#the ethics and implications of this kind of writing and how complex that can be vs. me being against censorship in the arts | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

tanadrin · 2 years

Note

one thing that annoyed me (probably unduly and definitely in a nerd-seeing-nuts-and-bolts-instead-of-narrative-tension way) about voyager was the way they did "scrounging for resources because we are cut off from our normal resuppliers" while seemingly not understanding the implications of replicators. and they could have just busted the replicators at the start of the series and avoided it.

like, neelix growing crops onboard. first of all how are you feeding everyone with so few plants. secondly conservation of mass and energy are still in effect! you aren't getting free food with this one weird trick. where are those plants getting their nutrients? sewage? wouldn't the sewage normally just be converted back to pure energy? were they just venting carbon dioxide before they had these plants on board to make use of it, when they have the technology to turn any molecule into any other molecule? even if it's a lossy process, is it really lossier-in-terms-of-truly-limited-resources than something as labor intensive as fucking agriculture when you're on a ship with a one-way mission that is therefore going to have trouble ethically sourcing more crew? "there's coffee in that nebula" there's coffee in that everything. when you blow up a hostile ship you can recycle the ship bits into more coffee than you can drink in a lifetime.

i don't remember a lot of specific moments from voyager because my memory is kind of shit and star trek is made of the sort of powdered detailium that gets lost easily but one that stuck with me was when chakotay saved up replicator rations to replicate a pocketwatch for janeway which just. it made sense as An Sacrifice in context but gift giving is such a cornerstone meaningful gesture in every society that has ever existed but how would it retain that meaning back in the federation where it's effectively zero cost to get any object you might want and this moment casts that fact into sharp relief, like they are going to have different pre-existing intuitions about what a gift means than we do because they're from a borderline post-scarcity culture. also janeway says to recycle it because it could be boots for someone which, no, a pair of boots has way more mass than a watch, which means replicator energy usage is based on some kind of game merchant price system instead of mass which is just... it's supposed to be dramatic but it's stupid.

i guess in general there is the point that you cannot have bidirectional matter-energy conversion tech in a fictional world and still have stakes because every object is every other object but in other versions of trek they don't constantly call attention to how we need to gather/conserve Hydrogen The One Thing We Can Turn Into Everything Also We Can Recycle Everything Into Hydrogen But When We Scrounge For Everythingium It Has To Be Already In The Form Of Hydrogen For Balance Reasons

while the exact parameters of this are left fuzzy for plot reasons, it's clear that there's tons of shit, both in terms of simple raw materials and complex objects, that replicators can't make. and they cost energy of a sort that it isn't trivial to resupply, hence the whole point of turning the captain's mess into a galley. it's explicitly mentioned at various points that neelix's cooking is a mix of replicated, traded-for, and grown ingredients (although yes, that cargo bay is way too small to provide more than garnishes for 140-odd people)

and yeah that pocketwatch scene was a bit of sloppy writing i didn't like. my issue with janeway is that the writers wanted her to be Determined and Stubborn, but occasionally the sloppy writing just made her come off as an asshole. like with murdering Tuvix--the reason Janeway killing Tuvix is basically a meme among Voyager fans is that there's just absolutely no way to justify it. Especially when in an early first season episode she explicitly refuses to kill a Vidiian they just met who stole Neelix's lungs to keep Neelix alive. like, at least that Vidiian clearly nominated himself for the short end of a tradeoff by accepting stolen lungs. Tuvix was by all accounts well-liked and a good tactical officer, and he's sitting there piteously begging for his life, and Janeway (and the crew) are like "lol, nah, it's murder time"

just a really unbelievable scenario given what we've already been shown about the character.

9 notes · View notes

spiritualsoull1969 · 2 days

Text

In Every Decision, Let the Compass of EtQ Guide You Towards the Shores of Enlightenment

The phrase "In every decision, let the compass of EtQ guide you towards the shores of enlightenment" encapsulates the profound integration of Ethical Intelligence (EtQ) and spirituality. It suggests that by using EtQ as our moral compass, we can navigate life's complex decisions in a way that leads us to deeper spiritual fulfillment and enlightenment. This journey involves cultivating empathy, integrity, and mindfulness in our everyday actions.

Understanding Ethical Intelligence (EtQ)

Ethical Intelligence (EtQ) is the capacity to discern right from wrong based on a deep understanding of moral principles, empathy, and the greater good. It is not merely about adhering to rules but about internalizing ethical values and acting consistently with them. EtQ involves:

Empathy: Understanding and sharing the feelings of others.

Integrity: Acting in ways that are consistent with one's values and principles.

Mindfulness: Being aware of the present moment and the ethical implications of one's actions.

Spiritual Foundations

Guru Nanak’s Teachings

Guru Nanak, the founder of Sikhism, emphasized the importance of truth, compassion, and humility. His teachings encourage seeing the divine in every being and acting with selfless service and integrity. He taught that spiritual enlightenment comes from living an ethical and compassionate life.

Buddha’s Wisdom

Buddha’s teachings on the Eightfold Path include right action, right speech, and right livelihood. These principles underscore the importance of ethical conduct as a foundation for spiritual growth. Buddha emphasized that enlightenment is achieved through mindful living and compassionate action.

Guru Amar Das’s Insights

Guru Amar Das, the third Sikh Guru, stressed humility, equality, and ethical living. He advocated for selfless service and acting with integrity, teaching that these practices lead to spiritual fulfillment and enlightenment.

Integrating EtQ with Spirituality

1. Cultivating Empathy:

Understanding Others: Empathy involves deeply understanding others' experiences and feelings. Spiritual teachings encourage seeing others as reflections of ourselves, fostering compassion and connection.

Active Compassion: Acting with compassion means helping those in need and speaking kindly. This practice not only benefits others but also enriches our spiritual lives.

2. Upholding Integrity:

Consistency in Actions: Integrity means aligning our actions with our values consistently. Spirituality provides a moral framework to guide our behavior.

Honesty: Being truthful in all aspects of life builds trust and respect, essential components of both ethical and spiritual living.

3. Practicing Mindfulness:

Self-Awareness: Mindfulness involves being present and aware of our thoughts, emotions, and actions. This awareness helps us make ethical choices.

Meditation: Regular meditation cultivates inner peace and clarity, making it easier to act in accordance with ethical principles.

Practical Toolkit for Daily Living

Morning Routine:

Mindful Meditation: Start your day with 10-15 minutes of meditation. Focus on your breath and set intentions to act with empathy and integrity throughout the day.

Gratitude Practice: Reflect on what you are grateful for. This fosters a positive mindset and prepares you to approach the day with compassion.

Daily Practices:

Empathy Exercises: Practice active listening in your conversations. Pay full attention to the speaker, seeking to understand their feelings and perspectives.

Acts of Kindness: Incorporate small acts of kindness into your daily routine, such as helping a colleague or complimenting a stranger.

Evening Reflections:

Journaling: End your day with a reflection journal. Write about your actions and decisions, noting where you acted in alignment with your values and where you could improve.

Self-Compassion: Reflect on any mistakes with compassion for yourself. Consider how you can learn and grow from these experiences.

Community Engagement:

Volunteer Work: Dedicate time to volunteer for causes that resonate with your values. This helps build a sense of community and purpose.

Support Groups: Join or form groups focused on ethical living and spiritual growth. Sharing experiences and challenges provides support and inspiration.

Continuous Learning:

Study Spiritual Texts: Regularly read spiritual and philosophical texts that inspire ethical living. Reflect on their teachings and how they can be applied in your life.

Attend Workshops: Participate in workshops or seminars on mindfulness, compassion, and ethical decision-making.

Mindful Consumption:

Ethical Choices: Make conscious decisions about what you consume, whether it's food, media, or products. Choose options that align with your values of compassion and sustainability.

Environmental Stewardship: Practice reducing, reusing, and recycling as part of ethical living, recognizing our responsibility to the planet and future generations.

Food For Thought

The concept of letting the compass of EtQ guide us towards the shores of enlightenment emphasizes the integration of ethical intelligence and spirituality. By following the teachings of Guru Nanak, Buddha, and Guru Amar Das, we can navigate life's decisions with empathy, integrity, and mindfulness. This approach not only enriches our own lives but also fosters a more compassionate and just world. Through practical tools such as mindful meditation, active empathy, and continuous reflection, we can embody Ethical Intelligence in our daily routines, creating a ripple effect of kindness and understanding that touches everyone we encounter. This journey leads us to spiritual enlightenment, where our actions reflect our deepest values and contribute to the greater good.

#EthicalIntelligence #Empathy #Enlightenment #SpiritualGrowth #Compassion #EthicalLiving #Mindfulness #Integrity #GuruNanak #Buddhism #GuruAmarDas #MoralCompass #ConsciousDecisionMaking #InnerPeace #EthicalLeadership

1 note · View note

misnomera · 4 years

Text

On racial stereotyping of the Haans in TMA...

Right so as someone who is ethnically Chinese I have NO FUCKING clue how I didn’t notice this more distinctly in my initial binge of tma (going too fast and not paying closer attention to character names and descriptions, probably) but the Haan family storyline is, all horror elements aside, pretty fucked up in terms of racial representation re: stereotyping. This got long as hell, but please please please take a moment to read through if you’ve got time for it. thanks.

To start off, the Haans are one of the few characters in tma with an explicitly specified race and ethnicity—Chinese—and pretty much the only explicitly Chinese characters in tma, other than the mostly unimportant librarian (Zhang Xiaoling) from Beijing. But like, Haan isn’t even a properly Chinese surname, at least not in the way that it’s spelled in canon (it should be Han, one a. A quick google search tells me that Haan as a surname has...Dutch origins??).

Of course, that could be chalked up to shoddy anglicization processes within family histories, which certainly isn’t uncommon with immigrant families, so I’m not going to dwell on names too much (although I also find it interesting that John Haan’s name is so specifically and weirdly anglicized that he changed his own surname?? Hun Yung to John Haan is a very big leap of a name change and frankly not very believable. ANYWAY, this is not that important. I don’t expect Jonny, a white Englishman, to come up with perfectly unquestionable non-Cho-Chang-like Chinese names, though it certainly would be nice. Moving on).

What really bothers me about the Haans is how they almost exclusively and explicitly play into negative Chinese immigrant stereotypes. I don’t even feel like I need to say it because it’s like...it’s literally Right There, folks. John Haan (in ep 72) owns and operates a sketchy takeout restaurant. They’re all avatars of the Flesh—and John Haan is Specifically horrific and terrifying because he cooked his wife’s human meat and fed it to his unknowing customers. Does that remind you of any stereotypes which accuse Chinese people of consuming societally unacceptable and ethically questionable things like dog/cat/bat meat (which, if it’s not already crystal fucking clear, we don’t. do that.), which in turn characterize us as horrible unfeeling monsters? John Haan’s characterization feeds (haha, badum tss) directly into this harmful stereotype that have caused very real pain for Chinese people and East Asians in general.

And Jonny does nothing to address that from within his writing (and not out of it either). And, speaking on a more meta level, Jonny could’ve easily had these flesh avatars be individuals of any race (like, what’s Jared Hopworth’s ethnicity? Do we know? No? Well then). Conversely, he could’ve easily, easily had a Chinese person be an avatar of any other entity. So why did he have to chose specifically the Flesh?

(This is a rhetorical question. You know why. Racial stereotyping and invoking a fear of the other in an attempt to enhance horror, babey~)

On Tom Haan’s side, Jonny seems weirdly intent on having other characters repeatedly comment on his accent (or rather, lack thereof) in relation to his race. Think about how, in ep 30 (killing floor), the fact that Tom Haan had spoken a line to the statement giver in “perfect English” was an emphasized beat in that statement, and a beat that was supposed to be “chilling” and meant to signify to us that something was, quote-unquote, “not right” with Tom Haan. Implicitly, that’s saying that it was unexpected, not “normal”, and in this case even eerie, for someone who looks Chinese to have spoken in fluid, unbroken English. Mind you, the line itself was perfectly scary on its own (“you cannot stop the slaughter by closing the door”), so why did Jonny feel the need to note the accent in which it was spoken in? Why did Jonny HAVE to have that statement giver note, that he initially “wasn’t even sure how much English [Haan] spoke”?

