#rather than just highlighting one and creating an entire false narrative around it. | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

sanstropfremir · 3 years

Text

kingdom episode 3 baby!!!!

listen. i’m not gonna lie i was nervous as hell for this episode. i saw that preview like everyone else and unfortunately i have ears so i was convinced the ateez stage was going to be a trainwreck. i was absolutely banking on sf9 and skz to do something even mildy interesting to save me from the ear damage and having to talk to extensively about why that disaster happened. but somehow i woke up in an alternate universe and you know what? with the exception of that high note the ateez stage fucked. i know. i don’t believe it either. i think i’m still in shock.

i’ll do individual breakdowns in order of favourites within the episode and then at the end i’ll put my personal ranking of all six. thank god i don’t have to do a stage breakdown again; if they change it again for next week i will scream.

ateez

a miracle happened. i don’t have to fight any of the staff at kq. i don’t understand either. jongho is so fucking lucky that the rest of the group pulled all that energy out of their asses because if they had been even a single iota less serious about it that stage would have flopped worse than a dead fish. i can’t believe we got this level of camp b movie schlock in the first full stage, and they stuck the landing. incredible.

fine i’ll address the elephant in the room. personally, i don’t think jongho is that good of a vocalist. he’s not bad, and he does have the potential to be a good vocalist, he just doesn’t have the training, and this is the issue with all of ateez. hanya talked about this before and i’ll say it again: he can’t switch to his head voice and he’s destroying his vocal cords by attempting to hit notes in his mid range that he should just jump to head voice for. frankly i’m surprised he got anywhere close to that note in his mid, but his technique is just not there and he’s gonna do some real damage to his voice if he doesn’t take a break and also get a good vocal coach. you can already hear the degradation in sound from their debut stage to now, and that’s in less than three years. ok i’m done talking about vocals that’s hanya’s turf, i’m pretending that that high note doesn’t exist and we’re moving on. also im in love with btob’s reaction it was fucking priceless.

costume

look, i have a one track brain and that brain can only think about seonghwa corset. seonghwa corset? seonghwa corset.

i know it’s not a real corset nor is it properly laced and i know this would never happen in a million years but a kpop mr pearl trend? i would die. just fully expire. there’s no coming back from that for me

yes i have laced boys into proper corsets before and yes it is as hot as you think it is (when it’s not work related, obviously)

ok now that i’ve got that out of my system for the moment, the costumes are actually pretty good. i’m a little obsessed with hongjoong’s coat although I know it’s stupid. fur? always, I love it, you’ll never change my mind it makes everything better. i own a lot of it and i wear it all the time. this is also a pretty good example of how to do a more modern styling within a very specific and recognizable genre.

i don’t hate the backup dancers’ costumes either, even though they would look a lot better in a not-pirate themed hiphop stage. because there is already a modern tint with the boys’ costumes, it’s not that much of a leap to the dancers, and they actually use the dancers and the camera really strategically to not put much focus on them.

the only real standout issue is the blacklight/contortionist moment, which is too gimmicky for me and doesn’t fit the rest of the theme. i do understand the purpose of them: you need a transition point from the upper deck to the more fantastical inner ship area, and blacklight paint is a really easy, cheap, and fast way to get four new costumes instantly. do i think they could have done something better though? yes.

set

this was actually a smart reuse of that pirate ship set. i know i clowned on them in the first stage that they could move on from the pirate gimmick but honestly? i’m glad they didn’t. this was fun as fuck. but also two stages was enough you can move on now.

i love how they actually used the weird double stage function that the false prosc creates for an actual architectural and narrative effect, instead of just sort of operating as though it’s just another place to travel just because you can. we are on the deck of the ship, and then we go inside the ship. it’s simple and effective. you don’t need to do a crazy amount of crossover to establish a dynamic sense of place.

i hate the ateez kingdom logo. i hate the ateez logo in general. get it out of there, at least you could have made something more fun and pirate themed.

would have loved to have seen them return to the hourglass at the end, especially if they got one that was specifically set for 4 minutes. would have been a nice bit of symmetry but i suspect it was struck before the kraken bit.

the kraken bit??? i was not at all expecting that and honestly? dope as hell. that big tentacle is just a custom inflatable santa claus that you see around christmastime and what a brilliant use of such a simple mechanic, especially to have it come through that weird little triangle arch they have upstage. smart way to use the existing architecture.

yes it is a gimmick but here’s why it works rather than just looks tacky like every other gimmick we’ve seen so far: it had a function within the narrative. this is so important. show us there’s a reason it’s there!

lighting

i didn’t love it but they did actually make some smart choices. the outer deck is warmer toned and has some good atmospheric effects, and the inner deck is cold tone and specifically lit with pin lights to imitate the light coming through portholes in an actual ship, which is so smart thank you lighting designer

also a very clear arc with the lighting, blue -> orange -> blue/red -> orange/multiple -> blue

sound

i actually kinda liked this remix? it fit theme and had a very clear dramatic arc. also i like wonderland, so sue me.

staging

WE DID IT, WE FINALLY GOT A CLEAR NARRATIVE FROM AT LEAST ONE GROUP! wonderland was actually a great choice for them because it’s a really good indicator of exactly how hungry they are. i was a bit worried that it would fall flat because it kinda rides on mingi but they actually pulled it off. i have literally no idea where they pulled all that energy from but holy shit you can practically lick the attitude off the screen. i’m also very impressed by the amount of information they managed to fit into that four minute narrative. we had a full conflict/climax/resolution, as well as a really clear understanding of the tenacity and drive of the group, as well as the desire to support one another in achieving their goals. bravo.

ok so like i said in the set section, they used that pirate ship bridge really effectively to create two different but connected spaces. this is a really smart way to make it seem like you have two spaces while having to only build one set. it was also one of the best ways to utilize this dumbass stage so it doesn’t just look like you’re running arbitrarily from area to area because you can.

also levels! levels are so important for staging but also hard to do in this context because you have to be able to move really quickly in and out of full group formation, but I think they did a really good job here.

continued point: the kraken arm worked because it was the conflict they needed to overcome in the narrative, so it had a function within the performance. also related: all the tricking and jumping also served a purpose within the narrative too. it was either used for fighting (yeosang kicking all those dancers on beat) or a demonstration of teamwork (jongho flinging yunho around on the floor). also frankly excellent use of choreographic formation with the backup dancers, each formation had a specific function and was meant to highlight ateez without being overbearing.

not a whole lot of camera choreo, but a fairly good long take at the beginning and the editing wasn’t too obnoxious which I think was more chance than intent, but i’m not gonna look a gift kraken in the beak.

sf9

i actually really liked this stage, and i really like that sf9 has established their colour as effortlessly elegant, which does set them apart from the rest of the groups. this stage was really choreographically complex and they made it seem so easy, so real props to them. however, like with ikon’s stage, there were a lot of good ideas that just weren’t followed through enough for me.

like ateez, song choice and theme were very well intertwined with this one, there was a lot of thought put into this stage. the pun with ‘jealous’ and ‘jilleosseo’ and having a fairytale/magic mirror narrative? fuckin GALAXY BRAINED. incredible. the implication that not only taeyang but the entire group is the evil queen from snow white? chef’s kiss. should have committed harder and put one of them in massive cloak à la king taemin mama 2020. instead it was subtle enough to not try to step on ateez’s schlocky camp toes but still just as serious and i love that. do i wish they pushed it farther though? also yes.

costume

not gonna lie, i had my reservations on the costumes when we saw the previews of them in the waiting room, but the thing about stage costumes is that they always look bad when not on stage. if they look good in the waiting room you’ve done something wrong. and i loved them on stage. big fan of that quilted vest/pseudo stomacher. please can we have a corset trend? y’all already adopted bondage harnesses, c’mon a little corset won’t hurt. also a good example of a modern spin on a recognizable genre.

i wish the backup dancers weren’t in all black but i am fighting single person battle against the entire entertainment industry on that one.

set

extremely simple with a few smart utilizations. had a feeling this might have been a budget thing, as it had a similar kind of vibe with ikon’s stage, but the use of the mirrors was smart and a fun device that served the purpose of the narrative.

working with mirrors on stage is really fucking hard, so kudos to them for giving it a go. for the most part it was pretty effective. especially with the combo of moving mirrors and moving lights AND moving camera, you’re kind of asking to either blind your audience or at least give them a headache. i once saw a production of the magic flute that had a rotating mirror setpiece and i swear i nearly went blind due to the constantly flashing reflections. you have to really be careful with directionality and reflection, especially with the added element of a camera. also you never use real glass mirrors on stage, it is unbelievably bad luck and theatre people are the most superstitious demographic on the fucking planet.

i kinda loved the draped gold dais. i have nothing else to say about it other than fun!

lighting

a lot of this was very weirdly lit and i’m not sure why. the quality on youtube is terrible and cameras already have trouble picking up detail in low light, and throwing a whole bunch of primary red over that (the colour with the longest wavelength and therefore disappears the easiest in the dark. also human eyes are not very good at distinguishing variations in the red spectrum) and the red costumes made it extremely difficult to tell what was happening.

i will give them props for dramatic lighting usage, especially for the two way mirror trick and for using the floor as a primary lighting source at the end, which i think groups should be using more of. how often do you have a lighting source in your floor!!! almost never!! use that opportunity!!

sound

i actually enjoyed this remix too. it was well suited to the dramatic nature of the stage. i think the sound byte at the beginning is ‘mirror mirror on the wall who’s the worthiest of them all’ but it also could be ‘who’s the worst of them all’ and that would be also fitting and kinda funny.

staging

again, not a lot of consideration for camera choreo in a meaningful way, and like the tbz stage I think the clarity in the actual choreo got hampered by the editing. because there was a lot of choreographic precision that went into making this work and it wasn’t totally obvious from the way mnet edited it.

a lot of them are actors so it works that they’re leaning more towards dramatic stages rather than the sort of performance type stages we’ve seen so far. i like this choice for them as it gives them a very obvious colour but they’re almost on the verge of making it look too easy, which does them some injustice.

next to ateez, using that long uninterrupted traverse was my favourite use of this stage. doubles as an easy way to build the atmosphere of a palace corridor/throne room with the rug, and to feed the drama of the piece.

skz

ok i have some…..things to say about this stage. so far i have not been kind to skz which makes me look like i hate them and i don’t, i promise. there were a lot of really interesting things happening in this stage and there some really successful ones, and i liked this a whole lot better than their intro stage, but their overall choreo and thematic dedication is really killing me. i’ll explain.

costume

I don’t hate them but also…….why? I got the good self vs evil self/internal struggle theme but the costumes don’t really have anything interesting to say about that. as far as modern style costuming goes i think they’re on the more interesting end, but they don’t push it far enough. there’s a few western art history visual motifs and honestly? they should have gone whole hog and whited out their faces/hair and made them look like classical sculptures. that would have been hella fun, especially with that little statue and marionette sequence, plus the shadow/leash manipulation.

this time it was actually intentional that the backup dancers were in blacks and i appreciate that.

why on EARTH did they have that ridiculous makeup that didn’t read on stage? theatre makeup and tv makeup are different, you can’t just do a light purple eyeshadow and expect to read under blue and red light. someone needs to bring an actual theatre makeup artist in and get these boys in some real crazy looks. see previous point about full-face white pancake. more extreme makeup please and thank you!

set

i liked the use of internal architecture within this massive weird stage space and they used the corridors quite well. i didn’t really like the mix of baroque scrolling and also graffiti, it wasn’t quite connected for me. this has been a common theme among this round and i think it comes from budget/props pulls rather than anything else.

also there was a distinct feeling of trying to fill the main stage space with bodies as opposed to atmosphere. this can work in some specific cases but the intent wasn’t strong enough for me. it just felt like a lot of people on stage, especially in the end choreo.

lighting

the general lighting was fine but not particularly inspired. the low light in the beginning was actually quite well done, especially combined with the fog, but in my opinion was not dramatic enough. you have a pseudo art history theme happening, pump that contrast and push the chiaroscuro!

ok stay with me, i’m gonna say something extremely controversial that might actually get me cancelled. s*per j*unior’s burn the floor did everything this stage was trying to do on a smaller scale and better. look i know ok, this is a like, a double atom bomb hot take. just forget everything you know about them and watch the performance video. tell me that’s not some of the most interesting choreo you’ve seen in kpop. if you’re going to work with practical light you need to COMMIT. not just steal the solar lanterns out of my mom’s back garden.

i have a lot of opinions on using practical light and alternate light sources in performance because it’s a huge part of my practice and this just....wasn’t interesting enough for me. push it further!

(I will wait for the subs on the full episode because there has to be a reason they chose that specific shape of lamp. if not i gotta ask jyp why he’s raiding my mom’s garden)

sound

god’s menu has such specific imagery associated within the lyrics and choreography that this stage was a bit dissonant for me. especially when seen in conjunction with two stages where the narrative was tied explicitly to the lyrics of the songs. i think maybe if it hadn’t been grouped with these other two stages i would have felt differently. the other groups chose to do songs were a little more abstract and allowed for more visual experimentation, but to go so blatantly against the food metaphor didn’t really work for me and i had a tough time divorcing the association. I found the arrangement to be a little lacking in energy for me towards the end but otherwise it was pretty interesting.

staging

Definitely a better performance overall that the intro stage. almost all of the gimmicks this time had relevance to the theme which i appreciated. the marionette bit and the shadow/mirror were probably the most interesting but i wish they were better lit.

there was a lot of back and forth in the blocking that made the stage feel repetitive and also aimless? like there wasn’t a very clearly established directionality within the internal space, so it felt like treading over the same ground for no purposeful reason. and again, not a lot of intentional camerawork.

i really liked having the dancers under the big sheet, it fit well enough within the ‘war between internal selves’ theme, but also had a loose tie to the art imagery. again, i really wish they had stuck to a clearer visual theme. it makes them stick out especially in this grouping of stages, but also across all the groups as whole because almost everyone had a clear(ish) visual idea.

holy shit that’s a lot of backup dancers. i don’t really feel like that many were necessary and the sheer number of them took away from the emphasis of the group. with all of the other stages (except for tbz) it was very clear who the centre of attention and emphasis was, and with both skz and tbz they got swallowed by the sheer scale they were trying to operate at. bigger is not always better.

---

this is a tough round to rank because none of these stages are bad, there’s just some that are, in my opinion, more successful than others. all of these stages do very well in specific elements but fall short in others which also makes this ranking difficult. i’m evaluating these based on whether they were successful to me, as i’m pretty sure this ranking will probably not all be popular opinion, but whatever i like to live on the edge.

btob – visuals, vocals, narrative, swords? what more do you want me to say? also i watched the full episode and minhyuk did rehearsal with a real bokken and i think i am in love with him now.

ateez – honestly not sure if i would have ranked this first if that high note hadn’t been a mess. i love camp nonsense and i genuinely think this was a well designed stage. i can’t believe i keep saying that but it’s true.

sf9 – this stage was really solid, just could have been pushed farther. i think it has a really good sense of drama and it’s a pity that sf9’s colour is more subdued, because i think they’re going to be stuck around the 3rd/4th position for the rest of the show.

ikon – ikon is only ranking this high because although i am disappointed in the wasted potential of this stage, they NAILED the camerawork and actually brought in someone to block the steadicam into the choreo. also they’re incredible performers. i say this every time, but their stage presence, although maybe lower energy that they normally would be, is still not to be fucked with.

skz – i think this one is the most ‘meh’ for me. while i liked a lot of the elements here they just didn’t push it far enough and the lack of narrative and general aimless choreo led to me not having any strong feelings yea or nay.

tbz – to be quite honest the lack of costume unity is a big hit for me. all elements of design are equally as important but because of my personal practice and experience i tend to put a lot of weight on good costume and spatial design. i don’t actually like game of thrones also, so I feel mildly offended on behalf of michele clapton, who had did a fucking incredible job and doesn’t deserve to be slandered like this. also the lack of cohesive choreography and the overblown lighting made this difficult to watch, no matter how good i thought the rear projection/stretch fabric dance was.

any questions or opinions you wanna share hit me up! see you next week!

#im ready for the angry asks about that s*ju opinion because that is a spicy one #kingdom #kingdom review #kpop analysis #im so surprised by these stages i cant believe ateez stuck the landing #i saw the preview for next week also and the new round looks wild so im ready #text

11 notes · View notes

thechildrendontlaugh · 3 years

Text

Identity: The Ebb and Flow of 'I'

Being in graduate school has highlighted and honed in on the idea around identities far more than any other pursuit or endeavor I have engaged in, has ever done. Much of this feels as though it has been to my own detriment. A superficial exploration which locks one into the identities of the moment, which have us in a cultural chokehold. Race is always going to be the elephant in the room, especially for those of us who are unable (or unwilling) to change the pigment of our skin or our obvious ethnic features, unable to rely or lean upon ambiguity. And sexuality (gender expression, pronouns, and the like), which seem to signal more a personal, self-isolated identity which has ballooned into a political barometer by which one can dismiss, judge, or otherwise label those who do not fall into domineering culture. I find both to have become so inflated, that I cannot possibly, in good conscious, place myself upon the spectrum of either, lest I unwittingly align myself with a group or mantra which props itself upon rhetoric instead of action. So far removed from the center—everyday people who do not have the time to wax poetic about what feels trivial at best, and narcissistically self-invoked, at worst—I rest somewhere pushed out in the wings. Viewed as counter-revolutionary and counter-progressive to some, and “normal” to others. I resent having to signal and flag out my Black identity, or delve deep into the etymology around it, or why I might choose Black over African-American, and find POC no different in context, fashion, or form, to that of the “colored person” of the 60s.

