. lol. dad joke.

Hopefully before you heard it before you heard it from the racist nazi fuck who teaches economics 234 like it was the grad level course he knows he deserves to teach and holds all of his students to the very highest and most rigorous academic standards. Some students get more rigor held up than others if you catch my drift. He loves to send academic careers of the most vulnerable brown kids he can find down in flames and kick them back down into the gutter where they belong. He loves to introduce you to that one using every search program he can personally afford while sniveling about "shirking duties" and "work ethic" and how you are "only hurting yourself" and how "disappointed" he is or whatever bullshit he puts in there to make you feel shitty and grease what's left of his conscience. These fuckers will stick that little rule so deep into your syllabus, but they will mention it on the first day of class as they drone through the syllabi. And that will be their moral cover.

You were already in legal trouble. Every time you ever did that in any class at any point in your academic career, to the point that I can't even copy and paste my own fucking materials and methods from my previous bullshit paper I wrote to get funding for my study shit onto the next bullshit paper I write for the same fucking predatory journal I paid $4000 (you read that right) out of my own fucking bank acount (I actually asked my masters for some help with the fees for publishing the work I did for them. And my lovely Christian masters said "make it enough") I have to pay that same journal another $4k the next time I publish on another aspect of the same fucking experiment in the same fucking volume of the journal they charge people 50 buck a pop just to be able to read a single article on your computer screen on their website for 72 hours. They frown on downloading to read at your leisure or to print out to read later on paper with a pen in my mouth like a normal person reads things.

You know, some of those assholes don't ever mention that technicality. Not in class. Not in the halls. Not out on the green. Not when they smoke all your weed when they crash your parties and hit on the underage girls. No. They ever and only pull it out on you when you are in their office, alone with no one to save you. And there is no saving. Every professor, every administrator, even your own classmates with throw up their hands and say that sucks. Maybe it was racist and fuck him for that. But, they will remind you, rules are rules! Even if they are fucking stupid rules that are only there to keep you busy doing shit work because if you get out of doing your shit job, that won't be fair to the other people who didn't have a get out of shit job free card laying around from another shit job.

So before you polish up the old turd, make sure you find and replace some words and switch around some sentences.

#academic dishonesty #plagiarism #school #ph4wg Original #ph4wg