This happens again in episode 72 with a Chinese man (and again, his ethnicity is Explicitly Noted) who we assume is also Tom Haan. This one is rather ironically funny and kind of painfully self aware, because the statement giver expresses surprise at Haan’s “crisp RP accent” and then immediately “felt bad about making the assumption that he couldn’t speak English,” and subsequently admitted that thought was “low-key racist.” Like, from a writing perspective, this entire passage is roundabout, pointless, and says absolutely nothing helpful to enhance the horror genre experience for listeners (instead it just sounded like some sort of half-assed excuse so Jonny or other listeners could say “look! We’ve addressed the racism!” You didn’t. It just made me vaguely uncomfortable). And again, having other people comment on our accents/lack thereof while assuming we are foreign is a Very Real microaggression that east asians face on the daily. If Jonny needed some filler sentences for pacing he could’ve written about Literally anything else. So why point out, yet again, that the crazy murderous man was foreign and Chinese?

At this point, you might say, right, but yknow, it was just that the statement givers were kind of racist! It happens! Yeah sure, ok, that’s a passable in-universe explanation for descriptions of Tom Haan (though not John Haan, mind you), but the statement givers are fake made up people, and statement’s still written by Jonny, who absolutely has all the power to write overt discrimination out of his stories. And he does! Think about just how many minor (and major!!) characters are so, so carefully written as completely aracial, and do not have their ethnicity implicated at all in whatever horrors they may or may not be committing. Think about how many lgbtq+ characters have given statements, and have been in statements, without having faced direct forms of discrimination, or portrayed as embodying blatant stereotypes in their stories (though lgbtq+ rep in tma certainly has their own issues that I won’t go into here). Jonny can clearly write characters this way, and he can do it well. So why, why, am I being constantly, repeatedly reminded in-text of the fact that the Haans are East Asian, that they’re from China, that they’re Chinese immigrants, that they’re second-generation British Chinese or whatever the fuck, and that they’re also horrifying conduits for blood, gore, and general fucked-up-ness? It’s absolutely not something that is Needed for the stories to be an effective piece of horror; the only thing it does is perpetuate incredibly harmful and hurtful stereotypes.

And listen, I love tma to bits. It’s taken over my blog. I’ve really loved my interactions with the fandom. And I am consistently blown away by Jonny’s writing and how well he’s able to weave foreshadowing and plot into an incredibly complex collection of stories. But I absolutely Cannot stop thinking about the Haans because it’s just. It’s such a blatant display of racial stereotyping in writing. And I’ve certainly seen a few voices talking about it here and there, and I don’t know if I’m just not looking in the right places, but it certainly feels like something that is just straight up not on the radar for a lot of tma fans. And I’m disappointed about that.

Just, I don’t know. Take a look at those episodes again and do some of your own thinking about why these characters had to be specifically Chinese (answer: they didn’t.). And in general, PLEASE for the love of god turn a critical eye on character portrayals and descriptions whenever they are assigned specific races/ethnicities (Some examples that come to mind are Jude Perry, Annabelle Cane, and Diego Molina), because similar issues, to an extent, extend beyond the Haans, though I haven’t covered them here.

You shouldn’t need a POC to do point out these problems for you when they’re so glaringly There. But for those of you who really didn’t know, hope this was informative in some way. I’m tired, man. If some of the only significant Chinese characters you write are violent cannibalistic men with a perverted relationship with meat, just don’t do it. Please don’t do it.

EDIT: Since the making of this post Jonny has acknowledged and apologized for these portrayals on his twitter and in the Rusty Quill Operations Update, which went up September 2020. A long time coming, but better late than never. This of course doesn’t necessarily negate the harm done by Jonny’s writing, and doesn’t make me much less angry about it, but is appreciated nonetheless. For more on this topic there’s a lot of productive discussions happening in my “#tma crit” tag and in the notes of this post

#tma #the magnus archives #magnuspod #tma 30 #tma 72 #tma crit #racism #sinophobia #racist stereotyping #tw cannibalism #tw violence #long post #tom haan #john haan

3K notes · View notes

tomorrow-and-tomorrows · 3 years

Text

SNK 139.5: Towards the Final Pages with no Final Answers

The final pages of the updated ending are bold, but I think ultimately more evocative than the original preliminary ending.

Even after the intensely polarized reader reception that took issue with the lack of storytelling precision and clarity when it was most needed, SNK chose to end with a decisively ambiguous symbol. In literature, a symbol is something that clearly means something -- but with the most "literary" symbols, their meaning cannot be absolutely defined; any attempted answer as to what a symbol represents has no finality or certainty, and interpretation will remain ever open to debate. A symbol both invites and resists interpretation.

Naturally, the immediate response to the symbolic tree on the final page is to try answering the invitation to the question, "What does it mean?"

One prominent answer I've seen is that it symbolizes the continuation of the cycle of war and violence either because a) of the symbolic parallel to Ymir or b) on a more literal level, that it implies the actual potential revival of new era of Titans. A reasonable interpretation either way, but also, I think, an incomplete one.

The first reason for this is that "the endless cycle of war" was already clearly and powerful represented in the preceding panels:

The cycle of war was already continuing in the decades or centuries before the child arrived at the tree. A culminating image symbolizing the persistence or resurgence of an era of war as the final panel would thus arguably be redundant and unnecessary.

Furthermore, the chapter is entitled "Toward the Tree on That Hill." If the tree were simply a symbol of war, by implication the chapter could equally be called 'toward the endless cycle of war'. But such a relentlessly bleak and tonally flat ending sentiment would be firmly incongruous with the story's recurrent conviction in the equal cruelty and beauty of the world -- a conviction that I believe it has been faithful to all the way to its end.

The Long Defeat

But while on this topic of war, let's linger a moment on the "cruelty" side and the consequence of this wordless construction and subsequent destruction of a city -- the most bold and possibly controversial additional panels that are also my personal favourite additions.

One objection that has emerged against this brief sequence of Paradis' apparent destruction is that it renders the entire story to be "pointless". Eren's 80% Rumbling, Armin's diplomatic peace talks between the remnants of the Allied Nations and Paradis, and before that, the proposal of the 50-year plan and Zeke's euthanasia plan... everything, to the very beginning to the Survey Corps' dreams of some kind of freedom; was it all for nothing? All that striving, that hope, that final promise bestowed upon Armin: was it all a pointless story? Even more radically, is the story suggesting that Eren might as well have continued the Rumbling to 100% of the earth? Was Zeke's euthanasia plan the cruel but correct choice all along? What was the point of rejecting the 50-year plan if that had a greater chance of success at preventing this outcome?

I think Isayama suddenly pulling back to such a long-term view of history to the scale of decades or even centuries into the future calls for a reorientation in attitude towards exactly what kind of story we have been reading. Yes, if the metric is Paradis' survival, maybe it was indeed all "pointless". But that's also to say that, on the broadest scale, SNK is a story about futility, that it is a deliberate representation of the struggle to make one's actions historically meaningful.

In the long view of history, all the events, from Grisha running beyond the wall to see the airships and the first breaking of Wall Maria to Erwin's sacrifices, Paradis' discovery of the outside world, and finally to the Battle of Heaven and Earth, it would all merely be a handful of chapters in the history textbooks of the future. A future in which war and geopolitical conflict will continue even without Titans. That does not mean that all paths to the future are equal -- the 50-year plan would not have put an end to Titans, and Zeke's euthanasia plan distorts utilitarian ethics into just another form of oppression; there are better and worse decisions that lead to more and less degrees of suffering, but no decision can ever be the final one.

The additional panels remind us that in history, there never exists a singular "Final Solution". The reason there are readers who vehemently support Eren to have flattened 100% of the world, and the reason the Paradisians supported the oppressive, authoritarian, proto-fascist Jaegar Faction under Floch and even after the Rumbling, is that because they want to believe that a Final Solution to end conflict exists and will work. They resist the fundamental uncertainty and complexity of the situation, instead preferring a singular, unified, and coherent Answer to Paradis' struggle to survive. I'm reminded of the scholar Erich Auerbach's theorization of why fascism appealed to many people during periods of political and social crisis, change, and uncertainty. Writing in exile after fleeing Nazi Germany, he observed that:

"The temptation to entrust oneself to a sect which solved all problems with a single formula, whose power of suggestion imposed solidarity, and which ostracized everything which would not fit in and submit - this temptation was so great that, with many people, fascism hardly had to employ force when the time came for it to spread through the countries of old European culture." (from Mimesis p. 550)

This acutely describes the Jaegar Faction's rise to power and continued dominance in Paradis. But their promise of unity, of a single formula to wipe out the rest of the world either literally through the Rumbling, or to dominate them with military force, is a false one. Even if Eren had Rumbled 100% of the world instead of 80%, history would still go on. The external threat of the world may have been eliminated, but internal conflict and violence would still continue onward throughout the generations born on top of the blood of the rest of the world. Needless to say, out of all the options, Eren's 80% Rumbling is the very epitome of perpetuating the cycle of violence as it creates tens of thousands of war orphans like Eren once was, and it would justify employing violence for one's own self-interest to an extreme degree. For the generations to come that would valourize Eren as a hero, it would set a dangerous precedent for what degree of destruction is acceptable for self-defence -- nothing short of the attempt to flatten the entire world. It is no surprise that Paradis would meet a violent end when its founding one-party rule of the Jaegar Faction has their roots in such unapologetically bloody foundations.

Neither the 80% Rumbling nor the militaristic, ultra-nationalistic Jaegar faction that come to govern Paradis are glamourized as the "correct" solution to ensuring Paradis' future. (This can also put to rest any accusations of SNK's ending as "fascist" or "imperialist" propaganda, since the island's modern nation that they founded ends in war. All nations must fall eventually, but not all do in such blatant destruction). Importantly, neither is Armin's diplomatic mission naively idealized as that which permanently achieves world peace. No singular or unifying formula can work because reality is complicated. Entrusting oneself to seemingly simple Answers is simply insufficient, even if they are ideals of peaceful negotiation; that method may work given the right conditions, but the world will always eventually complicate its feasibility.

After all in the real world, there's the absurd irony that some in the West had called the First World War "The War to End all Wars". These days, WWI is merely one long chapter in our textbooks just a few pages away from the even longer chapter of the Second World War that is followed by all the rest of the conflicts that have followed since then even with the establishment of diplomatic organizations like the United Nations. In this sense, showing Paradis' eventual downfall is perhaps the only way to end such a series that is so concerned with history, from King Fritz's tribal expansion into empire, the rise and fall of Marleyan ascendency, and finally of the survival and apparent shattering of Paradis.

From its beginning to its end, SNK has poignantly evoked J.R.R. Tolkien's conception of history as The Long Defeat. In one character's words, "together through ages of the world we have fought the long defeat". That is to say, "no victory is complete, that evil rises again, and that even victory brings loss".

No heroes, only humans

Eren's desperate, fatalistic resignation to committing the Rumbling, along with the characters' rejection of all the rest of the earlier plans to ensure Paradis a future, are merely the actions of human beings to that began with the need to find not even necessarily a Final Answer, but at least an acceptable and feasible one for the time being. But the characterization of Eren's confusion, childishness, and regret in the final chapter is startlingly real in how it demonstrates how, all along, we have been dealing not with grand heroes, but simply people who have no answers at all. SNK has always been about failures - and often ironic failures; it has always been a story about painful and frequently futile struggle.

People make mistakes, they can be short-sighted, selfish, biased, immature, petty, and irrational, and I think the ending follows through with depicting the consequences of that.

Erwin's self-sacrifice before being able to reach the basement (and his regression to a childhood state in the moments before his death), Kenny's futile chasing after that universal compassion he had seen in Uri, Shadis never being acknowledged by history despite his final heroic action, and so on -- these stories of ironic, futile failures are still meaningful in their mere striving. Eren's ending and Paradis' demise despite Armin's endeavour to ensure them a peaceful future are entirely consistent with this.

SNK certainly follows the shounen trope in which young individuals are bestowed great power and correspondingly great responsibility, and must then reconcile the burden of possessing that greatness on which the fate of the world depends. Yet it is equally defined by its representation of the state that us normal human beings confront everyday: the struggle against the apparent powerlessness to enact any meaningful or lasting change at all. Simultaneously, this helpless state does not exempt us from the responsibility to act in whatever small capacity we are able to resist oppression, ideological extremism, and the perpetuation of violence.