Identities today, feel like cheap clothing which one might casually peruse, try on, and then promptly remove once they happen upon another shiny object which upon wear, will stroke and pacify one’s tantrumous ego. To be given such a luxury. To passively demand that one also engage in such dress-up and modeling is a carousel of myopic narcissism. I’d rather walk around naked. And yet, this highlights how some identities one does not get to walk away from, nor control the narrative around. My race is one, and I will not have that continued in the act of weaponization and war against me. Unfortunately, sex and gender have also been thrown into the fray—perhaps they always were, but this time I’m to believe the “good guys” are leading the charge. When you’re on the ground, even your ally can look like an enemy, and war can make demons of us all.

What do the rest of my identities look like?

If given enough time to explore, to examine, to step back and take account of all the things which make me, me, “identity” is what is most alive for me. What flares up to the surface as rage, or passion, or unbridled euphoria. What fills me with a sense of purpose, which feels aligned and netted into the unfolding story of my own personal destiny. It’s how I show up in the world, claim my place in it. Situate myself in an effort to understand and further perfect the way I navigate, maneuver, dance in the interactions I encounter every moment of every day. Beneath that, my identity also encapsulates the things which I wrestle with, that cause me grief, that create some kind of discord. A knocking upon the walls of my body to be let out of its prison, or a curling in of such tightness as to will upon itself a magical disappearance into an even darker nothingness still.

I’m a creative. When I outstretch my hand in introduction, it is one of the first things I say to another person (I am still testing within the cavernous echo of my own mouth, what it feels and means to say “studying to be a psychotherapist”), it is one of the most familiar and personal lenses through which I have viewed my life since very near my inception. I don’t know any other way in which I exist where I do not identify, even if just in the quietness of my own mind, with my curious critique and approach to everything and everyone around us. It has informed so much of my preoccupations and pursuits, but also fueled my own latchings upon “new” identities, or rather, venturing to explore what is already present, just buried.

My identity for a long time at its core was my Christian religion. So embedded and enmeshed with so much of Black culture and struggle and triumph. This strong thread which connected me to a tarred history which granted me community and sense of well-being and place. Situated me somewhere. Rooted me. It’s been years since I have deconverted, and there was a lot of anger involved around that. I approached my religious beliefs sacredly, reverently. It was a beacon of purity and love and hope which felt corrupted and augmented by a false narrative which had finally been able to peel and flake away. I struggled for a long time trying to reconcile the disillusionment which had flared up within me and struck out, vehemently, in rage, disgust, and a deep impenetrable pain. To be so alienated. To come face-to-face with yet another weaponization which had enslaved, beat-down, and forever castigated an entire race of people who will, regardless of the leaps and bounds of progress, will always be subconsciously viewed lowest of the beasts of gods creation. Somehow I have circled back, in some ways, to my injected Christian heritage. Finding it impossible to fully leave behind as it has been the decorative layer of most ATRs/ADRs. Wading through the trauma inflicted by this religion (and perhaps all popular religions in the present-day world) in order to find my way back to my own people, my ancestors, the land.

For myself, that’s all identity really means and comes back to. The people whose blood you share, and the land of which gave birth to you, supported you, healed you. Everything else, are branches upon the system of trees which are interlocked and intertwined, at the root, with one another. If I have no sense of who I am, at my core. If I am detached and withdrawn, or in denial of that centered part of me, nothing else matters or can come fully into being. It will be a paper mâché upon which even the lightest of rains destroys, and dissolves.

#thechildrendontlaugh #Identity #Who am I?#The Ebb and Flow of I #longform

1 note · View note

diminuel · 5 years

Text

Thank you so much for your response, and all the points you made! Especially for mentioning Sam teaching Cas to hug!! I will never, ever, ever x 1000 be over that. (Also Sam sitting on the table and trying the peanut butter! That’s one of my regrets in not seeing some Sam and Cas moments, because while I love Sam and Dean’s dynamic, I think they both tend to perform a little bit with each other to maintain that dynamic. Not in a bad way, just that it’s a thing that’s part of it for them. And sometimes I think we see sides of Sam come out to play a little more when Dean is absent - which is typical for siblings, I think, even when they’re as close as Sam and Dean. I would have liked it if Cas could have been another person Sam could be himself with, because sometimes it feels like Sam’s world is very small, and I wish he had more closeness with people who didn’t die shortly after; I feel like Cas is one of his best friends, and I want to see that, but in the show it feels like there’s a barrier, and if we get some of the nice non-case moments/references you talked about, like you said, they’re Dean-centric.) I definitely agree about the ‘this was a case of trying to wrap character actions and reactions (and abilities) around a plot, instead of working the plot around the characters.’ For me, that spot on identifies (what I feel like is) one of SPN’s biggest issues lately. I’m missing character authenticity and organic development? I feel bad, in hindsight, I made it sound a little like Sam and Cas’s relationship has become antagonistic in some way. I didn’t mean to suggest Cas doesn’t love Sam (I agree that he absolutely does!), or that Cas, the way I see him at least, would ever deliberately let Sam get hurt. The moments we see where Cas is affectionate with him and vice versa are, in my opinion, the truth of their bond, but lately I’ve felt bad about how - because it’s not a focus - the show tends to handle it. Rather than there actually being anything wrong, sometimes it feels to me that the writing sort of suggests things that aren’t there, and kind of creates a false narrative where there’s either some tension or apathy between them? Not that there aren’t the other moments, too, but it seems inconsistent. So maybe it’s more - I’m grouchy about how the show represents it lately, out of plain carelessness, because in light of everything they’ve been through together, I don’t feel like it’s an accurate reflection of where they’re at. I was glad to hear your thoughts on Peace of Mind! There were so many great moments - that was not meant to be a judgment on the whole episode - and I love Sam and Cas team-up, since we don’t get a lot of it, and I would prefer to assume I’m projecting things that aren’t there than that what should have been a positive bonding moment ended on a sour note. I just worry about the profound bond overriding another important relationship in TFW (to clarify, I don’t want less profound bond, I just want more of all of it and yet I feel like I’m getting less -.-) As to your last paragraph - I apologize for deviating from your specific point about Cas being angry at Sam over the Jack issue. I realize it sounded like I misunderstood what you were saying - I didn’t mean to extrapolate in weird ways, mostly it just made me think of some of my other bad feelings about how the show handles them (i.e. their relationship gets sacrificed for other plot things). I am also curious to know what Cas’s feelings are on that (and if Cas will ever get to talk about his feelings and have them acknowledged on screen, heyyy); but I particularly like this: “Sam didn’t like it but he went along with it. He didn’t take Cas’ side for Jack (though he reacted sort of disapprovingly to Dean’s treatment of Cas). Maybe Cas wouldn’t be angry, more disappointed maybe?” because for me, it sort of points to one of the biggest problems for Sam and Cas; Sam and Dean have been through so much, and they’re brothers, so even when Sam’s not entirely in agreement, he’ll side with Dean. And likewise, Dean and Cas do have that profound bond, and I think that tends to take precedence for Cas. It’s not either of them saying, “I care less about you,” so much as, “Dean occupies this space in my life and that’s where my loyalties have to lie,” but I think sometimes their unique relationships to Dean, respectively, can create accidental conflict. I don’t know. That MCD rant has some - maybe a lot - of shade for Dabb’s writing, so if you’re not here for that (I totally understand) I can leave that part out of it! But yeah - thank you for talking it through with me! I’m sorry I did a bad job explaining, originally. As you may have noticed, I tend to go on and on and I was trying to keep it short, but I fear I didn’t do a very good job.

–

Oh, good point about Sam and Dean performing for each other to uphold their dynamic. I think that’s true and I’ve thought about it before. Of course, I mostly look at it from the vantage point of how different Dean is with Cas when Sam is present or when he’s absent. We’ve seen a lot of how Dean acts when Sam’s not around, i.e. he doesn’t feel the need to perform. I think that’s mostly because a) Dean thinks he has to live up to a certain idea/ ideal and b) Sam also has certain expectations about how Dean should behave. I can’t think of a good example right now, apart from Sam acting surprised when Dean has specific book knowledge. From Sam, on the other hand, we get less insights of how he is outside of the brotherly dynamic. Or maybe there’s simply not too much of a difference? I don’t know. But more Sam and Cas scenes would certainly highlight it. Sam definitely should have more relationships with other people!

I think you’re right that SPN has that issue where it forced through a stupid plot point to the detriment of the story telling and characters. I’m not sure if that’s a recent development. I know I’ve been internally screaming since S9. But I do know that my complaints regarding characters doing something stupid that makes no sense has increased. (Maybe I just got grumpier, who knows! *lol*)

And to come back to the Sam-Cas relationship, I totally agree that the writing does seem almost careless. They apparently don’t see the need to delve deeper into their friendship and just let us assume that they are best friends without putting much effort into it. Sam and Cas getting into a discussion or even a conflict regarding Jack should have happened. But somehow Sam was relegated to the position of bystander on a topic that should be very dear to him (once upon a time we were led to believe that Jack’s their kid, does Sam no longer feel like that?). And due to Sam’s inactivity and not getting into contact with Cas, he also accepted that Cas - as Jack’s surrogate father - doesn’t get to have a say when they decide Jack’s fate. I mean, I’m a bit projecting now, because the blame lies mostly with Dean and Sam merely didn’t offer any substantial resistance…

I would also love more TFW and the profound bond definitely has overshadowed anything else. Before. But now with Jack thrown into the mix there’s even less time for the original TFW. (And I don’t like that. Sometimes I like the addition of Jack and at other times I’m jealous of all the attention he diverts away from the things I’m most interested in.)

It’s not either of them saying, “I care less about you,” so much as, “Dean occupies this space in my life and that’s where my loyalties have to lie,” but I think sometimes their unique relationships to Dean, respectively, can create accidental conflict.

Yes, totally. Dean is the core of TFW, their loyalties do lie with him. When Sam wants Cas to do something he doesn’t agree with, he just has to say “for Dean” and Cas will do it (see S10). Likewise, Cas is closest to Dean for a variety of reasons and I don’t want him to come into a position where he has to choose, but he is loyal to Dean. Or he was, for a while, before Jack came into the mix. I don’t want to know what would have happened if Jack didn’t throw Cas away (…!!! I really dislike how careless Jack acts around Cas. Also when he still had a soul. Come on, dude. That’s no way to treat Cas.) when he got inbetween Dean and Jack. Would Dean have shot Cas? Would Cas have attacked Dean to defend Jack?

I’m here for the whole MCD rant, shade and all. I don’t think Dabb’s doing a bad job, but I haven’t really thought much about it and I’m not opposed to different points of view!

Also, you didn’t do a bad job explaining at all, I just babble about whatever sort of related things come to mind when I answer stuff. I don’t edit my thoughts all that well unless I’m writing academic papers and have to *lol*

#Anon #submission #Diminuel replies #Supernatural

11 notes · View notes

lovehaswonangelnumbers · 5 years

Photo

New Post has been published on https://lovehaswonangelnumbers.org/new-moon-in-leo-turn-up-your-light/

New Moon in Leo ~ Turn Up Your Light!

By Dana Mrkich

August feels like it is on fire right from the start! On August 1 (July 31 in the US) we had Mercury turn direct with the New Moon in Leo.

The overall message for this month feels very much to be “turn up your Light!” Leo is the Lion, King (or Queen) of the jungle. This is a month to step up and stand up for what it is you DREAM OF. This is going to mean a different thing for everyone. This could play out in your work life, career, business or finances, in your relationships, love life or with family. It could mean being more vocal about things you care about or noticing where you no longer want to hide or play it small.

Leo is connected to the Solar Plexus and the Sun, so power can come up as a theme this month especially connected to seeing your Light as Power. Seeing your Truth as Power. We’ve received all sorts of negative messages about what Power is – that it is dominating and controlling for example. Likewise, we’ve also received some pretty diluted messages about what “Light” is – that it’s “spiritual” but has very little connection to life in the “real world.” Your Light is who you are at a core, soul level. When you feel connected to your core, soul self, when you truly live life from this space, that is what healthy, authentic power looks like. It has nothing to do with having power over anyone outside of yourself. So remember this as you step up and stand up for what it is you want. Do it assertively, yet not aggressively.

Journalling Prompts:

This month I would like to step up in the following areas: _________________

Imagine yourself connected to your Light/Soul in a deeper way,

and living your life, your power and your truth from that space.

With each area, you’ve written above,

how would it look were you to live from this space more often?

Either in your journal or by closing your eyes and listening for inner guidance,

ask yourself:

What is ONE thing I can do in each of these areas,

so that I am living more in alignment with who I know myself to truly be?

Global Stage

Leo is a fire sign, all about strength, courage, and bravery and that is exactly what five New York Fire Commissioners are showing with their call for a new 9/11 Investigation. They unanimously passed a resolution claiming that “overwhelming evidence” of “pre-planted explosives and/or incendiaries”…” caused the destruction of the Three World Trade Center buildings.”

Mainstream media are not covering this.

Please watch and share their moving statement.

As the Fire Commissioner says, it is time to bring Truth to Light.

Awakening is not just a personal, individual process. When awakened individuals gather together, our awakening changes our families, our communities, our workplaces, our societies, our media, our governments and eventually, our entire world. The more of us that speak the truth, question what has been fed to us as truth, investigate, or even be open-minded enough to listen to what others have to say, the more that our personal and collective courage around the truth is multiplied, amplified, strengthened and supported.

These Fire Commissioners are speaking out on behalf of their friends, colleagues and those who lost their lives. Ultimately, however, they’re speaking out on behalf of all of us, because we are all affected by decisions and actions that were, and are, justified by conditions that are planned and orchestrated then fed to us in a false way.

The Fire Commissioners’ call for a new investigation should be the leading story on all channels but it looks like only the alternative media are covering it. The majority of people have been under the illusion that the media are there to inform us. With mainstream media, that’s not the case. Today only FIVE corporations own 90% of US media (news and entertainment). Everyone under that umbrella is told what to say, what not to say, what to publish, what narrative to spin. It is a machine to influence social thought and behavior. It hides truths much more than it tells truth.

“Events and stories are manipulated and repressed more regularly than we know, portrayed in a way to provide maximum television impact and encourage minimum social action and debate not in alignment with the agendas of the elite. Rather than serving the public interest of ‘right to know’, they instead serve the media’s need to make a profit, the corporate sponsor’s need to ensure information shown doesn’t conflict with their sales, profits and reputation, and the government’s need to retain control and influence.

The book Into the Buzzsaw: Leading journalists expose the myth of a free press is a plethora of mind-boggling accounts from respected well-known journalists, detailing how state and corporate interference has resulted in the muzzling of their stories. It is important to highlight, they are not talking about mere influence or preference being exerted on them, but what seems to be direct interference and pressure with uncomfortable consequences if not adhered to.”

Excerpt from A New Chapter, Dana Mrkich (2008)

Thankfully these days there are loads of alternatives from huge alternative news sites and youtube channels, to regular people posting links and stories on social media. Obviously, always use your discretion.

Turn up your Light!!

~~~~~~~~~

LoveHasWon.org is a Non Profit Charity, Heartfully Associated with the “World Blessing Church Trust” for the Benefit of Mother Earth

Share Our Messages with Love and Gratitude

LOVE US @ MeWe mewe.com/join/lovehaswon

Visit Our Online Store for Higher Consciousness Products and Tools: LoveHasWon Essentials

http://lovehaswonessentials.org/

Visit Our NEW Sister Site: LoveHasWon Angel Numbers

https://lovehaswonangelnumbers.org/

Commentary from The First Contact Ground Crew 5dSpiritual Healing Team:

Feel Blocked, Drained, Fatigued, Restless, Nausea, Achy, Ready to Give Up? We Can Help! We are preparing everyone for a Full Planetary Ascension, and provide you with the tools and techniques to assist you Home Into The Light. The First Contact Ground Crew Team, Will Help to Get You Ready For Ascension which is Underway. New Spiritual Sessions have now been created for an Entire Family, including the Crystal Children; Group Family Healing & Therapy. We have just began these and they are incredible. Highly recommend for any families struggling together in these times of intense changes. Email: [email protected] for more information or to schedule an emergency spiritual session. We can Assist You into Awakening into 5d Reality, where your experience is one of Constant Joy, Wholeness of Being, Whole Health, Balanced, Happy and Abundant. Lets DO THIS! Schedule Your Session Below by following the Link! Visit: http://www.lovehaswon.org/awaken-to-5d/

Introducing our New LoveHasWon Twin Flame Spiritual Intuitive Ascension Session. Visit the link below:

https://lovehaswon.org/lovehaswon-twin-flame-spiritual-intuitive-ascension-session/

Request an Astonishing Personal Ascension Assessment Report or Astrology Reading, visit the link below for more information:

https://lovehaswon.org/lovehaswon-ascension-assessment-report

https://lovehaswon.org/lovehaswon-astrology/

Experiencing DeAscension Symptoms, Energy Blockages, Disease and more? Book a Holistic Healing Session

https://lovehaswon.org/lovehaswon-holistic-healing-session/

To read our Testimonials you can follow this link: http://www.lovehaswon.org/testimonials

Connect with MotherGod~Mother of All Creation on Skype @ mothergoddess8

Request a copy of our Book: The Tree of Life ~ Light of The Immortals Book

Order a copy of Our LoveHasWon Ascension Guide: https://lovehaswon.org/lovehaswon-ascension-guide/

**If you do not have a Paypal account, click on the button below:

If you wish to donate and receive a Tax Receipt, click the button below:

Donate with Paypal

Use Cash App with Our code and we’ll each get $5! FKMPGLH

Cash App Tag: $lovehaswon1111

Cash App

Donate with Venmo

VENMO

Support Our cause in the creation of the Crystal Schools for Children. Visit our fundraising link below:

LoveHasWon Charity for Crystal Schools

Support Our Charity in Co~Creating the New Earth Together by Helping Mother of All Creation. Visit our fundraising link below:

Support Mother Earth!

Support Us on PATREON

PATREON

Support Us Through Our LoveHasWon Wish List

LoveHasWon Wish List

We also accept Western Union and Moneygram. You may send an email to [email protected] for more information.

***If you wish to send Donations by mail or other methods, email us at [email protected] or [email protected]***

**** We Do Not Refund Donations****

MeWe ~ Youtube ~ Facebook ~ Apple News ~ Linkedin ~ Twitter ~ Tumblr ~ GAB ~ Minds ~ Google+ ~ Medium ~ StumbleUpon ~ Reddit ~ Informed Planet ~ Steemit ~ SocialClub ~ BlogLovin ~ Flipboard ~ Pinterest ~ Instagram ~ Snapchat

#5D Astrology #Ascension and Spirituality #Astrology Updates #consciousness

1 note · View note

trinuviel · 6 years

Text

ALL IS SUBTEXT - A Case for Jon and Sansa (part 5)

This is the fifth installment in my analysis of the romantic subtext in the scenes between Jon and Sansa in seasons 6 and 7 of Game of Thrones (Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4). I’ve examined the different techniques that the show employs to create this subtext through primarily visual means. This post is is a direct continuation of part 3 and part 4 where I began examining the romantic tropes that inform the scenes between their. Once again I’ve had to break up my analysis because there are so many tropes in play and I am trying to be meticulous in my analysis. So here is yet another very long post.

KNOW YOUR TROPES

The ambiguous romantic subtext in the scenes between Jon and Sansa exists almost entirely on the level of the visual - and that means that we have to pay close attention to non-verbal cues, costume design, image composition and editing.

I have previously mentioned that tropes are excellent tools when it comes to creating subtext because they function as a narrative shorthand. They rely on audience familiarity and genre conventions, which mean that there’s no need to spell things out - and subtext exists at the level of the unspoken.

So without further ado, let’s have a look as some more JonSa scenes where romantic tropes are in play.

Gentle readers, gird your loins - this post is hella long.

Declaration of Protection. This trope occurs when the hero’s motivation is built around protecting another person. This is usually the love interest but it can also pertain to other kinds of relationships (as well as larger entities such as a home or the realm as per Jon’s season 7 arc).

Both seasons 6 and 7 make it clear that Sansa is the hidden reason for many of Jon’s actions. She’s the one that gives him the will to live and fight again. She shakes him out of his depression and disillusionment after he’s been resurrected - and he is determined to protect her at any cost. The night before the Battle of the Bastards, Jon issues a solemn declaration of protection when Sansa states that she’ll never let Ramsay take her alive, hinting that she’ll kill herself if Jon loses the battle.

(GIFs by https://giffferrplanet.wordpress.com/2016/06/23/game-of-thrones-the-night-before-the-battle/)

Sansa’s reaction is heartbreaking. No one has be able to protect her since her father died and her scepticism in the face of Jon’s promise is understandable yet so very sad. However, the thing to notice here is Jon’s sad puppy-dog face when Sansa leaves - now it isn’t just Winterfell that hangs in the balance, Sansa’s very life rests on his shoulders as well.

Battle Couple. This trope pertains to a couple who are partners in combat:

This is the kind of couple where bullets figure prominently in the story of their romance. Where “war buddy” and “significant other” are synonyms. If you harm either one of them, the survivor will kill you as surely as the sun rises. (TVTropes)

Jon and Sansa may not fight side-by-side in the physical sense but Sansa’s presence at the parley with Ramsay (as well as her involvement with raising troops, etc) puts them into the territory of Battle Couple. Furthermore, the visuals repeatedly puts them side-by-side to emphasize them as a team.

The parley with Ramsay offers a number of shots that presents Jon and Sansa as a united front.

In short, they look “beautiful and majestic” together (as the script explicitly states).

Ruling Couple. This trope is generally used in relation to a monarchial setting:

A ruling couple, on the other hand, are equal or near equal partners, and may even be Happily Married. Rather then one ruling and one staying in the palace they jointly rule. The rulers will rely on each other as trusted counselors and they will be The Good King and The High Queen in one. Perhaps they will show this by receiving audiences on two thrones. Perhaps the consort will have a regular seat in the royal council and a vote. Perhaps even the two of them will discuss deep and labyrinthine affairs of state during matrimonial activities.

On many occasions, they will also be a Battle Couple. (TVTropes)

Jon and Sansa may not be a Ruling Couple in the traditional sense (not yet anyway). However, the visuals repeatedly show them sitting side-by-side, looking regal, when they interact with their bannermen.

The shot below is an especially strong visual because it offers a simple yet effective image composition. Jon and Sansa are placed firmly in the centre of the shot, framed by the large hearth that forms a pale background against which and they stand out visually. They are further framed by the black silhouette of the bannermen. This, along with the slow zoom in, serve to highlight them visually in a way that ruling couples often are presented. Once again, Jon and Sansa look beautiful and majestic together.

This shot is not only visually striking but it may very well be narratively significant as a piece of subtle foreshadowing. The kingmaking scene follows the most narratively important reveal in the entire show: the revelation of Jon’s true parentage as the son of Lyanna Stark and Rhaegar Targaryen. Immediately after this revelation, Jon is chosen as King in the North based on his status as Ned Stark’s bastard son and he’s thus elected under false pretenses even though he is unaware of his true parentage.

Placing the parentage reveal before the kingmaking is an interesting (and very deliberate) editing choice because it introduces the possibility that Jon’s parentage may become a problem for his kingship in the future. Jon’s true parentage relates to several popular tropes: Really Royalty Reveal, Hidden Back-up Prince, Secret Legacy - or as I like to call it: the Hidden Prince. When a narrative employs this trope, the truth will ALWAYS come out and it is always be of extreme narrative importance. While Jon relinquished his kingship in season 7, his status as a leader in the North may very well be further imperilled when the truth comes out. There’s been written several metas on how a marriage between Jon and Sansa would effectively unite the competing claims to North and unite House Stark firmly under Jon’s leadership, so I won’t go further into this argument here.

Rather, I’d just point out that by placing the parentage reveal right before a scene that invokes a visual iconography of a ruling couple in such a strong image composition, the show simultaneously teases the likelihood of a future conflict as well as its possible solution - in one single image!

When Jon is declared King in the North, despite Sansa having the heriditary claim to Winterfell, he turns to Sansa to gauge her reaction. he wants her to approval before he accepts the kingship - and she smilingly approves without uttering a single word. Yet another instance of them being in accord.

It is a move that is similar to this interaction between King Leonidas of Sparta and his queen Gorgo in 300 (2007) - spouses in accord, there’s no need for words.

Whilst Sansa isn’t Jon’s formal co-ruler, the show continues to seat her next to Jon when he exerts his authority as king. This is especially important since Winterfell’s Great Hall lacks the visual stage-setting of power that characterizes the Red Keep and Dragonstone. Jon’s “throne” is just a regular chair and he is placed on the same level as his subjects - yet he maintains a certain distance by standing behind a separate table at the end of the room, right in front of the visual centre provided by the hearth. The table acts as a physical and visual barrier between him and his bannermen so even though he’s not physically elevated above his vassals, he does inhabit a space that is sectioned off from them (though he quickly moves beyond it). Sansa inhabits this same space, right by his side!

However, Davos also sits next to Jon, at the same side of the table. Here it is important to pay attention to the image composition! As you can see, Davos is seated a bit farther from Jon than Sansa - and this slight separation is visually emphasized by the hearth where the light reflected on the lower mantel creates a visual barrier between Jon and Davos. No such barrier exist between Jon and Sansa - and the slightly skewed perspective also makes them look closer to each other. In short, though three persons are seated side by side, Jon and Sansa are grouped together in a visually distinct manner that evokes the iconography of a Ruling Couple.

Even their costumes support this trope! @jonsalways has penned an amazing costume meta that about Jon and Sansa’s costumes in seasons 6 and 7. She notes that the colours and the overall silhouettes of their costumes match each other, which not only makes them look good together but also serve to underscore them as a team. I’m going to quote her here because she cuts to the heart of the matter in such a succinct manner:

When you look at the items they wear (it) is also wonderful. They both have a cloak, a cape, a dress/shirt, a “metal necklace”, a collar over the necklace and a belt. Every single detail in Jon’s costume has a equivalent on Sansa’s. It’s almost as they wear the female and male version of the same outfit.

When they are side by side, they look beautiful because their costumes match in pieces and their silhouette look just right. It’s comfortable to look at them because they look so similar. It’s almost like you don’t see two characters wearing two different concepts. You see them together as one whole concept. If they could switch their cloaks/capes, the colors would work just fine. And they are the only Starks whose costumes do that. Michele Clapton does it for a reason.

The elements mentioned in the quotes work on the level of the visual sub-conscious, i.e. we simply notice that they look aesthetically pleasing together but it is seldom something that the general audience give much thought to.

However, there are obvious symbolic elements to their costumes that we are most definitely are meant to notice; elements that also work as statements about their characters and their narrative journeys. In the case of Jon and Sansa, the symbolic element is the Stark direwolf, the heraldic sigil of their House - and this element tells the story of two characters travelling towards the same destination in season 6 and on parallel lines in season 7.

In season 6, we see Sansa visually reclaim her identity as a Stark through an act of (literal) self-fashioning: she makes a beautiful dress where the bodice acts as the canvas for the presentation of the Stark direwolf, made with materials that probably are supposed to evoke the natural landscape of the North - such a irregularly cut squares of mother-of-pearl (that made me remember the wonderful mussel shell necklace that Karsi wore in season 5).

Sansa’s homemade dress is a profound act of self-reclamation. She emblazons her chest with the ancestral symbol of her family - almost as an answer to the way the Lannisters put their heraldic stamp on her neck in season 3:

Throughout the season she’s repeatedly insulted as being no Stark - Lord Glover tells her House Stark is dead and Lady Mormont snidely calls her both a Lannister and a Bolton. Sansa answers that she will always be a Stark - and it is written on her body for all to see.

Jon is also wearing a single direwolf on his costume to match Sansa. However, his symbol is much more discrete in form and placement - probably both for reasons practical and symbolic. Sansa is the trueborn Stark after all. Jon’s cloak is a gift from Sansa, she made it herself - and the show actually takes the time to show us this:

We don’t see Sansa make the dress that is so important to her identity - but we get to witness her make a garment for Jon that is invested with a profound emotional, symbolic and political value. When Sansa gifts Jon with a cloak stamped with the Stark direwolf she wordlessly acknowledges and claims him as a Stark for all the world to see - the very thing that always has been Jon’s greatest wish! It is really very beautiful - she’s the one that makes a matching pair out of them (since she probably also made her own Stark fur).

Politically, Jon’s new cloak is also significant - not just because of the Stark sigil but also because it is just like the one Eddard Stark wore! The patriarch whom the North once were sworn to, for whom they went to war! It is a politically savy move because Sansa Stark understands that clothing isn’t just about covering your body, it is also a language.

(the two edits below are by @baelerion)

Season 7 builds on this symbolic aspect of Jon and Sansa’s costumes. Now they both wear a pair of direwolves facing each other. Notice how they wear the Stark sigil on the same part of their bodies in both seasons - on the chest and then at the neck! Once again they match.

The double direwolves are interesting because, unlike season 6, their stories have moved beyond becoming Starks (again). Now their narrative journey is about their partnership and that is signalled by the double direwolves. They have to learn to act in tandem. While they have their differences and instances of miscommunication, season 7 is about them acting as a ruling team, as King in the North and Lady of Winterfell - two titles that originally belonged to just one person. Once again they are being posited as two halves of a whole - the ruling pair of the North, which is formalized when Jon names Sansa his regent before he travels south.

Interestingly enough, Jon and Sansa’s double direwolves have their echoes in two earlier costumes. When Bran acted as Robb’s regent in season 2, he wore a gorget just like Jon’s - and when Robb attended the Red Wedding as KitN he wore a pair of direwolf clasps just like Sansa’s! Now the costumes are reversed, the gorget for the KitN and the clasps for his regent. An interesting detail that very likely is significant, considering Michele Clapton’s symbolic and narrative approach to the costumes of GoT.

Even down to the smallest detail, the costume design presents Jon and Sansa to the audience looking like a ruling couple; a couple that are on parallel narrative journeys. It is also worth noting that it is only Jon and Sansa who wear the Stark sigil in season 7! Neither Arya nor Bran appear to wear the Stark direwolf even after they’ve returned home to Winterfell. Perhaps that is because it is Jon and Sansa who are the leaders of House Stark and the North.

I’m going to return to the issue of image composition in relation to the Ruling Couple trope. When season 6 aired, HBO released this wonderful and very memorable photo. (I’ve reversed it for visual variety)

This beautiful image doesn’t actually match what we see on out TV screens! This is a still photograph, taken by a separate photographer (a unit still photographer). Not only do we not see this exact pose in the episode in question but it is also clear that this image has been through a graphics editor since the bluish tint from the episode has been removed in favour of a stronger visual contrast with the background so Jon and Sansa’s figures capture the eye immediately.

Still photographs like this are created specifically for publicity and marketing. This image became very popular with the media outlets that cover the show - not surprisingly since it is one of the most visually arresting images among the promotional material released to the press. This image became a very popular header picture in several reviews, think pieces and post-season articles, such as this one in TIME where a possible Jonsa marriage is discussed.

I hesitate to name this photo “iconic” because I think it is too early to use that designation. It is, however, an extremely striking image with the clear-cut profiles, the matching costumes and the sharp silhouettes against the light background - there’s no visual “clutter” to distract the eye from the regal couple. Jon and Sansa really stand out against the background and everything from the direction of their gazes to their matching colours and silhouettes tie them together visually as a couple. They look like a king and queen in this image and since it was a popular choice with the media outlets, it is an image that has repeatedly been presented to the people who follow the coverage of the show online. That kind of image repetition can also work to plant the idea of Jon and Sansa as a couple on the subconscious level.

This image is pretty much the incarnation of the line from the script about Jon and Sansa looking “beautiful and majestic”. They look like a King and Queen, there’s no need for crowns here.

No other couple has looked as regal as these two in the entire show!

In contrast, one of the most popular stills of Jon and Dany from season 7 is markedly different. @jonsalways has noted how Jon and Dany’s costumes never truly match, neither in colour nor in silhouette. That also is very apparent in this image. What is even more interesting is the fact that this composition doesn’t convey harmony and togetherness like the regal image above, which makes sense since Jon and Dany isn’t one the same page in this season. Not only do they have conflicting interests and goals, the one is also intent on subjugating the other. In short, they don’t look like a romantic couple.

In terms of body language Jon and Dany are completely out of sync and there’s a distinct lack of communication between them. Whilst Dany is gazing at Jon, her body turned towards him, Jon’s attention is elsewhere. He faces away from her and doesn’t even seem to acknowledge her presence. When compared with the JonSa image above, the background almost feels visually “cluttered”, which also means that it is much less attention-grabbing than the first image. When it comes to drawing visual attention to something, less is generally more.