Towards That Symbol

That was a rather long but vital digression about the additional "construction and destruction" pages. To return to the issue of the symbolism in the final panel, here I will turn from seemingly affirming the tree as symbolizing the cycle of violence, towards what I think is the greater complexity of what the tree might "actually" symbolize.

As I've said above, I don't believe that the final chapter title is synonymous with 'toward the endless cycle of war'. In tone, theme, and characterization, SNK has always been defined by the tension between cruelty and beauty, the will to violence and the underlying desire for peace, and the rest of the contradictory impulses that all simultaneously coexist. The end of SNK as a whole commits to a similar lack of closure, ambiguity, and interpretive openness.

So far I have rambled on about only a view of the perpetual "cruelty" of history. Where, then, is the "beauty"?

In short, the "tree = cycle of violence" interpretation is obviously based on how that this tree recalls the original tree in which the spine creature, as the source of the power of the Titans, resided. But it's worth first considering, what exactly is this creature? We seem to get our answer in the chapter that most precisely crystallizes the dual "cruelty and beauty" of the world:

The spine creature might be said to be life itself. Or more specifically, the will of life to perpetuate itself, for no reason at all but for the fleeting moments in which we feel distinctly glad to have existed in the world.

The creature at the source of the Titans, and in extension the Titans themselves, is neither inherently a positive or negative, "good" or "evil", creative or destructive force. It's both and all of those at once. As with any power, the Titans were merely a tool that was put to use to oppressive ends.

So as I now suggest that the tree at the end is symbolically a "Tree of Life", I don't at all mean "life" in the typically celebratory or optimistic sense: rather, I mean it in the ambiguous, ambivalent, uncertain, and complex sense that has been evoked throughout the above discussion of the inevitable continuation of war.

The title "Toward The Tree on That Hill" is derived from its associations with Eren and Mikasa, but more specifically of course, from Armin's affirmation of existence. However, the tree as a symbol of existential affirmation is undercut with the revelation that, despite Armin's diplomatic mediation between the Allied Nations and Paradis, the island nation never escapes war just as no nation in the history of the earth has ever fully escaped war.

The image of Armin running toward that life-affirming tree by the end becomes twisted and complicated, as the image of the anonymous child approaching the Tree of Life evokes both awe at its beauty and grandeur, and a deep dread at the foreboding of its cyclical return to Ymir's tree that signalled the beginning of a bloody era.

And I think that is precisely it: Life is not some idealized, beautiful vision that we always want to run toward; it is also ironic, complicated, and dreadful. It is ambivalent. Like a literary symbol, the meaning of life cannot be pinned down absolutely. The tree therefore becomes itself a symbol of uncertainty, of an open future that is cyclical both in its beauty and war.

As a final observation, it is surely no coincidence that, the small, black, birdlike silhouettes of the war planes destroying the city from the sky is replaced by the similarly small black silhouettes of birds in the final panel.

If the birds represent freedom from war, the irony is that the immediately surrounding land appears to be one completely empty of people save for the exploring child; it is a freedom attained only without people's presence. Yet at the same time, a child from some existing civilization has reached it; perhaps it is freedom that they have reached, perhaps it is something else that they see in the tree. What is it that they were looking for? What does the tree and its history represent for the child, and what does it mean for their future? Alternatively, does the child-in-the-forest imagery negatively recall the warning that the world is one huge forest of predator and prey that we need to protect children from entering?

Rather than providing answers, this tree embodies all of the potential questions, and all of the potential answers. These possibilities will unfold themselves into an uncertain future beyond the chapters of history that Eren, Armin, Mikasa, Zeke, Erwin, and all the rest of the characters were part of and left their mark on; and whatever future this child will witness or create, it will similarly be one of the struggle against futility, as the journey begins anew with each generation in every new era. Neither - or both - hopeful or despairing, the final image of this tree, just like life itself, contains those innumerable irresolvable tensions as it gestures towards all possibilities, both oppressive and free.

#snk 139 #snk ending #snk extra pages #snk meta #snk #snk spoilers #brain dump #this is a pretty personal interpretation so if there are any logical inconsistencies i don't know what to do with them #yes the execution of the final arc/chapter is flawed but it's still very conceptually interesting #i still have my disappointments but overall i've made my peace with it #translating my tangled thoughts into words however imperfectly: i think that's what freedom is all about #snk manga #aot #aot 139 #aot ending

229 notes · View notes

thewillowbends · 3 years

Text

Halfway through S&S, and I'm here to tell you guys the reason Mal drives you guys insane isn't because he's that toxic, really. There's some bad writing around him, but I can see what Leigh was trying to do having him be the moral heart of the series, the person who keeps Alina steady when she's pushing the limits of her own ethics. (Which is, fundamentally, a mild gender reverse of what we typically see in most stories, right? I'm not joking when I say I think she was inspired by The Hunger Games because there's a lowkey Peeta/Gale vibe with the love interests here and how they reflect moral pathways Alina could have taken. The Darkling even has grey eyes, lmao.)

He annoys you because he keeps Alina from being the dark protagonist this story needed her to be. I mean, there are other ways he's annoying in that his feelings about her powers isn't mixed (wouldn't you feel disturbed that the very same power by which your friend saved your life now seems to be destroying her? wouldn't it make your feelings on the situation really complex?). Beyond the fact that the moral landscape of this series really needed an adult story to thoroughly explore its nuances, there's the fact that the ultimate fate of this character really needed Alina to go to the edge. Ideally, it should have happened in S&B, but it could have happened here....and it just doesn't happen. He's the voice pulling her back, which is fine, but a story about the corrosive influence of power really needs a protagonist who is violating our own ideas of what's acceptable and making us question whether this story has any real heroes, whether everybody is just kind of fucked because Morozova's legacy is one of greed, and everyone who gets involved gets swept up in that feverish rush of his ambition.

So what happens is that, instead of doing anything truly meaningfully, morally reprehensible on the scale a fantasy series requires, she's just kind of an asshole. And not even an asshole who's interesting. S&B Alina was prickly, anxious, fast to make judgements, desperate to feel important and wanted...and all of that was fine because she was seventeen and immature. Those qualities could have been matured into something interesting, like having her become increasingly aware of how dangerous her life was as a Grisha and the saint, something that would start her down a path similar to the Darkling (i.e. power is both a boon and target your back, so you have to protect yourself against everyone). There's even like...the implications of this in S&S with her being legitimately freaked out by how people are sanctifying her, selling chicken bones claiming they're hers. (How on Earth did Leigh miss the obvious parallel there between an amplifier and a saint? They're both more valuable dead than alive!) She already has that anger in her, the same anger that the Darkling has learned to bury and fashion into a weapon that drives him. It just needed to be allowed to foster into something meaningful.

And she just...doesn't grow. Her awareness never goes beyond how events are affecting her. She never starts to understand what drives the Darkling beyond just seeing the boy in him. Her sense of responsibility to all of these Grisha who chose their country over years of loyalty and admiration of the Darkling never develops past how they're useful to her mission. (Hmm, sounds familiar, right?) Worst of all, she simply....gets all the prickly, unlikable characteristics of a character who could tip over into some really shitty behaviors but none of the actually interesting actions that make the Darkling a terrible but deeply compelling villain.

S&S Alina shouldn't have been told to kill the sea whip out of mercy by Mal. She needed to do it without prompting, showing us a jump from S&B's moment with the stag where mercy is something she's slowly realizing she can't afford anymore - or maybe doesn't care to maintain. S&S Alina needed to fulfill the promise of that girl who crippled the skiff in a moment of panic and fear to save herself and the man she loves. She needed to be more of the girl who was infatuated by the power the collar the Darkling gave her, so he becomes a complex figure who empowered her to dark ends, while Mal is the good man with a good heart who ultimately held her back unknowingly. The story is too afraid to go there, too afraid to ask the reader to forgive their protagonist if she crosses too far of a line, mostly because it refuses to forgive it in its antagonist...which should be a warning to all of us about what happens when you create a zero sum game where redemption isn't an option. Because in the end, Alina winds up committing the worst character offense of all: she's annoying.

#if they couldn't figure out a better way to execute this arc I'm glad that they cut it #but it does annoy me that it does mean they cut out some of Alina's character complexity which she didn't have much of to begin with #so like...what's her arc now?#it BETTER be replaced with an emerging sense of what's wrong with the world that it turned Aleksander into what he is now #a revolutionary who will pursue his idea of justice by any means #because otherwise we're back to the same problem as the books asking: why is she the heroine?#shadow and bone #alina starkov #the grisha trilogy #siege and storm

99 notes · View notes

whetstonefires · 4 years

Note

i thought the narrative did allow for sympathizing with jet and hama? hell, the narrative structure with jet and hama has their sad backstories and motives placed first, then after that they do things that make katara more and more uncomfortable until it gets to something horrifying. jet even tried to make a new life afterwards and his death is nothing but tragic. azula was introduced as a terrifying sociopath and wasn't given sympathetic attention until season 3.

Weirdly this ties in to some of the themes from the Vietnam War ask I just answered! Let’s see what I can do.

The thing is. You’re allowed to pity Jet and Hama, but they aren’t presented to us in sympathetic terms, no. We aren’t meant to empathize too closely with them, or even see them as immense tragedies. Jet’s death is sad, but it’s also a relief; it isn’t framed to stick with the viewer as even a major story beat.

We are explicitly discouraged from identifying with both of them; their role in the story is as negative examples, warning the main characters away from senseless violence and extremism.

Putting their sad backstories first and then following it with a Dark Twist actually works against making them sympathetic, because it means the motion of the narrative is away from them--we start out with a positive impression that gets worse, which leaves a much more negative psychological imprint than starting with bad and getting even a little better. It draws the attention and the story away from what was done to them and toward what they did, while the order in which Azula is shown to us moves the other way.

So their traumas are provided as context for their actions, though in a very outline version in Jet’s case, but they aren’t dwelt on; we don’t get into their heads and feel their agony with them; the narrative’s engagement with their motives is restricted to explication, and the assertion that their suffering does not justify their actions.

Which isn’t exactly wrong--they both were targeting noncombatants in a way that wasn’t likely to be terribly helpful to anyone, and that really is something that deserves warning away from because it’s very tempting when you have a lot of pain, and the proxies for your real enemy are so much easier to reach with the strength you have.

(Lateral violence is born from this process of reframing, though what they were doing was not that--they both were managing to target the actual group they had beef with, which is better than a lot of people in real life manage rip.)

But that’s a specific narrative choice that was made with these characters, to create them and deal with them as dark-reflections-in-the-world of other people’s (mostly Katara’s) wounded anger, and nothing more.

While Azula got a whole episode wherein the emotional arc of the A-plot centered largely around her feelings about her own social awkwardness and relationship with her mother.

And like. This is, for the most part, a side effect of Azula’s centrality in the story and her relationship with Zuko!

And of the way the Fire Nation royal family is used as a narrative microcosm of how the ideology behind Fire expansionism is toxic and abusive all the way down, and has to be dismantled.

So it’s not bad, exactly.

But it does mean that we’re encouraged to engage far more closely and in a much more nuanced manner with the self-image and lived experience of the homicidal, consciously sadistic young fascist from the industrially developed expansionist empire...

...than we are with the experiences and decisionmaking of the oppressed people victimized by the system of which she is a leading part.

And that’s kind of a pattern in American media, and deserves to be pointed out and critiqued where it crops up. It’s kind of inevitable, but it would be better if it could not be an unmarked default.

The narrative, in part because of the perspective from (and to) which it was being written, can more comfortably engage with Azula’s experiences because they’re ultimately personal--they interface with the broader, institutional reality in terms of allegory and in terms of consequence, but they are built on and about, and can be discussed in terms of, the interactions of individual persons.

While otoh Jet and Hama’s formative traumas are institutional in nature--it was the Fire Nation as military power that took their families and their homes and the lives they should have had away from them; it was the Fire Nation as administrator of colonial-political prison that destroyed Hama inch by inch.

And how do you resolve that? How do you parcel that down and let that go and make peace within yourself, when the thing that destroyed you is still there in the world, still taking and hurting and still beyond your reach? It hurts and it expands as if to swallow the whole world, that question, that irreconcilable need.

Katara only comes to terms with her own, in-comparison contained, experience of being traumatized by that same institution by drilling down until it’s a grudge against a single human person, who isn’t worth it.

But of course it really was the Fire Nation that took her mother away from her. And that’s difficult. That’s beyond the scope of the children’s cartoon. So they lock it away.

And Azula is locked away in the end, too, but she’s locked away as a person, whom we came close to and watched very intimately as she broke. While Jet and Hama are to a considerable degree locked away as ideas, not allowed to escape the confines of their rhetorical roles.

Making Hama a serial kidnapper/torturer/maybe-killer and locus of horror, and sending her back to Fire Nation captivity in a community with every reason to hate and fear her, and abandoning the character there with no follow-up (except using her legacy as a characteristic of villains in the sequel series) was a narrative decision that the people writing Avatar made.

There were good reasons for it in terms of the plot and Katara’s arc and it was even good storytelling! It doesn’t Ruin Avatar and there’s not an easy fix for it.

But it was a decision, and it has reverberations in terms of the history of representation of institutionally wronged people and particularly indigenous people in American media.

Having Jet be first almost a straw man of a resistance fighter, then betrayed and victimized by his own people, and finally literally disposed of, and take his rage and struggle with colonial aftermath with him, was a choice that was made, and which also has implications and an impact on the worldbuilding.

It’s a children’s series, and it’s a plot that needs to be resolvable on Aang’s terms; there’s only so far they could pursue either thread, but those decisions--especially with Hama--carry a certain subtext, and stand in stark contrast to the depth Azula in all her glorious shattered monstrosity was permitted.

And it’s worth talking about!

I mean...Korra had a lot of writing issues, like the pacing and the horrible love triangle, but a major underlying one (at least in Season One I didn’t get any further haha) was that it tried very hard to get out of realistically engaging with the aftermath of colonial violence in any depth whatsoever, despite specifically choosing to set season 1 in a place founded on the aftermath of colonial violence.

You cannot have America without genocide and colonialism, and when you try to have expy-America without talking about the genocide and colonialism you already established in the setting...you’re shooting your narrative in the gut.

And this situation was created out of the same limitations that let Azula be more human than Jet or Hama, and dug into the ethical complexity of her situation with far more care than either of them merited.

#atla #heavy issues #meta #hama #jet #azula #colonialism #hoc est meum #marked and unmarked #imperialist norms #a nonny mouse #ask

79 notes · View notes

welcometomy20s · 3 years

Text

January 10th, 2021

Action Button Review

Review

Tim Rogers reminds me of Hank Green. They are about the same age, they look about the same age which is a combination of young and old that feel eternal. They also have the same length of experience in writing in online spaces, interest in Japanese media, and apparently have Crohn’s disease? In summary, he might be the closest equivalent to Dave Green that exists in the real world. Well, I guess Dave Green is not apt, as Dave Green is not special in a way, while Tim Rogers is special, but his speciality comes from his failures rather than his counterparts' success.

Tim Rogers is a hypothetical Green brother who did not decide to publish that book. He’s a hypothetical Green brother who went to Japan instead of Alabama or Florida. Whose project crashed and burned rather than a surprise success. He’s forged in fire while the Green brothers are eroded by water. Both are wonderful people, but with a different ground of intensity and differing wealth of wisdom.

I encountered this series because I found a twitter post about a six hour review of Tokimeki Memorial, and a white middle-aged man talking about a dating sim for six hours with laudatory blurbs would always pique my interest, but since I didn’t know the guy, I went ahead and looked if he made other videos, and found he has four other review that were all about three hours or more. Now I knew that I had to watch all the reviews to prepare myself for this six hour review of Tokimeki Memorial.

Now, I wasn’t a stranger to three hour reviews of video games. I watched Joseph Anderson, Raycevick, Whitelight, matthewmatosis, and Noah Gervais-Caldwell. In fact, in the comments below Action Button Reviews, many people talked about a comparison to Noah Gervais-Caldwell (and Brian David Gilbert) and that was quite funny since I actually watched a recent Noah Gervais-Caldwell video.

His first two reviews were perfunctory, him opening himself up and trying out new things and polishing his review style, as he went through the Final Fantasy VII remake and The Last of Us. While I watched The Last of Us, I distinctly remembered and contrasted Noah’s The Last of Us Part 2 review with Tim Roger’s The Last of Us review. I liked Tim Roger’s defense of interactive movies (although he denies it!) contrasted with more cynical but ultimately positive connotation in Noah’s review. And Noah’s thesis pairs nicely with Tim’s observation that Ellie was the main protagonist all along. That fact makes Part 2 much more understandable, even the bad parts.

When I finished watch his first two reviews, I went ahead and also watched several of Tim’s videos on Kotaku, which were slightly shorter, the longest being just over an hour, which is a review of the best games in 1994, and does contain a short segment about Tokimeki Memorial, which his six hour review was my destination. To put in context, Tokimeki Memorial was #3. #1 was Earthbound, #2 was Final Fantasy VI, and #4 was Super Metroid. And I just watched a playthrough of Super Metroid basically on a whim, because it’s a monumental and a great game to play and watch.

And while the segment of the games that I knew to be great and monumental in my absorption of knowing video games was deeply personal and rightly claimed its stake that it deserved its spot, his segment of Tokimeki Memorial never got there. It was almost as if he was deliberately hiding behind something. In the end of 1994 review, Tim pitched an idea about a three hour Earthbound review, which probably was Tim’s idea of floating a departure from Kotaku, which would happen two months later, and I wonder if he was trying to deliberately throw a curveball by making a video of Tokimeki Memorial instead of the promised Earthbound review. This may be a far leap, I admit.

I went back and watched the video about Doom. It was much better in quality and in darkness. I was reminded of Film Crit Hulk’s writing of The World’s End and James Bond, another very long essay that was deeply personal and chapter for easier consumption. Few commenters noticed that Tim Rogers was just doing a dramatic reading of his written reviews on Kotaku and Action Button dot net, and how they liked that approach, and I found myself liking that approach as well. You might believe a video review needs more than just reading an essay out loud, but just the act of reading an essay out loud in the correct intonation and inflection adds ton to experience. And Tim Rogers sounds like he has decades worth of experience to present a dramatic reading of his essay very effectively, much like Hank Green.

I continued scaling the mountain to my goal. I went through his review of Pac-Man and was delighted by his reading of Namco games, and was impressed by the opening sequence, and just generally enjoyed it. I was getting excited to set a day aside and let the six hour review of Tokimeki Memorial watch over me and reduce me to dust.

And it sure did. That six hours was a harrowing experience. What Tim Rogers is best at is telling a story, and so to go through a let’s play was a wish I never made, fulfilled. In the end, I was left with nothing and everything. It was like finishing a really good book.

I wanted to watch it again, then again I never wanted to watch it again. It was almost a traumatic experience. Tim talked about there being endless variation of love, and the love Tim Rogers went through was not the fluffy yet melancholic one that I craved, but one akin to a devotion of an eldritch god. Love made in justification for one’s efforts in attending and maintaining a relationship. A love stronger than most kinds of love, but most draining and taxing as well. Tim Roger’s synopsis of Tennis Monster reminded me of Asking for It by Louise O’Neill, which is also about empathizing a quite hateable character because we kind of have to. Apparently one person knows the full plot because Tim Rogers rambled on about it as he was couch surfing in his house, and unbelieve as it usually is, I fully trust that the commenter is telling the truth.

I was like a heroin addict, who really wanted a different hit, like talking to friends or hiking, my mother wanted me to go hiking with her, and I didn’t because, after the pandemic started, all I wanted to be was inside. Outside felt diseased. The air outside felt contaminated to me, hard to breathe. I was stuck in this place.

Tim Rogers is an exceptional figure. He seems to be a movie protagonist, he reminds me of The Librarian, played by Noah Wyle. Tim has eidetic memory, as he has access every single autobiographical memory formed, but not other types of memory. We know that those types of memory are different because of people like Tim and people who are opposite of Tim, someone who has no memories of autobiographical memory but otherwise fine. These people tend to have very few emotions and have a hard time deciding things. Lack of emotions is correlated with difficulty in decision making.

So Tim is the opposite of that, Tim is full of emotions, complex emotions and he can make decisions and carry it out in a snap. He would be good at school, and he was, but he would be too focused on his grandeur to be under some authority, which is how he became who he was. His anti-authoritarian nature rings throughout his reviews, highlight the general Generation X vibe that Tim exudes but also the modern socialistic movement of Generation Z, which adds to this odd mix of old and new.

Not only does Tim have eidetic memory and intense work ethic that he never seems to move away from, therefore making a three hour video masterpiece at a clip that seems unbelievable for a seasoned viewer, he also has exceptional skills in fast math and language, he seems to be at least familiar with dozens of languages, and of course Tim’s experience is bounded by his decade of living in Japan.

I think this is why Tim naturally gravitates towards video games. When Tim says ‘welcome to video games’ there’s a natural supposition that Tim Rogers is the protagonist of video games, and I think he is. Tim wants to be in video games, because he needs to be in video games, instead of some almighty god cruelly deciding to plop him into a real life. He should be an video game adaptation of The Librarian and go on world-spanning adventure and romance impossibly beautiful girls instead of toiling the grime of what real life portends to. His life is dramatic, but impossibly mundane as well. It’s a simulacrum of a movie or a video game, which is pretty cool on its own.

But of course Tim Rogers isn’t the only part of Action Button Reviews. In the ensuing five videos, Tim Rogers tries to do something. Video games are a wide net. There is so much to video games, something like Gone Home and Geometry Dash are included alongside Wolfenstein The New Colossus and Farmville. What makes a video game? Actually, the more interesting question is, why do we have the term ‘video games’? Why do we put all of this mess into a single category, as if there is some throughline.

Tim Rogers starts to do that. Tim Rogers boldly states that things like Doom and Tokimeki Memorial are intimately connected to each other. And that all video games are in conversation with each other, through deep and complex meta-narratives. Tim Rogers is a cartographer, trying to map out how video games are made whole.

I’ve always strived to be that kind of a cartographer, to showcase the weave of reality, of connecting two seemingly unconnected parts, and showing to a profound implication both existing, instead of one or the other. If you don’t know, I have been trying to write something out of my current obsession with Virtual YouTubers, and mostly Hololive, and while I think I stumbled upon the six hour video review of Tokimeki Memorial outside of my interest in virtual YouTubers, this video, as I expected in the back of my head, gave me plenty of thoughts about Hololive. Its rumination of cyberpunk and idol culture is so directly connected with the peculiarities of Hololive that I was quite astounded.

From the very beginning, I wonder how Tim Rogers thinks about Hololive, especially after he has done that six hour review. I’m sure he will have a lot of interesting thoughts about the prospect. I want to get in contact with him, maybe work under him. But then I don’t want to hang out with him. I want to be near him as he talks to a crowd at a party, but I don’t feel safe to be near him when there’s less than ten people nearby. I think below ten, I would be swept in some danger that I won’t be prepared for.

Tim Rogers and Action Button Review is a fascinating review series and if you have the time, I suggest you should take the journey. It’s well worth it, just to get a different perspective on video games and the world around it.

#action button #tim rogers #video games #web video #review

22 notes · View notes

scripttorture · 4 years

Note

Sorry for the multiple asks. In Harry Potter, Neville Longbottom's parents were tortured to what I assume is catatonia by the cruciatus curse. Is this a realistic portrayal of the effects of torture, or does it involve some degree of magical handwaving? If realistic, then would you mind suggesting some avenues, both grounded in reality and more fantastical, by which their condition may be helped?

So I had a long answer written out for this and then it got eaten and I’d deleted my backup (both of them) and don’t you just despise technology sometimes? Join me as I scream into the void.

Once more, from the top-

No need to apologise for multiple asks. They are in fact encouraged. I’d rather you looked for answers to your questions then assumed you already know the answer. Thank you for coming to me. Thank you for taking an interest. It really does mean a lot to me to see people engaging with the subject. :)

It’s been a long time since I read Harry Potter. From what I can remember I don’t think the books handled torture survivors well.