As said, the regal image of Jon and Sansa doesn’t appear in the show itself. The closest the show matches the promotional image is this double profile shot:

This shot is of particular interest in relation to the Ruling Couple trope because the image composition adhere to a common iconographic schema for portraits of royal couples.

Fx in this coin minted for the 70th wedding anniversary of Queen Elizabeth II and Prince Philip.

Or this design for a stamp featuring Crown Prince Frederik and Crown Princess Mary of Denmark. These are but a few example from a vast number of offical royal portraits.

Throughout seasons 6 and 7, the show presents the audience with a large number of visuals that depict Jon and Sansa in a manner that is associated with ruling couples.

Interestingly enough, the Stark-centric cover of Entertainment Weekly in 2017 positively screams Northern Royal Family! This is of course a group portrait of a group of siblings (even though Jon is actually their cousin). However, not only is Sansa placed next to Jon (instead of fx between Bran and Arya), the combination of a standing male and a seated female evokes a time-honoured compositional template for official royal portraits. I’ve included a couple of examples for comparison.

Crown Princess Victoria and Prince Daniel of Sweden.

King Frederik IX and Queen Ingrid of Denmark.

Then there’s this lovely portrait of Crown Prince Frederik and Crown Princess Mary of Denmark.

This is a slightly different variation on the pose but it is also a popular one in royal portraiture. Notice how we also have a very similar image of Jon and Sansa in the last episode of season 6?

It is unclear whether the cinematographer consciously chose to model these shots of Jon and Sansa on popular visual conventions for royal portraiture. It is entirely possible that these similarities are coincidental to a certain degree. By that I mean that when we see a lot of pictures, certain types of composition becomes so familiar to us that we don’t register them consciously. However, I do think that the similarities between the image composition in the shots where Jon and Sansa are placed side-by-side are the result of some conscious choices, especially since directors and cinematographers often turn to art for inspiration (like Dan Sackheim took inspiration from Caravaggio’s art for Jon’s resurrection scene).

To be continued...

(GIFs and edits not mine)

#jon x sansa #jonsa #meta #all is subtext #romantic tropes #costume design #actuallyjonsa

260 notes · View notes

wizard-worm · 6 years

Text

Yo, for my English Lit A Level coursework, I wrote about Radio Silence & the canon. This is the essay, if anyone’s interested:

Radio Silence and other young adult novels ought to be included in the canon.

Young adult novels are often seen as less worthy of study than books for adults, even though many demonstrate the qualities seen in canonised literature. Radio Silence is an example of a novel which accurately represents the parts of society it is trying to reflect, contains valuable moral lessons, and is emotionally, thematically and narratively complex, all of which contribute to making a text valuable according to aesthetic theories, and yet the novel is overlooked perhaps merely because of its audience.

Young adult is a broad genre because it is simply an indication of the age of most readers, and within it exists the genres seen in adult literature: fantasy, thriller, science fiction etc. which makes the exclusion of young adult books nonsensical. It could even be more interesting to study because it is largely unexplored, so study wouldn’t involve repetition of interpretations that have been proposed before, as with books that have already been discussed for years. Perhaps because young adult books are intended for young people, those who have the authority to decide what is study-worthy assume that they must be simplified, when in fact there are a mix of more and less intellectual novels, just like in adult literature. The existence of “easy” novels in adult fiction doesn’t make people discount the others. Another assumption people seem to make is that young adult novels are thematically shallow, when in fact teenagers deal with many of the same existential questions adults do. Framing these themes from the perspective of teenagers shouldn’t make them any less significant.

While Radio Silence arguably shows a narrow perspective of the world since it is focused on a small part of the education system, so do many canonised texts, which are often more exclusive since they fail to represent groups which Radio Silence does, such as ethnic minorities and LGBT+ people. Austen’s novels are an example of this, with her focus on upper-class families, however even with her sharp focus on few characters, readers can still recognise and relate to the character archetypes.

Some canonised novels could be considered part of the young adult category, such as The Catcher in the Rye, but since they were written before the genre was widely recognised they were received in much the same way as adult books, meaning there was no bias against them. The fact books like this are seen as “academic” shows that adults are sometimes willing to see teenage perspectives as worthy of study, so perhaps the main barrier for modern young adult literature is the false belief that there aren’t intellectual books in the genre just because they have been put under a new publishing umbrella. In the future, critics may begin to take YA fiction into consideration for the canon, as has happened with other genres previously seen as unliterary. Crime fiction is an example of a genre which at first was thought of as commercial and purely “readerly”, but in recent years has been studied in English Literature courses, demonstrating the subjectivity of literary value.

Oseman was 21 when Radio Silence was published, which some might use as reason to exclude her novel from the canon. This mirrors the way female writers were excluded, resulting in authors such as the Bronte sisters using male pseudonyms. In the field of sociology, some theorise that modern society is an “age patriarchy,” meaning children are oppressed by adults to maintain the adult/child hierarchy. Both women and children have been seen as unintellectual, and this has been the basis for inequality. The fact that women have managed to challenge patriarchy to be included in the canon suggests that the same could happen for young people if the hierarchy is questioned.

Radio Silence deals with themes of mental health, sexuality, platonic and romantic love, family, and trying to find happiness. These themes are seen throughout literature, but when examined from a teenage perspective are often dismissed as self-indulgent. The themes are interwoven with discussion of the education system, which is the main subject. Frances, the protagonist, is successful academically but starting to realise she feels no enthusiasm towards school. Her friendship with Aled Last demonstrates the conflict between “school life” and “real life”. While they are just acquaintances, Frances expresses fear over “messing it up,” to which her mum responds “You’ve got lots of other friends,” and Frances says “They only like School Frances though. Not Real Frances.” The capitalisation emphasises the divide Frances feels between her “study machine” identity and her creative side. Her mum’s reply mirrors the way that adults oversimplify teenagers' problems, as also seen in the beginning. The headteacher is giving a speech on parents’ evening, and Aled has been chosen to give a talk about university. The teacher tells the audience Aled is going to Durham, “if his A levels go to plan, anyway!” Frances narrates that “All the parents laughed… Aled and I did not.” The short sentences create a curt tone which communicates Frances’ annoyance at the trivialisation of something which their futures rest on.

The effects of this invalidation are shown in how they see their own problems. Frances makes it clear that she doesn’t get any enjoyment from school, yet all of the decisions she makes centre around getting into university. She says “whenever I wasn’t doing school work I felt like I was wasting my time” reflecting the amount of pressure that is put on students. This tends to have a negative impact on their mental health, seen in the case of Aled isolating himself at university. Adults not taking teenagers seriously worsens this problem because they don’t feel able to seek help, since whenever they voice their feelings, they are brushed off.

When Frances is panicking about one of her exams she feels embarrassed texting Aled: “This sounds really dumb I know I really shouldn’t be so upset about it haha.” Through this Oseman subverts the stereotype of teenagers as uncaring as Aled sympathises with Frances rather than dismissing her and this support means, towards the end, when Frances is beginning to question the expectations she’s always put on herself, she stands up for her own feelings when she doesn’t get into Cambridge. She narrates “You probably think I’m a whiny teenager. And yeah, it was all in my head, probably. That doesn’t mean it wasn’t real.”

This is also an example of one of the ways in which Radio Silence is narratively interesting. The entire book is told in first person, but the “fourth wall” is often broken with Frances addressing the reader. This creates the effect of a story being told to you by a friend, which encourages empathy. It also exposes her as a somewhat unreliable narrator when it comes to the subplot of Carys’ disappearance. Frances speaks with conviction about why Carys disappeared, making statements like “It was my fault she ran away,” but later on it’s revealed that Frances’ perception of Carys has been distorted. This adds realism by reflecting the way people tend to think, believing ourselves to be more significant than we are. When Carys is introduced, it becomes clear Frances was fairly insignificant in Carys’ life, though the reader is previously convinced by Frances’ perspective.

The narrative also switches from past to present tense during the moments of direct address to the reader as well as during a pivotal chapter in which the characters are drunk. There are analepses to something that happened two years ago with Carys, but told in present tense. Oseman uses repetition such as “Aled was saying, Aled is saying,” to communicate Frances’ confused perception of time which realistically reproduces the experience of intoxication as well as highlighting Frances’ unreliability as even she is aware of the contradictions of her perception.

The subtlety of the portrayal of a toxic parent is also perhaps more well-crafted than many adult-oriented books, which often jump straight to the most extreme cases of abuse. These are important, but aren’t as engagingly ambiguous as Carol Last, who walks a fine line between strict parenting and psychological torment. The complexity of the situation creates a moral debate and would provide an engaging topic of discussion, since she is a more subversive villain than typical flat “evil” characters because it’s not clear what her true intentions are, as well as being a character one might encounter in real life.

Her actions are almost justifiable; she has Aled’s dog put down while he was away but she could rationalise it because of the dog’s old age. Frances aptly describes the disconcerting coldness Carol possesses without really doing anything wrong: “She looked terrifying… a smile that said “Can I get you a cup of tea?” and eyes that said “I will burn everything you love.”” Aled struggles to talk about her, and after a lengthy conversation Aled finally manages to simply say “I just really don’t like my mum.” and Frances realises he was struggling because “It sounds like such a juvenile thing.” This anti-climax creates mimesis since this conclusion lacks emotional closure.

The inclusion of modern technology also adds interest. Realistically, a significant amount of these character’s communication is done through text. Some might argue that focusing on technology, which develops so quickly, can date a text, but it is an important part of modern culture that can’t be ignored. Including text messages is useful because the author doesn’t have to obey grammatical rules, making it more expressive: “HOPE YOU’RE FEELING PARTY AF” and “it’s honestly fine!!!!” In the past when technological developments have been made, they were incorporated into literature, such as with the emergence of epistolary novels after the postal system was set up.

Oseman also uses a story within a story that incorporates technology. Universe City is a fantasy podcast which tells the story of Radio Silence, a character trapped in a dystopian monster-infested university. Occasionally between chapters there are transcripts of an episode, and through this, Oseman explores how the internet allows new kinds of creativity while providing insight into Aled’s character as the podcast creator. It is revealed that Universe City has been Aled’s way of reaching out to his sister after she disappeared. The transcripts are littered with metaphors and analogies for Aled’s mental health and life events, such as the motif of fire: “I see you in every fire that lights,” “The fire that touched you must have come from a star,” which refers to his mum burning Carys’ clothes just before she disappeared. It’s a clever way of including a more literary style without interfering with the realistic first-person voice. The issue of prioritising literary technique over realism is shown in young adult novel The Fault In Our Stars where the teenage characters say things like “My thoughts are stars I cannot fathom into constellations,” which some might see as more “literary” but which also seem pretentious and false.

Ultimately, Radio Silence incorporates many aspects of canonised literature that critics believe to be valuable: universal themes, complex characters, interweaving plots, interesting narrative techniques, and it is innovative through incorporating technology. Negative stereotyping of teenagers leads to dismissal of young adult literature, but as the internet allows young people to become more vocal, perhaps young adult literature will become more accepted.

@chronicintrovert (u dont have to read this if u dont want to but idk i’d be interested if someone wrote about my book so tagging u just in case)

#alice oseman #radio silence #obviously don't plagiarise because you could get in trouble #i was with AQA and got like an A/B for this essay #not exactly sure #but I got an A overall for the whole A Level :)#english lit #english lit essay #a levels #i had so much more to say but the word limit was 1500 and I wrote 3k and had to cut so much

2 notes · View notes

aion-rsa · 3 years

Text

Search Party Season 4 Review (Spoiler-Free)

https://ift.tt/3bsJQeN

This review is based on all ten half-hour episodes of Search Party season 4 and contains no spoilers.

“But you told the truth, and the truth set you free…”

Search Party debuted as a dark and provocative mystery and, even though each season has subscribed to that model, the show has evolved and become radically different each year. It’s not unusual for plot-heavy series to play chicken with their narrative in this way, but Search Party triumphs through each step of the progressively dark path that Dory heads down.

Search Party season 3 actively had the audience question if Dory is even a good person and if she deserves freedom for the lives that she took. Dory’s subtle transformation (and Alia Shawkat’s phenomenal performance) and the tension that it creates in the audience are Search Party’s greatest magic tricks. Search Party season 4 once more reinvents itself, but with a cyclical nature that inherently brings everything back to the beginning.

Season four of Search Party, much like season one, revolves around a search party coming together to find a missing person. However, this time Dory is the one that’s missing and in need of rescue, rather than leading the charge. Dory felt metaphorically lost back in the show’s first season, but now her destructive actions and life have caught up with her and placed her in a literal prison in addition to the psychological one that’s haunted her for seasons. So far Dory has been able to avoid extreme fates like a jail sentence or her own death, but her current situation is somehow worse than either of these scenarios. It’s karmically cathartic to see Dory pay for her blinding narcissism and ballooning God complex, but the psychological torture and brainwashing that she endures pushes the character into territory that’s deeply surprising and satisfying. It makes Search Party’s fourth season its most ambitious and important year yet.

Dory is the priority in Search Party, but every season has shown her entire group of friends in various levels of flux where they’re left to question not only their friendship, but also themselves. Characters have had to confront who they truly are over the course of the first three seasons, but this year forces everyone into inauthentic roles that challenge them in deeper ways than ever before. Dory is trapped in an actual Stockholm syndrome hostage situation, but Portia, Elliott, and Drew suffer comparable identity crises where they must hide behind facades that begin to feel normal. The previous seasons have had everyone panicking over the future, but now there’s a new tension that’s formed from how these characters are lulled into a false sense of normalcy. They don’t even know that there’s a problem to solve.

Search Party is still a wickedly funny show that knows exactly when to shift from one extreme to another, but this season really ramps up the suspense as Dory finds herself in actual danger. There are moments this season—many of them—that are genuinely scary and Search Party allows itself to veer into horror territory more than ever before, but in a way that feels natural with the increasing nihilism that’s infected the black comedy. There’s psychotic behavior and disturbing set pieces in this season that people would be talking about for years if they happened in a David Fincher film.

A more suspenseful score as well as stylized lighting and camera angles all reflect this newfound intensity. There are also nods to A Clockwork Orange, Silence of the Lambs, and Psycho, which are all major influences on this season. Search Party does an excellent job with the pacing of this tense plot and how big certain moments become. There are a few instances where the story verges on implausibility, but it never ruins the illusion or insults the intelligence of the audience. It’s a very patient season.

If Search Party’s last season explored the danger around “cult of personality” figures and how true crime monsters can be deified, then this season examines the level of obsession that can grow out of the opposite party. Dory becomes a victim, but her past behavior unintentionally gives Cole Escola’s Chip (a.k.a. “The Twink”) vindication and helps him reach this unstable place. Before this season I would have said that it’s impossible to imagine Escola tap into the kind of energy that Kathy Bates channels in Misery, but they reach a terrifying place here. It’s a role that would be so easy to go over the top with or reduce to a caricature, but Escola makes sure that Chip remains unpredictable and frightening, yet also vulnerable in an unsettling way.

So much of this season comes down to Chip’s bond with Dory and this turns into a phenomenal showcase for Shawkat. She’s routinely done her best work in this show, but in this season she sets a new standard. Dory gets dragged through an avalanche of emotions while in Chip’s care and Shawkat rises to the occasion while she navigates through this nuanced role. There is so much that she needs to convey and the scenes between Chip and Dory grow more electric and uncomfortable as the season continues.

Search Party Season 3 and The Trial of the Millennial

By Alec Bojalad

The rest of Search Party’s cast remains electric and their chemistry as a group is still one of this show’s strongest weapons. It’s deeply satisfying to just watch everyone bounce off of each other, but this season really analyzes their friendship, what it’s based on, and if it’s even real or just been manufactured out of convenience. Everyone’s individual storylines are hysterical, but Portia channels heavy Scream 3 vibes here when she’s cast in a true crime reenactment that forces her to live through her traumatic past, yet through a unique perspective. This season really looks at the limits or friendship and the lengths that friends will go for each other, even when it’s not necessarily healthy behavior.

Everyone’s antics this season also only confirm how Search Party is truly the perfect viewing for anyone in their early thirties. I’m still astounded by the clarity and authenticity that’s reached in the malaise and free floating fear of Dory and company as they attempt to figure out what they want out of life and determine where they belong. This season asks difficult questions and it’s just as much about the fragility of Gen Yers and Millennials as it is a comedy about a kidnapping.