I think this particular portrayal landed smack bang in ‘torture makes victims passive’. It was also pretty explicitly using that misconception about torture survivors being unable to live full, happy lives or make any kind of recovery.

You could make the argument that these are magical, rather then the effects of torture. But I don’t think Rowling did any work to show that was the case. From what I can remember the stuff that’s actually in the books just suggests the curse causes pain and… that’s it.

Which doesn’t stop you from trying to make a bad portrayal better.

@scriptshrink is the mental health professional in the family and may disagree. From what I can remember I don’t think the description of the Longbottoms in the books was exactly catatonia. It seemed more like a combination of catatonia and late stage dementia to me.

Which creates a bit of a problem for a narrative arc if you want to treat these characters in a more realistic way. Because catatonia is easily treated now with drugs and late stage dementia is… there’s basically no effective treatment. There are things patients can be given to slow the progression of dementia but what they’ve lost is gone. (I’ve spent quite a long time around people with various forms of dementia and I’m going to cite experience as my source there).

The reason that’s an issue for a narrative is that there really isn’t a middle ground between ‘take this pill to recover’ and ‘there is no treatment at all’. And that’s not on you, it’s on the source material.

So, suggestion time: I do have a few different ideas depending on what you want from a recovery arc and how you want to characterise Wizard culture in your story.

Let’s assume that (like catatonia) this fugue state survivors of the curse are in is easily treatable. What happens when you take it away? When survivors are present, not dissociating and remember what happened to them?

Well suddenly you get confronted with an actual torture survivor with all the loud, messy, complex mental health problems that implies.

And if you don’t know a lot about mental health? Then it looks like you went from someone who is calm and ‘at peace’ to someone who is incredibly distressed and obviously in pain. It also means you went from someone biddable and ‘easy to handle/care for’ to someone who is exponentially less likely to put up with shit. Someone who demands explanations, cries hysterically, has panic attacks or flashbacks.

With that sort of big visceral difference- A culture that doesn’t know how to deal with mental illness might well decide survivors are ‘better off’ in that fugue state.

Because it would probably be easier to take care of a quiet, unemotional drone then to deal with trying to help someone with severe, complex mental health problems.

With that kind of cultural background the dementia-like state might actually be the result of the treatment survivors are given. Because they’re ‘better off this way’.

This would give you a much more traditional recovery arc in your story but by its nature demands a narrative discussion of how mentally ill people are treated by society. Which may not be something you want in the story.

The other main suggestion I had was to treat this fugue state and this unrealistic depiction of memory loss as if it’s part of the curse itself.

The cruciatus curse is supposed to be designed to cause the maximum amount of pain, so why not factor lasting generational pain into that? Stripping away important, foundational memories with longer use of the curse seems like it could be an additional terror tactic.

‘It doesn’t matter if they survive. It doesn’t matter if you rescue them. You’ll never get them back.’

In that kind of scenario you’d probably end up with a different recovery arc, one that’s as much about magic as mental health. And I don’t think that’s necessarily a bad thing when you’re explicitly dealing with something magical.

If you wanted a plot line involving some kind of magical quest this would be a really good fit. I think it would also work well with a more… straight forwardly heroic story? There’d be less of the cultural and moral arguments that are naturally brought up if you’re talking about cultural attitudes to different medical treatments. It would also be a good pick if you want to lean into the intelligence/research skills of some of the canon characters: a combination of cleverness and compassion resulting in a breakthrough that saves the day.

I’ll finish off with a short general discussion about writing torture survivors realistically and writing them in fantasy.

I’ve got a post on the common long term symptoms of torture here. And I’ve got a post on what memory problems look like in survivors here.

We don’t have a way to predict symptoms. Different individual survivors get different sets of symptoms and we’re not sure why. Because of that variation I think that it’s best to treat symptoms as a writing choice.

Pick symptoms based on what you think adds to the story and creates interesting narrative opportunities. If a symptom emphasises the themes in your story, creates good opportunities to show the readers something about the characters or makes for interesting conflict then it’s a good choice. Conversely if a particular symptom doesn’t appeal to you or you don’t want to write it for any reason, feel free to choose something different.

I stress realism and writing survivors realistically. I don’t do that because I think fiction ‘must’ be realistic. I do it because the ways we choose to break with reality matter.

And right now most of the ways we choose to be unrealistic tacitly support/condone torture.

The majority of the time that’s not the author’s intention. I certainly don’t think it was Rowling’s intention here. (I’ll admit I haven’t been keeping up with her string of controversies but I don’t think active support for torture was ever among them.)

But these tropes keep getting repeated. Partly because finding accurate information on torture is hard. It’s difficult to search for. It often costs money. A lot of it just isn’t translated (I’m actually saving up to get a bunch of core texts translated into English when the plague is over.) And oh boy do not get me started on the lack of inter-disciplinary communication because I will go off like an unplanned quench of an NMR’s super magnets.

These are issues that hamper academic researchers to a huge degree. It’s no wonder they impact non-specialists trying to make sense of this mess.

Having said all of that: I think that we should make space for metaphor and fantastical elements in our fiction.

The issue is passing off tropes that are unrealistic and harmful as if they’re fact.

I have significant issues with portraying torture survivors as passive objects. I think it really hampers general understanding of torture and ethical treatment of survivors today. It encourages people to think that real survivors are ‘faking it’ because they don’t look like the passive objects we see portrayed in fiction.

That said, if a story explicitly states that what it’s doing is magical and unrealistic, it should be less of an issue.

I do not think that’s what Rowling did in this particular portrayal. I think she presented a curse that the audience was supposed to read as only causing extreme pain and she linked that to the idea of pain turning people into passive objects. You can remove the magic from this scenario and it’s unmistakably torture apologia.

But I can imagine alternatives where a fantasy story could separate these things out. It would be hard work and require a lot more focus on the curse itself.

Say you have a fantasy story that takes one of the non-Western approaches to ideas about human souls. Particularly the idea that our memories and experience constitute a separate spiritual part of ourselves.

Magic that stole and imprisoned that portion of someone would, by the logic of the magic system, create something a little like this catatonia/late-stage-dementia symptom set Rowling presents. And I think if that was presented, divorced from ideas about pain and what suffering ‘should’ do to people- Well it’s no longer really talking about torture. It’s talking about a fantastical scenario.

We’re not really used to thinking through the implications of where we break with reality. But it does get easier with practice.

I hope that helps. :)

Available on Wordpress.

Disclaimer

#nobodystormcrow #writing advice #tw torture #tw ableism #writing recovery #writing survivors #fantasy ask #Harry Potter #effects of torture #torture survivors are not broken #attitudes towards torture survivors #pain #catatonia #dementia #mental illness #memory problems #cultural attitudes to survivors

53 notes · View notes

rachelbethhines · 4 years

Text

Tangled Salt Marathon - One Angry Princess

There’s two halves to this episode. The first is a well constructed, if over simple, mystery for the kiddos to solve. The other is a failed attempt at being ‘deep’ and ‘mature’.

Summary: Attila is finally opening up his own bakery, but people generally don't want to stop by because of his scary helmet. The next day, Monty's Sweet Shoppe is destroyed, and Attila is arrested. He is about to be banished from the kingdom, but Rapunzel makes an appeal to investigate the matter further.

The Episode is Meant to be a Homage to 12 Angry Men, but Misses the Point of the Original Film

So for those who haven’t seen the movie, (though really you should) 12 Angry Men is about a jury trying to decide if an accused person is guilty of a violent crime. At first the evidence seems clear, but one lone juror refuses to vote guilty until the evidence has been gone over again. One by one he convinces the other men to vote not guilty as they each have to face they’re own personal biases.

Sound familiar?

In the show Rapunzel is the sole believer in Attila’s innocence despite evidence to the contrary. She insists on investigating herself while challenging everyone else’s personal biases.

The difference?

12 Angry Men is a hard hitting look at how privilege, prejudice, and cognitive bias can interfere with the American judicial system. None of the jurors are named, but they are all middle class, presumably Christian, white guys. And that is the point. They are all different from the accused; a young, poor, arguably non-white teen (the play is intentionally vague about the kid’s race so that you can slot any minority in there) who has a history of getting into trouble. If you were to change the ethnicity, race, gender, class, or age of any of the 12 characters then you would suddenly have a very different story. It’s their backgrounds and pre-formed opinions that inform their decisions. Even the main protagonist is not exempt from re-examining his own personal biases.

Meanwhile the writers of Tangled: the Series are too busy showing off how clever Rapunzel is to actually deal with the themes of injustice and bigotry that they added in themselves in the first place.

Rapunzel Knowing Attila Before Hand Weakens the Message

In 12 Angry Men none of the jurors know the accuse. In fact, they can’t know him. It’s against the law. In order to have an impartial jury, no one can have any ties to either the defendant or the prosecution, and they must not have knowledge of the case or have had specific experiences that might cause them to be biased or unfair.

Rapunzel being Attila’s friend means that she already has her own bias and an invested interest in making sure Attila goes free. She’s not acting out of the simple goodness of her heart here. She’s doing something that directly benefits herself.

I don’t expect a children’s fantasy show to recreate the US judicial system with all of the complexities there in, but I do expect it to uphold it’s heroine as the selfless person it claims her to be. Yet the show constantly undermines this supposed character trait by only having her help the people she befriends, and only if that help doesn’t require anything emotionally challenging or mentally taxing from her.

How much more powerful would this episode be if Rapunzel was defending a stranger or someone she actively disliked? Imagine if it was Monty who was being accuse and Raps had to swallow her pride in order to do what is right. But that would require the show having Rapunzel actually learn something instead of placing her on a pedestal. It would also mean giving Monty a reason to exist rather than keeping him around to be a convenient red herring.

Rapunzel Shouldn’t Have to Prove Attila’s Innocence

Rather than have a courtroom drama the show opts to have a ‘whodunit’ story instead. This unfortunately gives the implication that Corona’s judicial system runs on a ‘guilty until proven innocent’ mantra, which is backwards to any humane legal system. ‘Innocent until proven guilty’, ‘reasonable doubt’, ‘due process’, are the cornerstones of our modern social ethics.

In 12 Angry Men, we never find out if the accused actually committed the crime or not. That is because his actual innocence isn’t the point of the story. It’s about whether or not the system is working like it should or if it’s being compromised by human error.

Once again, I don’t expect a recreation of the US judicial system, but if you’re writing a story for a modern audience then you need to reinforce modern morals. Simply crouching Corona’s legal system as ‘of the times’ or ‘fantasy’ while ignoring why we no longer have such systems in place reduces the story to puerile fare.

It also means that show’s writers didn’t put enough thought into their world building.

No One Calls Out the Obviously Corrupt System

The show has interwoven throughout its ongoing narrative themes of classism, injustice, abuse, and authoritarianism, but then fails to follow through on those themes by not having any of the protagonists actually examine any of these issues. They just sit there in the background, even as the show tries it darndest to present Rapunzel as an arbiter of reform. However a person can’t bring about change if they can’t even admit that there is a problem to begin with.

In this episode alone we have

Banishment is considered a reasonable punishment for an act of vandalism. A crime that is usually considered only a misdemeanor unless the damage goes over a certain amount. Keep in mind that not even most felonies would be given such a punishment in the real world

Introduces the prison barge that regularly carries away convicts. In the past ‘undesirables’ would be shipped off to prison colonies as a form of persecution. Attila and every other person we see subjected to Corona’s legal system are of a lower class.

Many prejudge Attila based off his appearance, lower class, and past upbringing. However, it is either Attila who is expected to change or Rapunzel who is expected to win people over. At no point is anyone told that they shouldn’t be prejudiced to begin with.

There is no judge, jury, or lawyers. The king alone decides the fate of criminals, the Captain is expected to be the both the prosecutor and the ‘executioner’, which is a conflict of interest, and the defendant has no one to represent them unless they so happen to know a kind statesperson. Meaning you have to be either rich or well connected in order to even have a chance to defend yourself.

Oh and there’s this...

Uh, yeah you do. You’re the flipping king. You make the law. You’re the one to bring charges against Attila, and nearly every other criminal in the show, in the first place.