Search Party proves that Dory entertains dark and bad impulses, but it also highlights how maybe that’s kind of normal. She’s exhibited serious doubts about herself and this season doesn’t just acknowledge this, but it argues that everyone is flawed and vulnerable to a comparable degree. Doesn’t receiving enjoyment out of Dory’s poor decisions as she digs herself deeper into this mess also reflect a similar level of malfunction? These new Search Party episodes painstakingly explore this difficult road to acceptance and recovery. This season tackles the pain that consumes people and searches for a way to live with it, accept it, and heal, rather than hide away in delusion.

cnx.cmd.push(function() { cnx({ playerId: "106e33c0-3911-473c-b599-b1426db57530", }).render("0270c398a82f44f49c23c16122516796"); });

Search Party’s previous season lands on the idea that Dory perhaps deserves the bad things that happen to her, but this season elegantly reframes that narrative and actually turns Dory into an empathetic victim. The character gets broken down and forced to search her soul in an ugly manner that’s typically not reserved for comedies. Search Party season 4 features these fantastic characters at their lowest lows. It’s challenging territory, but it showcases just how articulate this comedy is and it leads to many of the most dramatic and hilarious moments from the entire series. It’s possible that there will still be more Search Party to come, but these four seasons tell an exceptional and raw story.

The post Search Party Season 4 Review (Spoiler-Free) appeared first on Den of Geek.

from Den of Geek https://ift.tt/35pX9cj

#aion-rsa #Den of Geek

0 notes

sortingoutayoungcontrarian · 6 years

Text

I recently typed the name Christopher Hitchens into the search bar on WordPress and was very disappointed with the top result. This result was an ignorant evaluation of who Christopher was as well an evaluation of his book “god is not Great. The author of this “evaluation” was clearly a fundamental Christian along with those who commented on the post thus far… Obviously, they hated Christopher and did their best to discredit everything about the man. I could not help but be a contrarian. I shall copy and paste the exchange below. I shall update per reply.

Me:

Hmm I wonder if you would find Hitchens’ points valid if they were made by a compilation of ancient misogynistic people who believed that genocide, dispossession of land, slavery, polyamorous incest, virgin-child-sacrifice-scapegoating, and baby genitalia mutilation was acceptable (all of these acts adamantly encouraged even), and then translated by a committee of megalomaniacs lead by a man who boiled his wife in a bathtub… All of whom believed the universe revolved around them in every sense the phrase entails and murdered those who said differently whilst claiming absolute morality. The reason why atheists do not mind that Hitchens may or may not have plagiarized is that they value what is true and don’t care how they get that truth. Christians, however, claim the bible to be the inerrant word of god despite its countless plagiarisms and contradictions.

If you could respond to those points which Hitchens made rather than the one he obviously did not care about (the validity of Jesus), then maybe your thoughts of critique would hold more water, maybe even have an atheist flicker with doubt . To be quiet honest, I have a very hard time believing you actually read any book by Hitchens’, due to the fact that his main focus was not to refute the overall accuracy of the bible but rather reveal the overall hypocrisy. You chose to give a general evaluation of a man by highlighting an argument he argued carelessly because there was no need at all to even argue it. Or maybe you were just scared to touch on the points he made that would open the eyes of any free thinking rational mind to see the lie they have succumbed to.

His response:

Your first paragraph has a large number of mischaracterizations similar to what is typical of Hitchens. You seem to have learned him well. Unfortunately, upon close examination, it is sophistry through and through, nothing but a hollow shell of an argument. In but one point: Flatly, circumcision is not mutilation, and to phrase it like you have is not making an argument, but merely using hollow emotional rhetoric. I gave cold explanation of a point, and you respond with emotionalism. This is typical of modern atheism, which Hitchens exemplifies. It always amazes me that atheists deal so much in emotionalism. Personally I prefer reason and logic.

Concerning what I have stated, I backed my claims. For example, see the first link in the post above. As to the Canaanites, I have responded to that as well.

Also please take note of my comment policy.

Me:

Thank you, I am proud to have learned Hitchens! I simply could not do nothing about such an inaccurate “evaluation” of a great man. As to baby genitalia mutilation, I was not making an argument but stating the fact of the matter, a beautiful baby is born and on the eighth day take a blade to its genitalia. There is nothing fallacious about that claim. If it is a semantical issue, the greek translation for “mutilate” is from a compound of kata and temno (to cut); a cutting down (off), i.e. Mutilation (ironically) — concision. The greek word used in the bible for mutilation is “katatomé” which translates– to cut. While circumcision is “peritomē” which translates — to cut around. Look for yourself, please. Studying in-depth interlinear commentaries in greek after graduating seminary school is what drove me away from the hypocrisy that is the church. I am not an atheist, as you assumed in your lazily mistaken attempt of ad hominem, but I merely saw the bible for what it was; a perfect business plan to enslave the people in a time where theocracy reigned. What sane person would not respond with emotionalism over this? If you apply James 2:24 to the role christianity has played throughout the narrative of history you will never again be amazed by the emotionalism that apparently surprises you in atheists however. It causes good people to do bad things, when one takes the focus off themselves and the box they locked themselves in due to fear of losing after-life insurance the bigger picture reveals itself. It is a lame excuse for wars birthed from an ancient inherited trait of tribalism.

You back your claims with a text you cannot prove. As to the Canaanites, I am always amazed by how christians separate real-life and their pretend world of faith as if in admittance to it not being real; Freudian slip esque. Like a child does when playing cops and robbers and their mom calls them inside for dinner and they have to break character in order to reply, “coming mom”. For example, I was stepping outside the realm of the bible and into empirical accounts in history books. who said I was talking about genocide mentioned in the bible only? I never brought up the Canaanites, you were mistakenly assuming (again) atop your omniscience tower. I was referring to, as Hitchens was, the rules for dispossession of land and the slavery of the previous land owners outlined in Leviticus 25, specifically verses 44-46. A lame excuse for justifying lust of what their neighbor has. Leviticus is the same book that outlines the pagan tradition of sacrificing life, (e)scapegoating responsibility. Chapter 25 in Leviticus was most cited chapter in the bible within memoirs of protestants during the establishing of the USA… and people wonder why black lives matter is heading a postmodernist movement.

You still avoided addressing the topic of (1) incest, (2) misogyny (which, unfortunately for all the women of the bible, in this context implies polygamy allowed for the man alone), and (3) The irrevocable evil, with a recorded historical background that goes back thousands of years before the bible linked to ancient savage polytheistic religions : scapegoating responsibility of sins through child sacrifice.

These were the main points of Hitchens, yes? I don’t think one could give a fair “General Evaluation of Christopher Hitchens” without addressing his main points. It seems as if you are trying to hide the reader from the points made by a man who had won countless debates with the leading apologists of all the major religions. A man who is now dead and unable to defend himself… If you could respond to those claims rather than attempting to define who I am or what I believe in then your critiques would be much more (logically/reasonably) respectable. I do apologize if I crossed a line defined in your comment policy. If you would prefer to reply privately I would still appreciate hearing your defense. Whether your audience hears you out or not is not upon my conscious. I would hope they follow you in order to hear the truth rather than feed confirmation bias. I have many issues with your past posts as well that I could refute using the bible, if you are interested. I am honestly just curious and value discussions from those that have come to opposing conclusion.

His Response:

As my comment policy states, this is not a discussion board and we do no go down endless rabbit trails here. Humoring you briefly is all I will do.

–You pointed out correctly that the Greek terms for cut around and cut off are two distinct terms. In no sense is circumcision mutilation. You agree the claim is incorrect. –As for horrible things like incest, the Bible accurately portrays history but does not condone these practices. It forbids incest and shows the folly of marrying many wives, for all who do so are shown to inherit the problems these practices create. –As to the Bible’s treatment of women, any claim that the Bible has a low view of women is completely false. –Child sacrifice was practiced by the Canaanites, which is one reason God commanded they be wiped out. Israel did what you and Hitchens seem to want them to do, which is not actually kill all the Canaanites. As I explained, this resulted in Israel starting these practices, which God stopped by sending Babylon to take Israel into captivity. Please portray the whole account or stop criticizing.

I did indeed deal with Hitchens in a fair manner. All signs point to Hitchens copying from earlier atheist writings, then not even doing the research to check out whether the claims were true. He spent the rest of his life traveling around repeating these claims with bluster, yet they are completely, entirely, totally untrue. His claims about virgin birth myths are completely false. Hitchens did not even do a magazine grade level of research on these items, yet repeated them for years.

The claims in this post stand.

Per my comment policy, we will stop here.

... And then he disabled the comments...

#christopher hitchens #atheism

8 notes · View notes

recentanimenews · 4 years

Text

OPINION: Here's Why Berserk Is the Perfect Blend of Shonen and Shoujo

My tastes in media have shifted in all sorts of directions throughout the years, but there’s one constant: Berserk is still my favorite manga and my favorite work of fiction, period. It was an absolute game-changer for me when I first experienced Miura’s hellish fantasy in early high school. I was amazed to see a manga that amalgamated so many appealing and variegated concepts, emotions, and aesthetic elements into one cohesive package. Miura’s world was not only frightening, but also beautiful, and even in my adolescent opinion, I thought it had the most painstakingly gorgeous hand-drawn illustrations I had ever seen. I was shocked a dark fantasy existed that blended the best of shounen and seinen, with the emotional depth and character development more native to shoujo.

In recent times, I found out my personal interpretation of Berserk might be more factually on point than I realized. Kentaro Miura, the creator, remarked in one of a Crunchyroll interview that Fist of the North Star greatly influenced Berserk. Miura also mentioned in the official Berserk Official Guidebook that the character Serpico was meant to mirror Andre from the acclaimed European-inspired shoujo Rose of Versailles. To celebrate the anniversary of the Berserk manga, I’ll explore how the depressingly overlooked Lost Children Arc — in particular, volumes 14-16 — embodies Miura’s unique mesh of the best of both shounen and shoujo, resulting in an entirely original and moving narrative. Because of this, Berserk is rightfully branded (pun intended, tee-hee) as a monolithic manga masterpiece for the ages. Read on for more.

Image via Dark Horse Comics

The Lost Children Arc is, in my opinion, the most underrated of all Berserk arcs. The short saga rarely gets discussed in online circles and has been skipped in both anime and game incarnations of the series (even in the most recent musou-style PS4 Berserk title). There are good reasons why, as the arc features some very graphic depictions of abuse and violence toward children. Despite its sensitive and graphic nature, the Lost Children Arc provides very cautionary insights about the cyclical nature/consequences of abuse toward kids. Miura is at his most compassionate here, encouraging readers to look at the ugliness of life straight in the eye while simultaneously showing the beauty of humanity’s indomitable will to survive.

Berserk's central character, Guts, meets Jill — a young girl and the protagonist of the arc — in a manner somewhat similar to the first meeting between Kenshiro and Rin in Fist of the North Star: The Movie. Guts saves Jill from a cruel group of men who kidnapped her, just as Kenshiro saves Rin from, well, a cruel group of violent men too. Guts goes to Jill’s hometown, which is plagued by demonic elves who eat humans and steal the children in the village. The central antagonist is Rosine, an Apostle who sacrificed the lives of her parents in order to obtain demonic powers, and who turns stolen children into murderous elves. Rosine and Jill were the closest of friends growing up, and both experienced the same level of abuse from their respective fathers. These two abusive father figures exemplify the unique way Berserk departs from shounen like Fist of the North Star.

Berserk borrows FotNS's depiction of the dreary lives led by many of the average inhabitants of its bleak universe. But whereas FotNS almost always portrays the average person/family of the post-apocalyptic world within a positive light, Berserk offers no easy dichotomy. Outside of the main characters and villains, FotNS is a roughly binary world split between the muscular roaming murderers and the hapless, regular people trying to survive their grim existence. Berserk injects a much starker component by locating the grisly realities of household abuse, refusing to portray the average family as uniformly faultless, saintly individuals. Jill’s father is an embittered alcoholic who abuses both his wife and daughter, and Rosine’s father does the same to her. Miura’s Berserk, unlike FotNS, is a disturbing — yet sadly realistic — world where even average individuals embody the same cruelty of their environment, where horror is focalized within the everyday, as well. Showing that disenfranchised, suffering individuals are capable of continuing cycles of abuse gives Berserk a nuanced edge that sets it apart from other shounen/seinen.

Image via Dark Horse Comics

In a more overt way, the Lost Children Arc further drives home its realist message via heavily deconstructed fantasy shoujo tropes that contrast from the norm. In a show like Sailor Moon, for example, Usagi and the Sailor Guardians must transform into their magical forms, and use their magical powers to fend off demons and save their loved ones along with the Earth. Their "regular" day-to-day human selves are not enough to defeat the evil beings and trials they face. Though it’s debatable, as I could see someone referencing love and friendship as the "true" means of triumph in Sailor Moon, I see its fantastical elements as the primary vehicles through which salvation, unity, and victory is achieved.

In contrast, Berserk does the inverse and uses escapist fantasy elements and magical powers to express a disturbing, sobering message. In one sequence, Jill is horrified that the demon elves actually kill each other in their mock warfare activities, and Rosine tells her they’re simply "playing human" in those games. Here, Miura uses the fantastical, mystical environment of Rosine and her misty valley to reenact and highlight the gruesome realities of human cruelty. In this way, fantasy is a vehicle to point toward the grim, bare facts of human reality, rather than the typical usage of fantasy as an escape from the hard truths of our existence. However, even though Miura uses Rosine’s fantastical powers as a means to communicate the ugliness of human behavior, he simultaneously adds a sympathetic layer to her character that expresses a deeply compassionate look at how enduring exploitation can easily reproduce horror and suffering.

The maltreatment and alienation that led Rosine to sacrifice her parents and become a terrifying demonic being feel very understandable given the circumstances of her life. Although Rosine’s actions are utterly indefensible, the manga still invites a somewhat compassionate reading of her character. It’s hard not to feel some degree of empathy for Rosine, a young girl who simply longed to live in a better world where adults did not beat her and make others suffer needlessly. Gaining power with the Behelit was an anguished cry from her inconsolable heart that understandably — though not justifiably — rejected the endless harshities of life.

Finally, Miura creates further sympathetic nuance around this unique take on fantasy the moment Rosine dies. Rosine personally identified with a fairytale about a lonely outcast child named Peekaf and expressed deep sorrow that she found no elves when she visited the Misty Valley. Puck — the Elf that follows Guts and provides much-needed comedic relief throughout all of Berserk — reveals that Elves likely did live in the Misty Valley, and his very existence proves the meaning of the story of tragic Peekaf. Rosine experiences a brief blip of comfort in her last moments as she tearfully realizes the fantasy story she clung to for dear life was not entirely false or meaningless. Here Miura adds another layer of complexity by reminding us that make-believe has traces of important truths, and those fantastical narratives can still help us even if the reality of life isn’t as bright or as happy as we hoped.

Image via Dark Horse Comics

In addition to the complexity given to both secondary "regular" characters and antagonists, Berserk uses Guts to defy common tropes of male shonen protagonists. Unlike the rather "righteous" stoic purity of someone like Kenshiro, Guts is gleefully ruthless against his enemies and does some dastardly stuff to achieve a win. Throughout the arc, Guts uses Jill as a hostage, almost slices her in half, and then kills what turns out to be demonic versions of formerly human children. This makes Guts appear to be more of a "villain" on the surface than even Rosine and her elves, which is a rather uncommon inversion within the world of shonen. Jill outright refers to Guts as the one who looked more like a "terrifying monster" at the end of Volume 15, and Farnese and her men are all convinced that Guts is the feared Hawk of Darkness, an ominous harbinger of world chaos. Despite this, Miura graces Guts with immense in-depth emotional development and refuses to keep him in a stationary, one-dimensional box.

In one example, Guts recognizes the bruises on Jill’s body with an empathetic look, having also been victimized by a surrogate father figure named Gambino. At the end of the arc, Guts tells Jill to look around him at all the darkness, and tells Jill with tenderness, “There is no paradise for you to escape to.” Guts says she’ll only find a battlefield, and tells Jill to return to the personal battlefield that is her life. Both these moments carefully and touchingly imbue Guts with a compassionate side beneath his veil of ruthlessness, giving him a level of sympathetic intricacy more common to shoujo characters. I love most shonen protagonists, but I admit their emotional palette is often woefully limited to masculinist tenacity/stoicism. This makes a figure like Guts stand out all the more due to his multifaceted, organic character development.

In the last scene of the arc, Jill remarks after Guts leaves that "the mist was pushed out by the flames," leaving only a clear view that did not possess the spectacle of flying in the sky with Rosine. Jill realizes she can’t be as violent as Guts or run away like Rosine, but she can at least try "crying and shouting and biting" her way through, and "maybe change something." These last words by Jill highlight the most powerful message of the arc: The world is overwhelmingly cruel, but so long as we can accept and address it with eyes clear and open, there is hope to survive and live to see a better day. For me, I have never seen another shonen or shoujo express this notion with the same audacity, depth, and idiosyncrasy as Berserk. I think I'll carry Miura’s words through my own battlefield. What do you think Berserk does best as a manga? Which Berserk arc is your favorite? Let me know in the comments below!

Do you love anime? Do you love writing? If you have an idea for a features story, pitch it to Crunchyroll Features!

By: [email protected]

#Anime #News #Latest in Anime News by Crunchyroll!

1 note · View note

pyjamapolitics · 7 years

Text

4.01 News Cycle

Prescient as always, Madam Secretary opens it’s fourth season by reaffirming it will not shy away from current and pressing real world issues. Despite talking place in an alternate universe where the President of the United States is not a giant orange moron, (or f***ing moron as his Secretary of State likes to refer to him) Secretary Elizabeth McCord is confronted with the growing threat of Fake News. When a foreign official dies suspiciously during a one on one meeting with Elizabeth at the United Nations General Assembly, she becomes the subject of a Fake News story identifying her as the murderer.

‘Fake News’ is a term that is thrown around far too often in the current political climate as a catchall to dismiss any negative story. In this episode the true definition of Fake News is well illustrated and it’s danger highlighted. Disinformation has always played a role in the body politic and the world at large, but with the advent of social media it has become a prevalent and powerful tool of bad actors and ordinary citizens alike. From the Brexit referendum to the elections in the United States, France, Germany and others, Fake News and the weaponisation of information through social media have influenced people and events on an unprecedented scale. But now Fake News has evolved to become a weapon, not only of elections, but of anyone with a message to push and a platform from which to push it. with the sole purpose of attacking truth and reason to erode trust in democratic institutions and democracy itself.

Two of the three most important scenes in this episode are Nadine explaining the source of the Fake News story to the Secretary before her interview, and the Secretary’s interview itself.

“It began on a conspiracy mongering fringe website called Champion of Facts, it spread through social media at an alarmingly fast rate, has been retweeted and shared through countless sources. What’s not helping is the hundred plus phone calls that Mr Bento made to our office… apparently you were avoiding him because he had something on you. Then you became hysterical, revealing choice of words, so you stabbed him in the chest during an unscheduled closed door meeting with him at the UN.”

Fake News stories, perhaps not of this magnitude, are created in exactly the same way every single day, in an attempt to influence people on almost every issue. A small shred of truth is taken, twisted into something sinister and spread across social media. The hundred calls to the State Department, Elizabeth being Ex-CIA, an unscheduled meeting, of course she murdered him. With her bare hands or was it a cocktail glass? Leave it up to the readers of this Fake News to decide, it doesn’t matter as long as the seed of “she’s a murderer’ has been sown. Something else worth noting is Nadine’s comment that “hysterical” was a revealing choice of words, which highlights the coded language used to describe women that act as a sexist dog whistle to those who subscribe to that kind of discriminatory thinking.

Before her interview Elizabeth tells Nadine she thinks “there’s still a strong divide between legitimate news sources and fringe based hooey.” but during the interview is ambushed with a statement by Senator Morejon threatening a congressional investigation into the incident.

“This is obvious crackpot theorising, which quite possibly is the work of a disinformation campaign by a foreign power. What Senator Morejon is doing by legitimising this story is not just immoral and unethical, it undermines the stability of democratic government. Reliable information is the bedrock of any institution, be it science, government or private enterprise, if citizens can’t tell the difference between fact and fiction then the entire project of civilisation turns to dust… By bringing legitimacy to a ridiculous murder claim against me he’s using the tactics not just of dirty politics but of warfare, because it’s dictatorial, it’s autocratic and it’s un-american. Furthermore a mainstream media outlet ought to have a better understanding of it’s responsibility to the public and refuse to signal boost these kinds of outright lies.”

The mainstream media, who in our world as well as the world of Madam Secretary, largely continue to abdicate their responsibility to place the truth above all else in favour of ratings and increased advertising revenue, no longer act as the so called fourth estate. False equivalencies between the facts and blatant lies are made on almost every issue and presented as a balanced debate. There are not two sides to every issue. Framing everything as a debate and leaving the public to draw their own conclusions is a dereliction of journalism’s duty. Journalism should be objective, but not to the point that it excludes what is true and what can be proven.

One of the things that makes Madam Secretary such a refreshing show of the political persuasion is the State Department senior staff. We’ve seen relationships and bonds grow in and amongst Elizabeth and her staff for 3 seasons now, reaching a level of familiarity and comfort with their roles and backstories. The battle of the Chiefs of Staff made for a funny yet full circle moment when Elizabeth’s Chief of Staff, Nadine met the White House Chief of Staff Russell Jackson’s angry outburst with one of her own, thinking back to the first season it’s hard to imagine Nadine defending Elizabeth with such fervour yet now she is as protective of Elizabeth as Russell is of the President. It’s also hard to imagine Blake not making wonderfully pithy comments every episode, a favourite of mine this episode being “I believe that’s Mr Jackson’s knock ma’am.”

Russell does raise some important points during his dressing-down, however angrily they were delivered. “In the age of the internet a lot of nut jobs reach just as wide an audience as the Secretary of State.” with the fact that 22% of the American people believe Elizabeth is a murderer being testament to that. Elizabeth’s ability to effectively do her job does hinge on her credibility and so Nadine makes her finest point ““Sunlight is said to be the best of disinfectants.” the only way we can possibly fight this rumour is with the truth.”

The truth in this case becomes rather complicated. The deceased Mr Bento who was the assistant vice minister of Timor-Leste, a Southeast Asian nation, had been trying to contact Elizabeth to blow the whistle on the impending sale of island atoll’s to a powerful Mexican drug cartel. The cartel had infiltrated Timor-Leste’s government at the highest level, threatening it’s President into the sale to establish a shipping base, leaving Timor-Leste in danger of becoming a narco-state. The cartel poisoned Mr Bento using a rare compound that only the Russian’s and they were known to use for homicide, the State Department team managed to piece the story together from this fact.

Once the team’s theory is corroborated Elizabeth believes the situation in Timor-Leste can begin to be righted with both American and Chinese intervention. Elizabeth meets with Foreign Minister Chen to gain Chinese backing and while doing so highlights the increasing globalisation of Fake News and the need for international cooperation to combat it.

“This has something to do with everyone’s troubles in the news… this is what we’re all facing if we don’t fight back against bad actors weaponising the news, the Colima cartel is manipulating this narrative. Right now they’re focused on me, tomorrow? Could be you… even your regulations won’t stop some guy in Macedonia being paid to manufacture clickbait, we’re all going to lose this battle if we don’t stand together and call it out.”

No episode of Madam Secretary is complete without some Team McCord time. The other very serious event Elizabeth dealt with this episode is Alison leaving for college and her inability to be there to help her move in. While it started out as a sweet display of motherly fretting that she was missing this parental right of passage, we learn that Elizabeth’s feelings go deeper than that. When she tells her brother how hard she found moving into college alone by herself as an orphan, her desire to help Ali move in takes on greater significance. Elizabeth’s recollection of her own experience underscores her commitment to be as involved and loving a mother as she can be, and we know she is. When Elizabeth manages to meet Ali and Henry there the delight is palpable and made for a special Team McCord moment.

The third of what i consider to be the three most important scenes of this episode was Elizabeth coming home. The man beside the woman as Dr Henry McCord once dubbed himself, proved once again why he is the best fictional husband currently on television. Henry and Elizabeth talked out the episode’s events, with Henry informing his wife that a snap poll now showed only 12% of American’s thinking that she’s murderer and listening to Elizabeth voice her fear that “It’s scary how fast everyone jumped aboard that train, even scarier to think that a drug syndicate can use the power of Fake News to rattle a country and convince them to lose faith in their government officials.” presenting one of the biggest challenges democracy now faces. Henry promised he’s working on it then provides the perfect distraction for the beleaguered Secretary of State. This balance of communication, deep understanding, support and affection is a true representation of a healthy marriage and what makes us love the McCords so much.

The final scene, featuring a nice cameo by the episode’s director and MOFOTUS Morgan Freeman, where Elizabeth intends to warn Senator Morejon that he’s playing a dangerous game ends with him issuing his own warning.

“In this brave new world of scattered partisan media where unscrupulous outlets are desperate for any juicy new story and political plot twist that they can find, i believe i can chip away at Dalton’s approval ratings quickly and efficiently. 12% of the American public thinks that you’re a murderer Madam Secretary. I can work with that.”

The Senator hits on a key aspect of Fake News, it’s power lies in it’s ability to affect the way people think. To make them doubt and mistrust institutions, elected officials and mainstream media outlets. To sow discord and divisiveness amongst citizens. To make people question reality and replace it with a fabrication. Regardless if a story is eventually debunked or not, once those who are susceptible to Fake News believe it, they will not be convinced otherwise. Whether or not Fake News is a continuing theme in Madam Secretary, it is a dangerous daily threat to democracy and free thought in all our lives.

#madam secretary #madam secretary review #4.01 #spoilers #pyjamapolitics #season four reviews

1 note · View note

inhumansforever · 7 years

Photo

Karnak #6 Review

spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers

The Flaw of All Things comes to its existential conclusion, by the creative team of Warren Ellis, Roland Boschi and Dan Brown. Full recap and review following the jump.

Acted on the behest of the secret spy organization, Shield, Karnak has ventured out to track down a young new Inhuman named Adam Roderick who has been abducted by a shadowy terrorist organization. In his pursuit of Adam, Karnak discovered that the young Inhuman had manifested incredible reality-warping powers. Adam had made himself into a god, his former abductors becoming his loyal acolytes. Adam’s powers enable him to grant onto his followers everything they wanted, a sense of purpose and utter contentment. Yet Karnak knew that all that Adam created was illusion; the reality that Adam crafted was artificial and inauthentic, his followers were made cattle stripped of their humanity. To this extent, Karnak has deemed Adam an effrontery to the fabric of truth; and he has pledged himself to destroy Adam and put an end to this existential threat.

In the previous issue, Karnak had interrogated one of Adam’s acolytes, a powerful being known as The Painter. In this interrogation, The Painter was able to hone in on Karnak’s insecurities, highlighting that the false sense of meaning provided by Adam is truly no better nor worse than the abject nihilism entailed in Karnak’s philosophy. Karnak didn’t take kindly to this challenge and slammed his fist down with such precise magnitude that it caused the Painter’s body to explode in a gory torrent. Karnak claimed that the acolyte was a human improvised explosive device, but Shield sub-director, Coulson, remained unconvinced. Indeed it was becoming clear to Coulson that this mission has caused Karnak to become increasingly unhinged.

Karnak explains to Coulson what makes Adam such a threat. Adam can see what people want and need and give it to them; and in so doing taking from them of something essential, making them less than human, turing them into monstrous slaves. Coulson asks what it is that leaves Karnak immune to Adam’s powers and the reply is that it is his own selflessness and want for nothing that protects him.

Coulson’s agents have identified Adam’s whereabouts, retrofitting a teleportation device to send Karnak to him. Karnak arrives at a darkened cavern and is immediately attacked by a host of giant monstrous spiders. These spiders are the remnants of Adam’s followers, transformed into mindless creatures.

Karnak makes short work of these spiders, destroying them with a series of fault-finding kung fu chops and kicks. Karnak then ventures further into the cavern, eventually finding Adam sitting alone in large room.

Rather than fighting, Adam merely asked Karnak why he should take such exception to what he has done, why is it a bad thing? He offers people purpose and contentment, the solace of meaning. What is wrong with that? Karnak notes that these dutiful followers have been transformed into spiders, yet Adam retorts that the life of a spider is actually quite rewarding and structured. He has made them simple and this simplicity has taken away their pain.

Karnak’s objection that it is all antithetical of truth. He states that he helps people become free by accepting the absolute truth that they are nothing, they are meaningless. It is harsh and it is painful, but it is the truth and is ultimately liberating. To be a happy prisoner or be painfully free, these are the two poles from which Karnak and Adam argue.

In the midst of their discussion, Adam probes Karnak, seeking out his own flaw, determining how he can give Karnak what he wants and hence make him a slave. Karnak may claim he has no wants, but of course this isn’t true. Adam can see into Karnak’s mind and he can see that Karnak is not as egoless as he says and indeed possesses deeply seated feelings of anger and inadequacy. His being denied Terrigenesis as a child appears to be at the root of his anguish.

Honing in on this pain and weakness, Adam offers to fix him, make him feel whole. He will give Karnak what he wants and make him like him, cherish him as a god and become his slave. Boschi and Browns art really cut loose in this scene, offering an haunting image of what it might be like to accept Adam’s godhood...

Karnak is clearly shaken, but retains his wits in time to dodge Adam’s enchantment. Adam’s probing of Karnak has gone both ways and now Karnak is also able to ascertain Adam’s weakness, the flaw in his godlike powers. He swings with a keenly placed jab, striking Adam in the temple and destroying the area of Adam’s neurological structure that control and enables his powers.

A second blow renders Adam a near vegetable, effectively resetting his neurological functioning to that of an infant.

The narrative leaps forward to Karnak returning Adam to his parents’ care, promising them that Adam will be able to rehabilitate (it’s anyone’s guess whether or not Karnak is telling them the truth). In return, Karnak asks for his payment. This harkens back to the first issue in which Karnak agrees to rescue Mr. and Mrs. Roderick’s son in exchange for a simple request: that they offer to him the singular that enables them to see the world as a kind and meaningful place.

Mr. Roderick had thought the matter over and hands to Karnak a photograph of his family. It’s a picture that was taken on a day in which they told their son that anything was possible, that he is loved unconditionally and could be whatever he wanted to be. He gives this photograph to Karnak as a gesture of letting go of that kind, gentle sentiment.

Karnak receives his payment with cold detachment and makes his leave.

A final scene shows Karnak kneeling before the great stone in his Tower of Wisdom. He has placed the photograph of Adam’s family at the foot of the stone. Alone and unseen, Karnak allows himself to give into his sorrow and covers his face. And it is here that the series ends.

In announcing the completion of the final script for his Karnak tale, writer Warren Ellis dryly referred to the whole matter as “just bad readings of philosophy, punching, and a character study of an absolute trashfire of a human being. But I like to think it was worth it.”

Well, it has been certainly worth it, there has been a lot of punching and Karnak himself is indeed something of a trash-fire… I agree with it all except for the ‘bad readings in philosophy.’

I’m by no stretch an expert on the works of Nietzsche, or Kierkegaard, Baudrillard nor Sjöstedt-H. Yet I know the material well enough understand Ellis was not merely name-dropping the theories for the purposes of a pretentious backdrop for violent action. Ellis uses the theories but doesn’t resort to longwinded exposition or esoteric references; it’s not pedantic. It’s accessible, straight forward and unapologetically weird.

Karnak and Adam’s battle is essentially a question: is it better to believe in a higher power and in so doing become trapped and blinded, be rendered as sheep (or in this case spiders); or is it better to deny this higher power, to be free of it and embrace the harsh truth of meaninglessness? This question is posed, but an answer is not really given. Karnak talks like he knows what’s what, that he is without flaw. Yet it is made abundantly clear that he is quite flawed; that he is a sad and angry little man who is intent on enforcing his misery on everyone around him.

Adam was indeed a threat… his godlike powers could have rendered all mankind into mindlessly content followers. And Karnak is something of a threat as well. His strict adherence to nihilism is cruel and dogmatic. He and Adam are two sides of the same coin… I don’t want to buy what either of them are selling.

Karnak is by no means someone I would want to hang out with; I don’t agree with his philosophy and he’s a rather miserable bastard. And yet he is just hugely fun to read about. And the general tenner of this newer version of Karnak has been picked up by the other creators including Karnak in their tales. Both Al Ewing and Charles Soule have done terrific work in running with the version of Karnak Ellis and company have created. And it’s ended up making Karnak one of the most interesting and fun to read about characters in the entire Inhumans pantheon. I can’t wait to see what Mathew Rosenberg does with Karnak in the upcoming Secret Warriors series. The prospect of Karnak interacting with the likes of Kamala Khan and Lunella Lafayette fills me fearful excitement.

The whole series has been a bizarre, thought-provoking, thoroughly unsettling and tremendously fun read. It’s unequivocally recommended. Five out of Five Lockjaws.

#Karnak #Warren Ellis #Roland Boschi #Dan Brown #spoilers #review

14 notes · View notes

beneaththetangles · 4 years

Text

Finding God in a Light Novel!?

Gods tend to come off badly in fiction. Really, really badly. No, wait, “badly” isn’t strong enough. Worsely? Worstly? Anyway…

There are stories with evil gods. There are stories with insane gods. There are stories where the gods are actually unfathomable horrors misidentified as deities. Going back to ancient mythology, many fictional gods are deeply flawed, with the same failings as humans but far more power with which to run amok. Sometimes the gods aren’t quite malevolent, but they are annoying jerks. Other times, gods are just foolish and incompetent. There are stories with gods who aren’t actively hurtful, but never do they bother to do anything worthwhile either. In some settings, whatever god once existed is dead. Plenty of stories have gods that must be killed by the heroes. Even if the god in a setting is benevolent, there’s a good chance he’s still somehow limited and unable to do much. One of the prime ways to undermine gods is to make them reliant on the faith / prayers / worship of mortals for their power and even their very existence.

I could go on, but I think the point is made.

Of course, all these examples ignore another huge swath of fiction. While much fiction specifically portrays gods as finite, flawed, and/or false, countless other stories project a sort of implicit atheism. Such stories simply don’t bother to bring up the subject of deity at all. The existence of a god is never explicitly denied, but the utter absence of gods from anything the characters say or do leaves a clear implication that the idea of a god is irrelevant to the story. Perhaps this is because no such being exists, or maybe it’s because the setting’s deity is a deistic figure uninvolved with the affairs of mortals. Either way, these are stories where it would be perfectly reasonable to bring up the topic of god, if one existed in the setting, but by ignoring the matter entirely, they leave one with the tacit conclusion that either god doesn’t exist or he doesn’t matter.