The show constantly wants us to view Frederic as simply an everyman who is only doing his job, but he’s not. He’s a ruler and as such he has powers and responsibilities that no one else has or ever will have. The series gives both him and Rapunzel all of the privileges of being in charge without holding them to account for the consequences of their actions.

By not pointing out how wrong these actions are, the show winds up avocating them instead. When I call Tangled the Series authoritarian, this is why. Because authority is never questioned even when clearly wrong and nepotism is presented as the solution to conflicts as oppose to being the problem itself.

The Show Introduces Complex Issues but Then Oversimplifies the Conflicts Surrounding Those Issues

The creators of the show have constantly declared that the series is ‘not for kids’. That they were shooting for an older audience than the pre-school time slot they were given. Now ignoring the fact that Tangled was always going to have a built in audince of pre-teen girls and ignoring that children’s media can be mature, TTS lacks the nuance needed to viewed as anything other than a pantomime.

As stated before, this episode alone ignores the very real issues interlaced within the conflict in order to give us an overly simple mystery that anyone over the age of five could figure out.

It’s frustrating to watch the show constantly skirt towards the edge of complexity only to see it chicken out and go for the low hanging fruit instead. As a consequence the series winds up being for no one. Too shallow for adults and older teens, but too confused in its morals to be shown to small children and younger adolescents.

I wouldn’t recommend this show to a parent, not without encouraging them to view the series either before or alongside their child in order to counteract it’s ‘lessons’ and I know parents within the fandom itself who’ve stopped showing newer episodes to their kids; stating that they want their child to be old enough to point out the harmful messages to before doing so.

Once Again No One Learns Anything

Rapunzel doesn’t learn that the system is flawed. Attila doesn’t learn to open up to people. Nobody learns to treat people with respect and to not judge others based on appearances alone.

The whole point of the episode is to just show off how much ‘better’ Rapunzel is than everyone else. The show constantly feels the need to tear down other characters in an effort to make its favs look good as opposed to just letting the mains grow as people.

Conclusion

Tangled the tv series is no 12 Angry Men. It’s no Steven Universe/Gravity Falls/Avatar:TLA/She-Ra/Gargoyles/Batman:TAS either. It barely reaches the same level as the likes of DnD, Sonic SATAM, or Voltron. Interesting ideas but poor pacing, build up, and lack of follow through, with some naff decisions thrown into the mix bring things down in quality. And unlike the Dungeons and Dragons cartoon from the early 80s, TTS lacks the benefit of being a pioneer in the field of animation, where such flaws are more forgivable.

#tangled #anti-tangled #Rapunzel #rapunzel's tangled adventure #king frederic #critique #salt

41 notes · View notes

giftofshewbread · 3 years

Text

HERE IT COMES !

By Daymond DuckPublished on: January 30, 2021

It is my desire to stop writing about the election and direct more of my time to the fulfillment of Bible prophecy, but the election has major prophetic implications, and the two issues cannot be separated.

Pres. Trump promised a peaceful transition of power, and he and Melania left the White House with grace and humility.

Here are some quotes that may interest you:

“The purpose of the New World Order is to bring the world into a world government” (Winston Churchill).

“Out of these troubled times [out of the Persian Gulf War], our [America’s] fifth objective—a new world order—can emerge” (Geo. H. W. Bush, 1990).

“I learned to love the New World Order” (Joe Biden, Apr. 23, 1992).

“The hierarchy [of the U.N.], among other things, had called for world government to be achieved in STAGES through the forming of world administrative REGIONS. This was in accordance with the U.N. charter, which encourages the implementation and administration of world government on a REGIONAL basis” (Edmund J. Osmanneczyk, 1995).

“What I am trying to do [to build a global system] is to promote a process of reorganization of the world” (Bill Clinton, 1997).

“Within four years, we will see the beginning of a new international order” (Henry Kissinger 2008).

“The burdens of global citizenship bind us together” (Barack Obama, July 24, 2008).

“To bring about the New World Order, we have to have a new consciousness” [a new spiritual ethic, or new world religion] (Henry Kissinger, Jan. 12, 2009).

Concerning who will head up the New World Order, “We’re trusting that he will be President Obama” (Henry Kissinger, 2009).

“The affirmative task we have now is to actually create a new world order” (Then Vice-Pres. Joe Biden, Apr. 5, 2013).

“I believe we and mainly you [the U.S. Air Force Academy graduating class] have an incredible opportunity to lead in shaping a new world order for the 21st century…” (Joe Biden, May 28, 2014).

“You are about to graduate into a complex and borderless world” (Biden’s new Climate Change Czar, John Kerry, May 6, 2016).

Globalists have big plans, but they are not in control; they just think they are.

The more they reject God; and the more they turn against His people; and the closer they move toward world government; the more they stir His wrath, and the closer God’s people are to the Rapture.

Here are some of my thoughts on current events:

On Jan. 20, 2021, the “America First” president was replaced with a “Fundamentally Transform America” president.

This “fundamental transformation” of America involves the submission of America to a godless world government (the New World Order, The Great Reset, the U.N. 2030 Sustainable Development goals, etc.).

Biden has already announced his intent to undo Trump’s America First policies, rejoin the Paris Climate Accords, rejoin the World Health Organization, halt America’s departure from the World Trade Organization, halt construction on the Keystone Pipeline and border wall, review and reverse more than 100 Trump policies on the environment, stop immigration enforcement in the U.S., and more.

Biden announced support for things (other than world government) that go against the Scriptures: taxpayer-funded abortions for everyone up to the moment of birth (murder of babies), nominate judges that support abortion, allow gays to serve openly in the military, reinstate Title IX that lets transgenders use bathrooms according to their gender identity (men use women’s bathrooms, etc.), etc. Think about this. Through a Political Action Committee (PAC), Planned Parenthood gave more than 27 million dollars to Biden’s election, and now Biden is going to give Planned Parenthood millions and millions of taxpayer dollars to kill babies.

Biden has already cut America’s defense budget, cut the Space Force budget, transformed money budgeted for America’s nuclear arsenal to FEMA, and threatened to fire at least two Generals (one in the Army and another in the Air Force) that questioned these cuts. There is speculation that a military purge is coming to replace patriot-minded officers with officers that will pledge allegiance to the U.N. Here is a link to an article about this: https://beforeitsnews.com/blogging-citizen-journalism/2021/01/generals-tell-trump-we-got-your-back-2649650.html

Biden dissolved the 1776 Commission designed to teach patriotism in public schools and replaced it with a group “to assist agencies in assessing equity with respect to race, ethnicity, religion, income, geography, gender identity, sexual orientation, and disability.”

Simply put, “Here It Comes” means that I believe the Biden administration intends to support policies that will lead to the rise of the Ten Kings, world government, the Antichrist, the False Prophet, tracking everyone, godlessness, the Tribulation Period, etc.

The shadow government controls every branch of the U.S. government, and, as I see it, there will be a surge forward with no going back. In his first six days in office, Biden signed more executive orders than the last four presidents combined (and one of his officials said there are more to come).

How long it will take to bring in the world government is unknown, but I expect the shadow government to push Biden to accomplish as much as he can before the next election two years from now.

No one knows the day or hour of the Rapture, but whenever it happens, the Restrainer will be removed, and godless world government will go into overdrive.

Here are several stories that made the news:

One, Biden asked a “Christian” preacher friend to offer the benediction at his inauguration, and the preacher closed his prayer, not in the name of Jesus, but “in the strong name of our collective faith.”

Praying in “the strong name of our collective faith” is the kind of reprobate thinking that left God out of the Democrat Party Platform.

Their total one-party control of the U.S. government will cause them to fully support a godless one-world religion and government.

The Bible clearly teaches that God will put up with this godless world government nonsense for 7 years, but if He did not bring it to an end, no flesh would be saved.

The pastor’s prayer is also evidence of a sick, lukewarm Church that tickles people’s ears instead of proclaiming the truth.

Two, on Jan. 23, 2021, a bomb exploded at First Works Baptist Church in El Monte, Cal.

Hate messages were painted on the inside walls of the church.

Several news organizations ignored the bombing and blamed the church for preaching against same-sex marriage.

These people appear to believe it is okay to blow up a church if the preacher preaches the Scriptures.

Three, on Jan. 20, 2021, an unidentified person in the U.S. State Dept. decided that the U.S. Ambassador to Israel will now be called the U.S. Ambassador to Israel, the West Bank, and Gaza.

The person that made that decision posted it on the State Dept. website, and it appears that whoever did it does not believe that the West Bank and Gaza should be part of Israel.

Some say the Biden administration also plans to change the U.S. recognition of the Golan Heights as part of Israel.

Two weeks ago, I wrote that God had a reason for putting Trump in office, He has a reason for removing Trump, and He has a reason for putting Biden in office.

I tend to believe God is ready to let world government advance, and He removed Trump because Trump would have been in the way.

I also tend to believe that God put Biden in office because He wants Israel to trust Him, not Trump or the U.S., for protection.

Unfortunately, most Christians do not know enough Bible prophecy to recognize the danger that dividing Israel poses to America.

According to the Bible, those that try to cut Israel into pieces at the end of the age will be cut into pieces.

(Note: Before this article was sent to the editor, the State Dept. reversed itself on the issue and went back to calling the U.S. Ambassador the Ambassador to Israel.)

Four, concerning pestilences, my last week’s article noted that a group of U.S. doctors believe Ivermectin is safe and effective for preventing Covid in most people.

The article also noted that India has developed an inexpensive, effective, and safe Covid Ivermectin treatment kit.

On Jan. 19, 2021, it was reported that the National Institutes of Health (NIH) has upgraded Ivermectin from “against the drug” to “not for or against the drug.”

According to the article, this opens the door for doctors to feel safe in prescribing it and for the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to approve it for emergency use if they choose to do so.

I found Ivermectin searching “Ivermectin for humans” at amazon.com.

There is also an apple-flavored paste, and a reader told me about a nurse that puts it in peanut butter.

I am just passing this information on for people to make their own decision.

Five, concerning persecution, much of the hatred that has been dumped on Trump over the last 4 years is now being directed toward those that voted for him.

Since Jan. 15, 2021, more than 22,000 people have signed a petition to have Franklin Graham fired from Samaritan’s Purse and the Billy Graham Evangelistic Assoc. for supporting Pres. Trump.

On Jan. 20, 2021, the Daily Beast published an article calling for a new “secret police” force to spy on Trump supporters because the FBI and NSA will not sufficiently punish these Americans.

Many Christians and conservatives are expressing concern that Biden’s support for the LGBTQ agenda (biological males in women’s bathrooms, etc.), and Pelosi’s rule that people in Congress are not allowed to say man, woman, etc., will lead to people being denounced as homophobes, etc. One reader e-mailed me to say there will be a tremendous effort to pervert the children that are not killed by abortion.

It has been reported that Katie Couric is calling for Trump supporters to be deprogrammed in re-education camps and for members of Congress that question the accuracy of the election to be punished. This could pit brother against brother just like Jesus said because the left wants to silence and shame those that disagree with them.

On Jan. 20, 2021, it was reported that former FBI Director James Comey said the Republican Party “needs to be burned down or changed.” He asked, “Who would want to be part of an organization that at its core is built on lies and racism and know-nothingism?” Comey is a proven liar, and there is evidence that he used false evidence to protect Hillary Clinton when she destroyed thousands of e-mails.

On Jan. 21, 2021, it was reported that a columnist for the Washington Post is calling for Fox News to be kicked off the air for “radicalizing people and setting them on the path of violence and sedition.”

I pray that Jesus will Rapture the Church off the earth before the persecution gets too bad, but judgment must begin at the house of God (I Pet. 4:17).

It falls on believers first, and it falls harder on unbelievers second (persecution of the Church signifies a greater persecution is coming on the lost).

Six, after constantly condemning Trump’s handling of Covid and claiming that he (Biden) will vaccinate a million people a day, concerning Covid, on Jan. 23, 2021, Biden said there is “nothing we can do about the trajectory.”

He added, “In the next few months, masks, not vaccinations, are the single best defense against Covid.”

Seven, concerning the Battle of Gog and Magog in the latter years and latter days, on Jan. 20 it was reported that a senior Israeli official said if Biden returns to the same terms of Obama’s nuclear deal with Iran, Israel will have nothing to discuss with him.