Now let me be clear, I’m not suggesting that any works of fiction that fit the descriptions above are necessarily bad. My goal is not to judge the merit of all these stories. I’ve enjoyed a number of them myself. Star Trek: the Next Generation and Stargate SG-1 are the first examples that spring to mind. I also think of the works of Brandon Sanderson, a number of which feature “gods” of various sorts and actively explore the question of what does it really mean to be divine. My point is simply that fiction commonly portrays gods in a…less than favorable light, to put it mildly.

There are exceptions, of course. The preeminent examples would be the works of J.R.R. Tolkien and C.S. Lewis. Each of them wrote fantasy (and, in the case of Lewis, some sci-fi as well) within a setting where the God of the Bible clearly exists. But they are the exceptions that prove the rule. It’s quite unusual to find stories that feature gods that are genuine, effective, benevolent, not somehow dependent on mortals, etc. I don’t expect every fictional work to have an Aslan equivalent, but I do find it strange how rarely fictional gods bear even the least resemblance to the God I worship.

So when I recently encountered one such exceptional story, featuring a god strikingly reminiscent of the God of the Bible in several respects, I was quite taken aback. It’s just so unusual for even faint glimmers of the true God to shine through in fiction. It’s also a great opportunity to highlight that hey, here’s a story featuring thought-provoking echoes of the God of the Bible.

Invaders of the Rokujouma!? is the saga of high-schooler Satomi Koutarou and nine girls who become friends with him and with each other. It’s a genre-defying epic that could rightly be characterized as a *deep breath* supernatural harem romantic comedy school slice-of-life sci-fi fantasy adventure time travel isekai magical girl political thriller, with a dose of the Power Rangers thrown in for good measure. And I’m probably forgetting something. Anyway, the twenty-ninth volume of the series finally resolves a plot thread that has been dangling since the very first book.

Warning: Spoilers! I’m not going to spoil everything, but there are some really huge spoilers ahead.

Back at the start of the story, Koutarou had a brief, barely remembered, cryptic encounter with a mysterious figure in an underground chamber. Some volumes later, he encounters what might be the same being thanks to a certain accident involving time travel, which sends him all the way back to the beginning of the universe. He doesn’t remember this meeting, either, but we the readers certainly do. We also learn that the alien Forthorthians refer to this being as the Goddess of Dawn. While the narrative periodically referenced the goddess, her true nature, character, and role in the story remained nebulous for twenty-eight volumes.

Finally, though, she comes into full view. Koutarou encounters her once again and the truth behind much of the story is revealed. It was meeting Koutarou at the beginning of time that caused the omniscient, almighty Goddess of Dawn to create the universe as she did. After meeting another person, i.e. Koutarou, she came to desire relationships, and thus created a universe with people in it. She hoped they would get to know her and love her.

After that meeting at the beginning of time, the goddess remained interested in Koutarou, and that’s actually why he ended up with so many of the eponymous “invaders” in his tiny apartment. It wasn’t just a weird coincidence that a ghost, a few aliens, a couple of magical girls, the reincarnation of an ancient alien princess, a mole person, and his landlady (who seems normal at first but actually can transform into a dragon) keep inserting themselves into Koutarou’s life. It’s actually divine providence. The goddess hoped Koutarou would learn to love her, and to help him get to know her, she incarnated different aspects of herself into nine human girls—the very same ones Koutarou has grown close to over the course of the story.

Let’s review: An all-knowing, all-powerful deity created everything. This deity made humanity out of a desire to have relationships, wanting to love and be loved. This deity benevolently influenced the course of history, providentially intervening for the benefit of humans. Finally, this deity incarnated in human form in order to more fully reveal themselves to humans. Who are we describing, Yahweh or the Goddess of Dawn?

Of course, the resemblance is far from exact, and if you read the story, you can find obvious points of divergence between the two. The Chronicles of Narnia this is not. But those differences are far less interesting than the similarities. Typically, fictional gods differ so sharply from my God that I’m flummoxed that the same word can even be applied to both. Excluding Tolkien and Lewis, it’s incredibly rare to see a “god” in fiction who reflects this many aspects of the true God’s nature. It fills me with curiosity as to how the author arrived at this character. Whatever the author’s reasons, Invaders‘ Goddess of Dawn is one of those exceptional fictional deities who moves me to think about my God not by way of contrast, but rather because I can see a genuine resemblance. It’s refreshing to find a story that encourages me to think about God from a positive angle, to say to myself “Yeah, my God really is like that.” I already thought Invaders was one of the best light novel series around, and the revelations in vol. 29 just make me appreciate it even more. If you haven’t read this series, I hope maybe this post will encourage you to check it out.

=====

BENEATH THE TANGLES RECOMMENDS INVADERS OF THE ROKUJOUMA!?

#Light Novels #Christianity #Invaders of the Rokujouma!?#Rokujouma no Shinryakusha!?#God #Author: JeskaiAngel #Articles

0 notes

inkingaboutwords-blog · 6 years

Text

Lesson 1: History And Scope

1) Foreword

Inking About Words is a free online poetry course covering all kinds of poetry. No previous knowledge of poetry is required. Its purpose is to mentor budding poets in the local scene of Wellington, Aotearoa. People from outside of the greater Wellington region are welcome to use these resources for their personal education, but are asked not to submit to the workshops. Inking About Words is the creation of Vex Chat-Blanc, and is run in association with Poetry in Motion, Wellington, and with the support of the Wellington community. For further information see the FAQ.

The course comes in the form of a large informative post each month, with small posts of additional content throughout the month. Hopefully every mid-month there will also be a guest post from a local poet expanding further on the topics covered that month. I want people to know what they're in for, so here's a run-down of what to expect from the monthly posts:

A brief foreword

An index that doubles as a checklist so people who feel competent in covered topics can choose to skip/skim those parts

A few sections of writing describing some practical skills, poetic devices, poetry formats, and general theory

Small breakout paragraphs with tips, examples, or sources for further reading

Some encouragement and suggestions for practicing skills covered that month

I intend to be open to workshopping some poems submitted by people relating to that month's topics. I'll post rules for how that will work each month.

Mostly sincerely, Vex

---

2) Index

1. Foreword

2. Index

3. Lore

3.1 Poetry by Definition

3.2 History of Poetry

3.3 Geography of Poetry

4. Forms

4.1 Free Verse

4.2 List Poems

4.3 Found Poetry

4.4 Blackout Poems

4.5 Spam Poetry

4.6 Google Poetry

5. Devices

5.1 Simile

5.2 Metaphor

5.3 Analogy

5.4 Allegory

5.5 Parallelism

5.6 Correlative Verse

6. Skills

6.1 Inspiration

6.2 Drafting

6.3 Assessing

7. Suggestions

7.1 Find Some Poetry

7.2 Find Some Poets

7.3 Make Bad Poems

7.4 List Everything

---

3) Lore

3.1) Poetry by definition

If you're not new to any kind of educational works, you know to expect that we begin with a boring waffle about the 'true definition' of the topic - starting off with a dictionary definition before painstakingly pointing out all the ways the definition isn’t precise enough.

For poetry, I'm fond of this definition from dictionary.com, which gets progressively more vague with each step and frankly sounds like a poem in its own right:

noun 1. The art of rhythmical composition, written or spoken, for exciting pleasure by beautiful, imaginative, or elevated thoughts. 2. Literary work in metrical form; verse. 3. Prose with poetic qualities. 4. Poetic qualities however manifested: "The poetry of simple acts and things." 5. Poetic spirit or feeling: "The pianist played the prelude with poetry." 6. Something suggestive of or likened to poetry: "The pure poetry of a beautiful view on a clear day."

Of course, a dictionary definition really fails to encompass the breadth of poetry. But we don't need a good definition to do the ground work. I just thought it would be good to begin these lessons making sure everyone is thinking about how loose the definition can be, because having that perspective gives you a lot of room to experiment with the boundaries of what can reasonably be called ‘poetry’.

Further watching: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6F7quI-MbzY Further reading: https://www.britannica.com/art/poetry

3.2) History of poetry

If you’ve studied English Lit before, you’ll likely be familiar with the works of some white dudes. But perhaps one might imagine a world of Hemmingways and Byrons to be a bit dull, so I’m going to expand the horizons a little.

An important thing to keep in mind about poetry is that it predates literacy, so while existing written work has been dated back all the way to about 2000BC, using written word as the academic yardstick to measure poetry might be a bit naive, given the oral traditions of hymn, prayer, chant, song, mnemonic, elegy etc. are known to date back further.

On a more modern scale, it’s useful to look at poetry’s applications. While many of these are not new, studying our forebears (that is, the proverbial giants on which we stand rather than the ferocious beasts that stand before us, but you can imagine either as you choose) gives us perspective on what we may wish to repeat or improve upon to have words with impact, rather than simply having words. Such applications I’d like you to consider:

Using poetry to define new concepts

Expressions of affection

Bringing whimsy to the mundane

Speaking out against injustice

3.3) Geography of poetry

Literature is one of the most universally important cultural artifacts. For us to truly understand poetry, we must understand its existence in every culture provides us with a wealth we could never have amassed alone. Studying to create this course really drove home this point for me as I read lists of devices transliterated from other languages, many of which described rules unique to forms from relatively small regions. The point is, poetry doesn’t belong to one culture. It especially doesn’t belong to the academia who study its theory but aren’t a part of its applications. Many cultures, whether that be regional, religious, class, generation, social rights causes, artistic movements, or anything else; include poetry as part of their identities. As a result, poetry can be a powerful way for people to connect to their peers.

Further reading: https://static.poetryfoundation.org/o/media/landays.html Further watching: The Bigger Picture Campaign

---

4) Forms

4.1) Free Verse

Excuse me for starting with the obvious, but free/open verse is poetry that doesn't have any rules or restrictions. It's a good starting place to establish that your poetry can just say "idgaf" to all the rules. I can't really teach form without acknowledging that form itself is an opt-in sort of deal.

4.2) List Poems

One of the easiest forms of poetry is the list poem, which unsurprisingly is a list as a poem. You'd think that not just any list would do, but for real any list will do. Just write a list of things and decide how you want to make it poetic (You don't necessarily need to make a list of boring things poetic. It's more common that people make poetic things into a boring list, and that approach is fine too.)

Example: The Labor It Takes To Forgive by Uyên Thi

4.3) Found poetry

Poetry can be found among all sorts of text. Remembering that poetry is to give more meaning to a text through devices, it follows that the act of finding meaning in existing text can therefore create poetry.

There's lots of ways to create found poetry, many of which hinge on highlighting the absurdity of the world. One of my favourites is just to take things out of context. The removal or addition of context can create or change meaning in text.

Example: This couplet written using a truth or dare game on chewing gum wrappers.

Here's some other forms of found poetry:

4.4) Blackout poems

An erasure poem involves removing words or letters from a block of text, such as a page of a book, or a psalm, or an existing poem, such that what is leftover forms a poem. The most popular method, and a more common name, is the blackout poem, which involves using a permanent marker to blackout the other words. Many use the opportunity to also create an image that complements the poem.

Example: They Were Married

4.5) Spam poetry

Spam poetry is a form of found poetry that takes words or phrases from spam emails and forms them into poems. Sometimes they have messages, but more often they are an exercise in skirting the uncanny valley of coherency to highlight the absurdity of spam messages.

Example(s): http://www.spampoetry.org/our-favorites/

4.6) Google poetry

Another common form of found poetry is Google poetry - a form created by gathering the suggested search completions that google presents you with when you start typing in a partial search term. Many of these poems consist only of suggested search terms and are very short and in the format of a list poem. However, it is possible to create a poem that uses these search terms as part of a larger narrative.

Examples of short google poems: http://www.googlepoetics.com/ Example of larger narrative: Google Search For Black Lives Matter by Len Lawson

---

5) Devices

5.1) Simile

A simile is an explicit comparison made, typically using a ‘like’ or ‘as’ statement.

Example: “A simile is like a metaphor”

5.2) Metaphor

A metaphor is an implicit comparison made by saying something entirely different to what you’re saying. Now, is that cheating? Heck yes. Poetry is 90% cheating.

Example: “You are an asshole”.

(Swearing is, after all, probably the most common use of poetic device.)

5.3) Analogy

An analogy is a phrase that uses one idea to express another. This can be a metaphor or a simile, and can be straightforward or subtle and indirect. On the internet, analogies are often (ironically) regarded as a false equivalence. The catch being that an analogy is used to explain a concept by relating it to an existing concept rather than say those concepts are the same.

Example: An atom is like a solar system in that it has planets (electrons) that orbit a large sun (the nucleus).

5.4) Allegory

An allegory is the story-sized version of a metaphor. A tale in which the actors are stand-ins for political figures, or social ills, or a child you want to send an irresponsibly indirect warning to. They tend to be used to send a moral or political message. Balancing the clarity of the message with consistency of the metaphor can be tricky. Most fairy tales are allegories designed to teach children about the dangers of the world around them.

5.5) Parallelism

Parallelism is the use of words that are similar in their construction, sound, or meaning. It often employs repetition, and is often used to compare two concepts. For example: “Like father, like son”. Parallelism is an umbrella term that encompasses many more specific poetic devices, such as Janus parallelism, which uses the multiple meanings of a word to join two different statements together in such a way that each statement uses a different meaning of the word.

Example: “I came, I saw, I conquered.”

5.6) Correlative Verse

Correlative verse uses two lists, and parallels the items between those lists. The way the lists are paralleled isn't constrained in any way, so that's up to you. That said, I think if you want people to appreciate it as a device, you have to use a parallel that will be clear to your audience.

Example: “The intern, the mistress, and the public, were not aware of the affairs of the state, or the heart”

---

6) Skills

6.1) Inspiration

Finding inspiration is a thing most poets I know have trouble with, but to be honest, if you have something to say, about anything at all, you have a poem. Anything you can tweet can be reworked into a poem with the right application of poetic devices. Of course it's not as simple as that. Some topics are bland no matter how you state them. But if you find yourself with such a problem, consider some alternative perspectives on the topic: is there someone with higher stakes in the matter? Maybe you could write a persona piece (be wary of telling other people's stories though - it seems like an easy grab for evocative content, but I can guarantee you it's a trap. Your best work will come from your experience 99% of the time). Is the topic an easy allegory? What’s the smallest amount of words you can use to get your point across? Can the topic be expressed by remixing something that already exists? Would wild exaggeration make the topic more interesting?

6.2) Drafting

The drafting process is not a universal thing, and it’s okay to have a process that differs from what I’m about to outline. But there are two mistakes that are incredibly common among poets:

Believing a bad draft is a worthless poem

Believing a good draft is a finished work

Ideally, a first draft should be a train wreck of ideas that don’t consistently flow on from each other. It may not be cohesive enough to perform, and in fact that’s probably a good sign. Most forms of writing have an initial planning stage, and use the first draft to get the ideas from the plans into words, acting as placeholders for the more refined structure and vocabulary in later drafts. Poetry is typically easier to plan -after- the first draft. I recommend using the first draft as a way to collect whatever stanzas, ideas, and poetic devices flow freely out of your headspace when you first decide something might make a good poem. Don’t worry about what the end result will be, and don’t pre-emptively throw things out if they don’t seem good enough. Just ensure you write down everything that comes out before you start running out of ideas. It’s worth noting that many people get discouraged because their first draft turns out bad. The biggest favour you can do your self-confidence as a poet is to not expect a first draft to produce a poem.

6.3) Assessing

Once you have an initial draft, you can work on figuring out where to go from there. This is the point where you can plan a structure, choose a form, decide what message you want to convey, decide what lines to keep, decide what lines to throw out. Think hard about what aspects of the draft are good, and what aspects are bad. Consider where you can give it a better rhythm and where more complex poetic devices can be fitted in without disturbing the flow.

Tip: Think carefully about -how- you want to convey your message. Your draft may have some novel devices or particularly on-the-nose metaphors that will go a long way to making the piece unique among similar voices. This is normally what I recommend focusing on, as the most striking poems usually are the ones that hold an entirely new perspective for people.

---

7) Suggestions

7.1) Find some poetry

I don't usually look for found poetry. You get the most out of it by developing a mindset that questions whether any given thing is poetry (which I do recommend working on, it will help you a lot to produce more content). But you absolutely can actively search for found poetry. Try the techniques described earlier just for practice.

7.2) Find some poets

You gotta know what you like. Better yet if you know why you like it. Find some poets you like across all genres, and jot their names down. If you need to discover new poets to do this there are good sites online that will help you out (and expose you to too many old white dudes, so don't rely on them too heavily if you can). I recommend choosing a variety of categories such as genres/topics that interest you, minority groups you want to see represented, poetic forms you like, etc and trying to find a poet you love for each category. If you want to take it one step further, use those categories to make a Punnet square and see if you can find a poet that fits each intersection of those categories. Be sure to include both page and performance poets.

7.2) Make bad poems

Try editing a draft into a intentionally bad poem. Aim to end up with something you'd be embarrassed to have discovered in a diary from at least 5 years ago. This will help you in a number of ways: you'll become more comfortable accepting the difference between a draft and a poem, better be able to identify mistakes/bad use of poetic devices, and become more comfortable producing bad work (it seems like an unnecessary thing, but I assure you it will help you out)