Biden is clearly interested in returning to the deal but said Iran must start complying first.

To summarize this article, concerning world government, I am not like Chicken Little, who claimed the sky is falling (world government indicates many good things such as the approaching rapture; reign of Jesus; peace, justice, and righteousness on earth; etc.), but I am saying get prepared because here it comes.

Some are saying a police state and persecution are coming.

U.S. Josh Hawley recently said, “You can go to church now, but you may not be allowed to go to the church of your choice in two years.”

As far as many of you are concerned, your pastor will never tell you about these things, so I suggest that a good place to get started is hischannel.com.

Finally, if you want to go to heaven, you must be born again (John 3:3). God loves you, and if you have not done so, sincerely admit that you are a sinner; believe that Jesus is the virgin-born, sinless Son of God who died for the sins of the world, was buried, and raised from the dead; ask Him to forgive your sins, cleanse you, come into your heart and be your Saviour; then tell someone that you have done this.

#January #31 #2021 #Biden #Globalist #Puppet #Fall #of #America #executive #order #destroy #USA #from #within #NWO #the #great #reset #underway #rapture #imminent #maranatha #JESUS

2 notes · View notes

victorlimadelta · 4 years

Text

okay because my own writing is pissing me the hell off this morning i have to point out some necessary inaccuracies or i’m going to clobber myself in my own sleep

a complex, multi-hour operation would require not just multiple surgeons, but a separate anesthetist and perhaps even a second (anesthesiologist for sure, and perhaps an assistant crna/certified registered nurse anesthetist). it would also require OR RNs (registered nurses, as opposed to lower level licensed vocational nurses or higher level nurse practitioners), certified scrub/surgical techs, circulating nurses who would probably switch out once or twice for a lunch break, maybe even someone at a control center/switchboard. this requires a lot of people for optimal safety. i’m writing it with two because this isn’t real and it’s also the future. we’re just gonna pretend that two people can pay attention to both their own tasks and to basic patient monitoring, mmkay? we are doing such a good pretend so far. okay.

obviously, the tech for the arm is made up. the tech for the genetic replacement is mostly made up. crispr is real but as far as i can tell works mostly via injection. obviously, manufacturing a portion of genome out of nothing isn’t real, and neither is working on it on an in vivo grown human cellular level. i took some liberties with how to portray this portion of the operation, because it hasn’t even been attempted due to human ethical implications.

not all surgical suites have observation windows or rooms. it’s great for storytelling and dramatic purposes, think watching your loved one code and die on the table for maximum heartbreak, but that’s kind of not how it actually happens, usually the windows are to a sort of command center with a bunch of patient monitoring. but sure, we’re gonna pretend that everyone can see what’s going on with shiro’s operation, because it’s easier that way for commentary/roleplay purposes. we’re also just gonna pretend like we have patient consent for viewing the operation, because technically this is protected health information and shiro has the right to tell people they can’t see what’s going on.

#Δ ooc #medical /

3 notes · View notes

queerchoicesblog · 5 years

Text

Lost Cause (OH, Aurora & F!MC Friendship, Harper & Aurora)

So I finally wrote a fic about the Emery doctors since I strongly doubt we will get a chance to see this in the original book. Yet I feel like a scene like this should have been part of the story, after what we learned about them over the past few chapters. Set before Ch. 16 on the eve of MC (Meredith Valentine)’s hearing and containing references to my Aurora & F!MC friendship fic, this fanfic deals with a (much needed) confrontation between Aurora and Harper.

Pretty angsty and hopefully bittersweet, as I headcanon them as close in the past: that affection isn’t gone, but things are different now when they’re both doctors at Edenbrook hospital. And a few misunderstandings cloud their minds, even though they speak from the heart out of care. It was tough to write, but I hope I stayed in character! I’d like to think that after this talk, there will be a new beginning for their relationship. Hope you like it!

Word Count: 2800+

Perma Tag: @brightpinkpeppercorn @melodyofgraves @abunchofbadchoices @bhavf @bbaba-yagaa @kennaxval @strangerofbraidwood @crazypeanat

OH Tag: @bubblygothzombie @emeryharper

_________________________

Harper was going through the papers of Dr. Valentine's hearing, sipping a coffee on her couch when her doorbell rang. It was a bit late for a friend stopping by and she wasn't expecting anyone, not the night before a hearing. She stood, groaning, hoping that it wasn't Ethan on the other side of the door. Or even worse, Declan. That creep would be perfectly capable to throw a stunt like that.

But it was none of them. When she opened the door, it was...

"Aurora?"

"Hi...Harper" her niece greeted her, shifting uncomfortably.

"Hi but what...what are you doing here? It’s late?"

"Can I come in?"

Harper looked at her for a moment, before resolving to set aside and let her in.

"I made coffee, do you want some?"

"Yes, why not? I can't sleep anyway"

They both walked to the kitchen.

"How come? What's troubling you?" she inquired, handing her a mug of black coffee.

Aurora took it and a displeased expression curled her lips. She diverted her eyes and muttered:

"As if it's hard to guess"

Harper inhaled sharply and grimaced.

"Rory, please tell me you're not here for tomorrow's hearing"

Aurora met her gaze and looked at her right in the eye, determination in her eyes.

"What if I am?"

"You perfectly know that I can't share any detail nor allow any kind of interference-"

"I know that"

"Then why you're here?" Harper sighed.

Aurora didn't divert her gaze but kept quiet for a moment, searching for the right words to articulate her thoughts.

"When I mess up or do something wrong you, Dr. Mirani, Dad or whoever else don't miss the chance to let me know that I made a mistake. Well, that's why I'm here tonight. You made a mistake. More than just one maybe"

Harper crossed her arms and stiffened. She had already had the most unpleasant phone call with Declan earlier that day, another scolding was exactly what she needed, she thought.

"Because I called the hearing?"

"Yeah, for instance"

"Believe it or not, Dr. Valentine herself asked me to call it. She came to my office, confessed to be the one who injected the unapproved serum to Mrs. Martinez and asked me to call an ethical hearing" Harper shuttered her jaw.

"What?" Aurora gaped, genuinely surprised. She was in the dark of that detail.

"She stated that she wants to stand up for what she believes it's right, to pick her battle. And she wanted a chance to defend her choice at an ethics hearing which I allowed her. But I guess it's easier to put the blame on me, right? The only one who broke the rules is Dr. Valentine, I'm just following the protocol. And for the record, since she confessed me her doing, I wasn't even-"

Aurora had stopped listening to her. She repeated the words of her aunt into her head.

"My God, she did it...she did it for real"

Harper gave her a quizzical look. Aurora met her gaze again.

"That's one more reason why Valentine must win the hearing!"

"Wait wait...it's not that easy, girl. We're not in one of those medical dramas on TV. I must admit I was impressed by her courage too but-"

"Name me one intern, an intern not even a senior doctor, who would do the same? Who has ever done the same?" Aurora challenged her.

Harper opened her mouth to say something but nothing came.

"See? Maybe not even you would have done it!"

Harper sighed.

"Rory..."

"Surely not a single one of those one brain cell interns of that stupid competition you put on!"

"That's not stupid! It-" Harper protested but she was cut short by her niece.

"Maybe it was not in your head but it's utterly stupid! None of them took it seriously. Or better too seriously! But in the wrong way! It's just like high school or worse kindergarten all over again" Aurora groaned. "People only want to win and can't care less for their actual patients. Take Olsen, number two of your ranking, for instance: the other day I heard him say to a kid complaining about pain to toughen up and stop whining cause he couldn't possibly be that much in pain. And it's not the only one I heard saying stuff like that! I got lucky that my surname is Emery but someone's heavily sabotaged Valentine since she got to the top!"

Harper immediately reminisced the pager accident and the talk she had with Dr. Valentine in her office.

"Sabotaged?"

"Yes, with the pager, stolen charts and things like that. Because she was on top!"

Harper pinched her nose.

"That's ridiculous and very serious at the same time. That's not just a petty prank, this is crossing a line and putting our patients in a bad position too. Do you have evidence?"

"No, I don't. I just know, everybody knows"

"That's no good news though. With pieces of evidence, I could have started an investigation. I don't tolerate this in my hospital, under my watch"

"Still, it's partly your doing: if you hadn't come up with that brilliant idea of yours!"

"I did what I thought was right, Rory. And I would do it twice because I believe it is the right thing. Even if there are clearly interns that are utterly immature and don't understand the huge opportunity I gave you all. Because that's what it is. But is that a reason not to do the right thing? That fellowship could be the start of a great career, it's an opportunity none of the doctors I know had when we were in your place. But I cannot hand it to any of you just like that: I must know that you have what it takes to earn it. Even if it means pushing you to the limit. I don't regret it, I'm just disappointed to hear some of the interns are so unworthy of even entering medical school as they have no maturity nor ethics"

Aurora exhaled loudly, taking a sip of her coffee.

"Whatever, it doesn't change the fact that Valentine's career is on the line now"

"Actions have consequences and she made her choice" Harper winced.

"And you made yours"

Harper's gaze hardened as she registered the implications.

"And what's this supposed to mean? What Valentine did was reckless and the charges she's gonna face are very serious!"

"And what about Teresa? Didn't you care for her? Or was that just a lie you told to yourself?"

A flash of fury crossed Harper's gaze as she slammed her own mug on the kitchen counter.

"That's enough, Aurora! Enough! What do you think you know about Teresa? About Teresa and me? You have no right to talk to me like that! So do me a favor and stop assuming things about you as most do lately, and on that note stop assuming the worst about me!"

She paused and took a deep breath to cool off. When she spoke again there was a hint of sadness in her voice.

"Is that what you really think of me?"

Aurora diverted her eyes.

"All I'm saying is...you're so obsessed with rules. I know it's a Chief job but I think that a good doctor knows when to make certain calls if you get what I mean. That's what makes them a good doctor, not just another doctor"

"And I'm clearly not a good doctor while Valentine is, that's what you're saying, right?"

Harper was now looking her right in the eye, waiting for her answer.

"From where I stand, Mrs. Martinez case is so complex and there are so many ethical implications...I don't know if it's right to charge Valentine for her doing. Yes, she broke the rules but Teresa got to live her few days outside the hospital"

"Aurora, I'm glad she got to leave the hospital at last too but that injection could have killed her, for what we know. I was about to read the result of the autopsy but I hope you understand that the scenario you're using to support your admirable defense of your partner is just one of many. The brightest one. The one you're ignoring is way darker and far less pleasant"

Aurora considered her words.

"But what if sometimes there are some risks to take? Like you have to do whatever it-"

"Whatever it takes" Harper repeated mechanically, exhaling loudly in frustration. "Did you talk to Ramsey too?"

"No, but from what I've heard at least Dr. Rams-"

"Ramsey, Ramsey, Ramsey. Always Ramsey! Hundreds of talented professionals at Edenbrook and who's everyone swooning over? Ethan! Because he's so tormented, so compassionate with patients: the knight in shining armor of Edenbrook"

Harper shook her head.

"Do you know what wondrous Ethan did? He quitted! And I've covered for him so far to avoid rumors and chaos! I tried to make him reason and come back to work but no! Drowning your sorrows in a bottle of scotch is way better than fighting back, because yes, Aurora, that's what he's doing right now! And he even stopped answering my calls, anyone's calls! So I'm asking you: is that what you call a good doctor? He is one of the best residents in the diagnostics team and yet he chose alcohol instead. He quitted without giving a damn about the consequences: who's gonna cover his role? Did he say if he's done permanently or not? No, and in the meantime, I have a hole in the diagnostics team with him and Naveen gone and one brilliant doctor less. A doctor who could have helped significantly during the E.R. emergency and every single day, if only he picked up a phone because people don't stop getting sick or hurt when we're down. Everybody hurts, everybody grieves their losses but it's not a good reason to act like that. From where I stand, this is part of the Oath too"

"I didn't know about Dr. Ramsey..." Aurora commented, lowering her gaze.

"Nobody does yet people always assume the best about him" Harper commented sharply.

A tense silence fell into the room. Aurora was the first to speak.