7.3) List anything

Just pick something to list and list it. Try to cover a range of topics from trite mundane things like shopping lists, to heavy existential things like reasons university is killing you. Lists make great drafts and typically bad poems. The unfortunate thing is they tend to make great drafts specifically for list poems, so you won't always get something you can work into another form. But once in a while a list poem comes out really well on its own merits. --- I juuust realized I said I’d explain how submissions will work at the end of the post. I really have no idea what an appropriate way to do this would be, so for now if you a) are from Aotearoa, b) want some advice (at the moment I’ll only be helping with the assessing step), c) are comfortable with your work being posted here, then fire through a submission.

#Poetry #Learning #Education #Wellington #Wellington NZ #Aotearoa #Poetry in Motion Wellington

0 notes

pabluesman · 7 years

Link

The latest rant:

A common picture of the Republican Party is that of a cabal of big-money plutocrats, rubbing their hands gleefully as they kick starving children into the cold and knock retirees over for the Social Security benefits while lighting cigars with $100 bills. And while this is useful as agitprop, it creates a divide in the discussion of serious issues. Granted, there are some on both sides of the aisle who are craven and corrupt, and unfortunately they also make the most noise. It also doesn't help that the top figures in the party -- trump and his staff (Spicer, Conway, et al), Ryan, and McConnell -- further this perception with their words and actions, but such is a topic for another day ... The thing is, though, almost all Republicans are working with the best of intentions. They honestly believe that their proposals and actions are in the best interest of the American people. So why is there such a gulf between Republican and Democrat, liberal and conservative, trump and normal people? My opinion? It comes down to a fundamental difference in how progress is measured. The Republican Party measures everything in terms of dollars and cents. This is fine as far as it goes -- it is a completely objective measure, with no wiggle room for interpretation. Something costs what it costs, and revenue is revenue, and the numbers are going to be the numbers whether you like them or not. As a result, for many things this is fine ... but there are aspects of the things the government does that do not translate well into currency. Things like quality of life for a family that can no longer afford health coverage. Or environmental quality. Or lives lost fighting bullshit wars on false pretenses. The modern Republican Party is, on paper, dedicated to the idea of fiscal responsibility. They believe that deficit spending is fundamentally bad, that social welfare programs impede individual initiative, and (at least, on the far right) that many of the problems faced by marginalized populations -- the poor, people of color, and so on -- are the result of moral failings at the individual level. Proposals presented by the Republicans are centered around the idea of "if ya ain't got the dough, don't spend it." Nowhere is this demonstrated more clearly than in the following statement made by Rep. Mo Brooks on May 1:

“My understanding is that it will allow insurance companies to require people who have higher health care costs to contribute more to the insurance pool. That helps offset all these costs, thereby reducing the cost to those people who lead good lives, they’re healthy, they’ve done the things to keep their bodies healthy. And right now those are the people—who’ve done things the right way—that are seeing their costs skyrocketing.”

On the surface, this seems like a pretty cruel, heartless stance. After all, what Rep. Brooks appears to be saying here is that if someone gets breast cancer, say, then it's their own damned fault for not living a clean life and they deserve to pay more for insurance as a result. Now, everybody knows this is bullshit, and it's a pretty safe bet that's not what Rep. Brooks meant. My guess is that he was speaking more to the apparent fairness of premium amounts, taking a position that people who need more health care should be paying higher premiums. And while this does seem like a reasonable proposition, it misses the point entirely on how insurance is supposed to work (the people who need less subsidize the people who need more, thus spreading the cost more or less evenly ... but diving into the intricacies of health insurance actuary is way beyond the scope of this article). This illustrates a higher point, though. Whether it stems from ideology, or the need to maintain viewership across the basic cable spectrum, or just pure salaciousness, we have been trapped in a cycle of "gotchas" for the past several decades. Barack Obama says "So it's not surprising then that they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion ..." as a statement on small-town America's reaction to steady job losses over the prior twenty years, which is clearly evident when the entire quote is used:

"Our challenge is to get people persuaded that we can make progress when there's not evidence of that in their daily lives. You go into some of these small towns in Pennsylvania, and like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing's replaced them. And they fell through the Clinton administration, and the Bush administration, and each successive administration has said that somehow these communities are gonna regenerate and they have not. So it's not surprising then that they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations."

However, the right-wing shriek factory chose to highlight a specific phrase in a manner designed to generate the most outrage, furthering the narrative of Obama as a Kenyan Muslim terrorist atheist communist dictator, hellbent on taking away everyone's guns and forcing them to adhere to Sharia law (which, let's be fair, almost none of the target audience knew anything about except what they had heard from the right-wing shriek factory in the first place ... and not for nothing, but it is impossible to be a Muslim and an atheist. Just sayin'.). To be fair, this sort of nonsense happens on the left as well, but again ... a topic for another article ... The thing is, there are actually very few Republicans who hew strictly to this line. The vast majority of them do not agree with ideological purity at all costs; instead they adopt a stance of "Okay, I have my ideology, you have yours, and there has to be some agreeable middle ground." For example, as you may have guessed, I am a liberal. Very liberal. Not quite to the anarchist extreme of some, but definitely more than most. One of my best friends is a hard-core conservative Republican. We argue about politics all the time, and rare is the occasion when one of us makes a solid enough argument to change the other's position. Despite this obvious mental deficiency on his part (kidding, and he knows it), he is a wonderful stepfather, a good and decent person, and regularly kicks my ass at pool. And this is the fundamental point. Republicans are not, by nature, evil. They are not the sort of cartoonish, sinister villains portrayed in the media, any more than liberals are all a bunch of skinny, stoned, granola-munching whiners with acoustic guitars militantly guarding against trigger words. Republicans just have a different viewpoint from Democrats. That's all. They are both still Americans, they both still love this country, they both still respect the Constitution. Go to any firehouse, police station, military barracks, elementary school, restaurant, grocery store, auto shop. Unless there is only one person there, chances are pretty good that there will be a roughly even split between conservatives and liberals. And I guarantee that the EMT who is driving the ambulance taking you to the hospital doesn't give a hairy rodent's posterior about your political affiliation, the only concern is getting you to the goddam hospital. This is what we, as a society, are losing sight of lately. It is incumbent upon all of us -- right or left, Democrat or Republican, conservative or liberal -- to always remember this, and to accept the fundamental humanity of those with differing views, and to allow the respect that is born from this acceptance to be shown. And it has to start with a decision on which media outlet to frequent. Yes, there are no purely objective sources. Every media outlet has some sort of political leaning. It's only natural, considering they are all people. Where the differences lie is in how this slant is addressed. Some, like Breitbart and the Daily Wire on the right or Occupy Democrats and the Palmer Report on the left, make no bones about their political leanings. Which is fine, as long as people understand that their content is all opinion, not fact. Others, like the New York Times and the Washington Post on the left and the Wall Street Journal and Forbes on the right, acknowledge their political stance but strive to keep it from coloring their reporting. Yes, sometimes they are better at it than others, but they all have one common characteristic: when a mistake is made, they cop to it. Publicly. They issue retractions and correct the erroneous information. If there are enough retractions credited to a specific reporter ... well, that reporter is then out of a job. So I urge everyone reading this -- both of you -- to ask the following questions when considering a news source (not including articles clearly labeled as opinion pieces):

Does this news source use objective language, or are there subjective terms (excluding quotes) used to attempt to sway the reader to a particular way of thinking about an issue? For example, the Daily Wire recently published a story about funding being pulled from a Shakespeare in the Park production of "Julius Caesar" because it depicts the assassination of donald trump. While the story may be true, and it is not at all uncommon for theater companies to adapt Shakespeare to modern settings, the Daily Wire uses language like "objectively despicable contents of this production" to describe the play. Rather than just reporting on the "who, what, where, when" of the issue, the Daily Wire attempts to apply a value judgement to the play, thus robbing the reader of that opportunity.

Can the story be verified by multiple reliable sources? For example, if you see a story in the New York Times, or Forbes, or the BBC, or even the Daily Caller, can you also find reporting on that same topic from another source? This excludes the latest practice in which someone creates content that may or may not be factual and distributes it to like-thinking outlets, who then publish it blindly (basically, what happens here is that the article appears in multiple outlets, with identical or near-identical language).

In the case of erroneous reporting, does the source acknowledge it and issue a retraction? This only applies to factual errors. For example, an article about Ivanka Trump's clothing line that reports on a pair of shoes costing $2,500 when they are actually $250 deserves a correction. An opinion piece stating that they are the butt-ugliest things to come down the pike since the Pontiac Aztek does not.

It is vitally important that we all -- Republican and Democrat alike -- do our due diligence when consuming media. It is only once we emerge from the shriek factories on both the left and right and into the light of day that we can start to find common ground on the issues facing this nation today. Please like and share my page at http://ift.tt/2rkD9UV for more.

#IFTTT #Blogger

0 notes

ilovequantitativeresearch · 7 years

Text

A Critique on Lauren Martin’s Opinion Article: Why Women Need To Start Asking Men Out…Because Men Have No Balls

With issues such as gender equality, being built around discussion and narrative, sound analysis and logical consistency must be of paramount value. Unfortunately, in this text, Martin posts unabashed drivel and unfounded opinions on how she thinks the world should work. For whatever reason, it always seems to be in her favor. A large percentage of the article highlights on the fault of the male gender, not once giving them merit or displaying any sense of objectivity.

The author seems to highlight the problem as something between a man and woman; making constant references to the behaviors of past generations, yet only putting the blame on one stakeholder. In reality, this is has nothing to do with that. This only has to do with horrible, muckraking, sensationalist “journalism”. It is shallow ideologies and thought pieces like these that make it much harder for true feminism and gender equality to gain a foothold in society. This is the very undermining of its true meaning. We delve further into this by dissecting the work in terms of Aristotle’s Appeals, type of claim, logical fallacies, and intertextuality.

The author begins the argument build by displaying the kind of behavior men show.

“They'll make eye contact with you in the bar, but never come over. They'll get your number, but never call. They'll offer to buy you a drink, but never pay. They'll say a girl is hot, but never hit on her. They'll text you for a week, but never ask you out. They'll do absolutely everything but make a move. I've watched men pine over women, talking about them like future wives, yet after staring at them for two hours, let them walk away. I've watched men chase women down for their phone numbers, yet wait a week to text them, acting like it's something they simply forgot about. I've watched men spend an entire night talking to a girl, yet never get up the nerve to ask for her number”

Consistently, she repeats the fallacy of Reductio ad absurdium. She blows the situational analysis out of proportion. What’s even more contradicting was the disclaimer she noted before going on the absurdium rampage. “Well — to be fair here — not all men, but a lot of them”. While this could have been a great opener for objectivity, providing credibility to the piece, it had been completely destroyed and off-set by the countless other fallacies which will be tackled further on.

In terms of logical fallacies, the author draws close to a slippery slope.

“(if A)We're dealing with a new breed of men here and it's not the kind we grew up dreaming about. It’s the want-what-I-want-but-don’t-know-how-to-get-it type; it’s the sweet and cuddly mama’s boys who grow up terrified of making the first move; it’s the guys who have so much to say but don’t know how to say it. (then B) Now, the unfortunate paradox for a woman is that she must be the chased and the chaser. She must be the target and the shooter. She must play coy and simultaneously pursue him. (then z!)Anyone notice the problem here? Yet again, women are left to do all the work. We're left playing both sides of the game because they've simply forgotten how to play. “

Notice how the paragraph concludes the sequence with “left to do all the work”. Yet again, the author draws up the situation out of proportion. The author draws on and on about how the woman now has to be the “hunter” and the “target”. Is there really anything wrong about this? Essentially, feminism and gender equality is founded upon the equal standing between the sexes. With this slippery slope, the author left with it a question up in the air: should women then continue to simply look pretty, provide nothing to the equation and leave themselves as objects for men to select on shelves? This is the exact notion that feminism seeks to eradicate in modern society.

“This leaves women making all the moves. We must tell them what they want if we're to get anywhere close to the goals we had for ourselves. But it will never be as we fully imagined because, in our dreams, men weren't timid or scared little boys; in our dreams, men are the ones with the balls to ask us out.”

Once again, the author coats on the same dressing: oversimplification. In this piece, men are still perceived to be useless and unproductive, with the only supplementary evidence being nothing but the author’s personal anecdotes. The tone set is final and all-knowing,

“Men aren't these masculine displays of strength and perseverance. They aren't these persistent characters created by Nicholas Sparks and John Green. They aren't going to catch your eye and spend all night convincing you why you should be with them. They aren't Noah Calhouns. They aren't Augustus Waters”

Martin cites problematic allusions to back the article. References are made to John Green and Nicholas Sparks. These authors are the very creators (and sometimes critics) of the manic pixie dream girl archetype. Most of the women in their novels serve to the character development and fulfilment of the male protagonist however, more often than not, forget their own. The role of the female in their novels is to be the muse and inspiration for men to change and take action in the world, rather than they themselves take action. An example would be Jamie Sullivan in A Walk to Remember and Alaska Young in Looking for Alaska.

“It's said that the male ego is as fragile as a woman's heart and unfortunately for women, men won't take the chance of letting it shatter. While women willingly put themselves out there, men stand back, scared of the tiniest bruise on their overinflated self-image. So yet again, women must be the strong ones. We must put ourselves out there and risk rejection. Because if we don't do it, bars will soon be exactly like those middle school dances: boys on one side, girls on the other.”

Although the text in its entirety appeals to emotion, pathos is most evident in this paragraph and so is the oversimplification of the situation. However, one must give credit to the author’s consistency- of making a functional, give and take adult relationship sound like a chore, rather than a common decency and standard of social behavior.

“Men, on the other hand, always seem to be waiting for something better. In the age of Facebook and Instagram, there’s this constant filtered delusion that a hotter girl sits just an inbox away”

Another case of Reductio ad absurdium in which the entirety of a gender is being thrown into a singular notion- a notion constructed by the author.

“In a sad, but not all that surprising, report by Nickelodeon UK, men are 11 years behind women in maturity. While women reach maturation by 32, men aren't fully matured until 43. While this study garnered much attention, women everywhere were less than surprised. Didn't we already know this?”

Nickelodeon is an entertainment company, targeted to children. Clicking on the link, one is greeted by SpongeBob- who is known to live in a pineapple under the sea. This is an example of false appeal to authority. When seeking reputable and credible data on maturity and gender behavioral studies, Nickelodeon should be considered as the least of the options available. Regardless, maturity differences correlating to gender is a well-known fact. However, this only refers to biological maturity. Meaning, men start puberty earlier and also don’t stop growing until much older either.

Furthermore, the real problem of this article is the complete generational bias the author notes to conclude the thought piece.

“To add insult to the few dates you have yet to be asked on, men are also getting married less than ever before. According to a study by Pew Research Center, only 26 percent of Generation-Y is married.

Compared to the 48 percent of our parents at this age, there's no denying that men just don't have their sh*t together.

We’re dating less and thus, marrying less. And the downfall picks up speed with every failed attempt to ask a woman out.”

Looking at the social aspects of the situation, the conclusion is downright erroneous. While couples are getting married at a later age, they are actually getting married sooner in their lifespans. This is according to the U.S. Census.

Should we analyze this in the true spirit of feminism, marrying later on is actually a positive indicator for women everywhere. More women are working, and less are ready to start a family as early. Women are valuing careers more and more, less willing to be stay-at-home moms. A rise in independence, an increase in financial freedom and desire to be more as an individual before becoming a couple means both sides of the aisle are marrying less because they choose to.

Lauren Martin’s opinion article clearly exemplifies the difference between opinions founded on solid, logical reasoning and opinions founded on shallow, misconstrued concepts- with it inclining more onto the latter. An article teeming with logical fallacies and plain sexism, it serves no higher purpose. It answers no valid questions and problems, and only proves itself to be counterproductive to the discussion and discourse of feminism and gender equality.

Maritin, L. (2014, September 9). Why Women Need To Start Asking Men Out…Because Men Have No Balls [Web log post]. Retrieved February 28, 2017, from http://elitedaily.com/dating/men-pssies-women-need- start-asking-men-dates/746965/

Vespa, J. (2014, February, 2014) Marrying Older, But Sooner? [Web log post]. Retrieved February 28, 2017, from http://blogs.census.gov/2014/02/10/marrying-older-but-sooner/

Word count: 1,550

1 note · View note