"I didn't mean to say you're a bad doctor. I..I just miss you being you, I guess"

"What do you mean?"

"When you weren't Chief. When you were just my aunt surgeon"

"I'm always the same, Rory"

Harper's voice imperceptibly softened as she tried to reach for her niece's hand but Aurora shook her head, grimacing.

"No, you're not. Stop lying to yourself"

Harper looked taken aback by her last statement so she continued.

"This is not you and you know it, deep inside. You're frozen, stuck...scared maybe? What were you thinking when you signed up for this position? When you were an intern like me, when you were a surgeon, you were happier. Try and tell me I'm wrong! I remember the look on your face, the light in your eyes when you were appointed Head of Neurosurgery. Your dream came true, that's what you said. Then one day you gave it away to do what? Administration. And become this Chief who enforces rules at any given occasion. But that dignified smile you have on at work is not the one I remember from back then. Was it even worth it? Being a Chief?"

Harper did her best to conceal the pang of pain she felt in her chest as her niece spoke.

"Rory, time changes things...years of experience changes your perspective..."

As she stopped, unable to find other arguments, not ready to tell the truth, Aurora sighed.

"You know what's funny? I don't think I've ever told but when I decided to apply to med school, it wasn't only because of an aptitude test. It was a tough decision but I did it because...I wanted to be like you one day"

Harper met her gaze, visibly surprised and touched.

"Maybe not a neurosurgeon but a confident, badass female doctor just like you. You were so passionate about your work. When you talked about it, it was so inspiring, nothing like mom and dad speeches. You made it sound the best thing in the world, even if it was just an ordinary appendicectomy. And when I visited you at work...gosh, you were a force of nature! And your colleagues I talked to as I waited for you to end an operation were enthusiastic about you. So when at my college admission interview they asked me who was my inspiration I said your name"

"You...you never told me"

"No. But you know what? Seeing you now, I think I would change my answer"

This time Harper diverted her eyes under the blow of Aurora's delusion.

"I understand" she whispered.

Aurora grimaced, looking at her aunt who was now giving her her shoulders pretending to wash her mug. Noticing how her last few words hurt her, she spoke again, her tone gentler this time:

"I...I saw the pile of the newest surgery journals on your desk. Aunt, you miss it. You miss practice. You should go back to it: you're a...good doctor. You can still be a good doctor."

"It's not that simple, Rory. I cannot exactly quit like Ramsey did. That's not who I am, since you mentioned it. And even if I quit, I cannot walk into-"

"No, you're right. You're so stubborn when you want. I knew it was a lost cause trying to talk with you"

Aurora placed her mug on the counter too and stood.

"Just for your information, tomorrow I'm not gonna stop by your office at the end of my shift. I'll go straight home and find answers on my own"

Harper turned. Her face looked more exhausted now.

"Okay, as you wish"

"Just like that?" Aurora asked, taken by surprise.

"Yes, you don't need me to find out the solution to your cases. You never did."

"Then why you grilled me for hours?"

"Because you're so insecure, Rory. You keep second-guessing yourself and it backfires"

"Oh and here I thought the reason why you put all that pressure on me was that you were trying to live through me the doctor life you cannot live anymore since you become an administrator"

"What?"

"Yeah, you heard me. And I hate it as much as you hate being the Chief away from the O.R."

"This is what you think?" Harper asked, wincing.

"Honestly I cannot find another logical explanation but it ends now. This is my life and I want to live it on my own terms. I'm not you, aunt. And if you're so frustrated by how you miss practice, go back to it and don't take it over me"

Harper frowned, hugging herself.

"I wasn't trying to take it over you and I'm not...frustrated, as you said. I was just trying to mentor you. Pushing you to excel because I know you can excel, you have it in you. But I didn't mean to hurt you and make you feel like that. I'm sorry I did, truly sorry and I won't do it again" she sighed before recollecting herself. "But you’re right. It's your life and you get to live it on your own terms. Just know that it works for me too. And this is the life I choose now"

"But you're not happy" Aurora noted.

"I appreciate your concern but I'm good with it" Harper said, closing off again.

Aurora gave her a long look then frowned.

"It's a lost cause, right? This conversation is a lost cause, isn't it?"

"I'm afraid so" Harper confirmed, pressing her lips together.

The young Emery nodded and without looking back to her aunt, moved towards the door. She stopped right in front of it and sighed.

"I took the subway train with Valentine, after the E.R. emergency. That night she was the only person who treated me kindly. And you know what she said about the competition? That she doesn't care if she wins or not, cause that was never the point. She said that she wanted to believe you would make the right call. That she trusted you to choose the intern who would best benefit the hospital and the patients. If it wasn't her, it's okay, she said. Then she added: I share this with you because I know you think that way too. And she was right"

Aurora sighed.

"I don't want to interfere. I'm talking as Rory, not Dr. Emery junior when I say...I do really hope Dr. Valentine wins the fellowship. She's the best partner and the best intern, both on a personal and professional level. If she loses her license tomorrow, well then this competition is a total farçe and I'm not sure I would keep playing along. It would be such a loss for Edenbrook and medicine in general"

"Rory..."

"See you tomorrow, Harper" Aurora sighed before opening the door and disappearing out of view.

#open heart #aurora emery #harper emery #aurora emery & f!mc friendship #playchoices #choices fanfic

70 notes · View notes

scifigeneration · 5 years

Text

Science fiction could save us from bad technology

by Alessio Malizia and Silvio Carta

Ahmet Misirligul/Shutterstock

The short film Slaughterbots depicts a near future in which swarms of micro drones assassinate thousands of people for their political beliefs. Released in November 2017 by academics and activists warning of the dangers of advanced artificial intelligence (AI), it quickly went viral, attracting over 3m views to date. It helped spark a public debate on the future of autonomous weapons and put pressure on diplomats meeting at the United Nations Convention on Conventional Weapons.

But this kind of speculative science fiction storytelling isn’t just useful for attracting attention. The people who design and build advanced technology can use stories to consider the consequences of their work and ensure it is used for good. And we think this kind of “science fiction prototyping” or “design fiction” could help prevent human biases from working their way into new technology, further entrenching society’s prejudices and injustices.

youtube

A bias can lead to the arbitrary preference of some categories (of results, people, or ideas) over others. For example, some people may be biased against hiring women for executive jobs, whether they are conscious of it or not.

Technology built around data that records such bias can end up replicating the problem. For instance, recruitment software designed to select the best CVs for a particular job might be programmed to look for characteristics that reflect an unconscious bias towards men. In which case, the algorithm will end up favouring men’s CVs. And this isn’t theoretical – it actually happened to Amazon.

Designing algorithms without considering possible negative implications has been compared to doctors “writing about the benefits of a given treatment and completely ignoring the side effects, no matter how serious they are”.

Some tech firms and researchers are trying to tackle the issue. For example, Google drew up a set of ethical principles to guide its development of AI. And UK academics have launched an initiative called Not-Equal that aims to encourage greater fairness and justice in the design and use of technology.

The problem is that, publicly, companies tend to deliver only a positive vision of the potential consequences of near-future technologies. For example, driverless cars are often portrayed as solving all our transport issues from cost to safety, ignoring the increased dangers of cyberattacks or the fact they could encourage people to walk or cycle less.

The difficulty in understanding how digital technologies work, especially those that are heavily driven by obscure algorithms, also makes it harder for people to have a complex and comprehensive view of the issues. This situation produces a tension between a reassuring positive narrative and the vague suspicion that biases are embedded to some degree in the technologies around us. This is where we think storytelling through design fiction can come in.

Stories are a natural method of thinking about possibilities and complex situations, and we have been hearing them all our lives. Science fiction can help us speculate on the impact of near-future technologies on society, as Slaughterbots does. This can even include issues of social justice, like the way certain groups, such as refugees and migrants, can be excluded from digital innovations.

Revealing the (possible) future

Design fiction stories provide a novel way for designers, engineers and futurists (among others) to think about the impact of technology from a human perspective and link this to possible future needs. With a mixture of logic and imagination, design fiction can reveal aspects of how technology may be adopted and used, starting conversations about its future ramifications.

For example, the short story “Crime-sourcing” explores what might happen if AI was to use crowdsourced information and a criminal database to predict who might commit a murder. The researchers found that because the database was full of people in minority ethnic groups who, for social reasons, were statistically more likely to reoffend, the “crime-sourcing” model was more likely to wrongly suspect minorities than white people.

You don’t have to be a talented writer or make a slick film to produce design fiction. Brainstorming activities involving cards and storyboards have been used to develop design fiction and help develop the storytelling process. Making workshops that used these kinds of tools more common would enable more engineers, entrepreneurs and policymakers to use this method of assessment. And making the resulting work publicly available would help to expose potential biases in technologies before they affect society.

Encouraging designers to create and share more stories in this way would ensure the narrative that underpins new technology wouldn’t just present a positive picture, nor an extremely negative or dystopian one. Instead, people will be able to appreciate both aspects of what is happening around us.

About The Authors:

Alessio Malizia is Professor of User Experience Design at the University of Hertfordshire and Silvio Carta is Head of Art and Design and Chair of the Design Research Group at the University of Hertfordshire

This article is republished from our content partners over at The Conversation under a Creative Commons license.

#science fiction #technology #scifi in society #design

6 notes · View notes

fuckthegovfucklove · 5 years

Text

The Love Ideology: What is love?

Trying to define love is a bloody tiring mission encumbered by vagueness, contradictions and inconsistencies. So I’m not going to attempt to define the word but rather look at some of the different shapes love comes in within interpersonal relationships.

I want to look at the different types of love, the function of each, the power dynamics that exist and their relevance as a basis to share my speculative thoughts on the wider implications of love in later posts.

Loving is touted as a necessity, a source of joy and an objectively good thing for humanity. I’m not so sure I agree and I think a counter-argument against love is useful in redirecting our focus to more urgent issues and developing critical thought, or at the very least being more conscious of the way you love (if you must).

I briefly look at self love, romantic love, platonic love and familial love from a mainstream (western) perspective since that’s what's most prevalent and all I know anyway. Love is not confined to interpersonal relationships and critique of it can be extended to sentiments like unwaveringly love for homeland (patriotism), love for a public figure (idolatry), love for an ideology (cultism).

You’ll find that in every case where love is referred to, it could easily be replaced by a more revealing synonym.

Self love

I know your familiar with this one, we rave on about it all the time. It’s being content with who you are, knowing your “worth” (you see the capitalist undertones too right?). Some call it a radical self-acceptance and according to John Kim the ‘life coach’, self love looks like this:

“When you get to a place where you like yourself, the action of loving yourself will come more naturally. You’ll have non-negotiables. You won’t tolerate certain behaviour from others. You’ll seek less approval. Your friendships will be less lopsided. You won’t have as many holes to fill within you. You’ll be more gentle with yourself, more forgiving. You’ll believe you deserve more, better, different. You’ll finally stop breaking the promises you’ve made with you. And the relationship you have with yourself will improve. “

Ah so, curing all the problems caused by love (and capitalism) with more.. love? Think about why you do what you do. You compromise because you love, tolerate because you love, seek approval because you want love, your love is quantifiable and isn’t always reciprocated, love told you you need it feel whole, to love you must forgive, you deserve love.

Is loving yourself enough in a capitalist world that measures your social worth on how full your cup of love is? (think about the [profitable] factors that determine this too). Will the inferiority complex completely dissipate? If you walk out on the expectations of this here capitalist world perhaps, but abandoning the pursuit of love might be a quicker route.

“You can’t love somebody else until you love yourself“ is a widely known cliché typically used in a romantic context. Some critique the adage saying self-love isn’t actually a precondition for loving others, clinical psychologist Leon F. Seltzer proposes a better alternative: “To deepen your love and acceptance of another, first develop love and acceptance for yourself.” Interesting. I still think theres a semblance of truth in the former that could easily be extrapolated to other types of love.

See loving the Other can only be done by identifying parts of yourself within them and seeing qualities in them that you like. It’s impossible to imagine what loving something entirely disconnected from us looks like because everything is in some way connected to self. We extend ourselves to the object of our love so that by loving the Other we are also loving ourselves. Kierkegaard calls this ‘self-love’. Loving your partner is loving self, loving your friend is loving self, loving your family is loving self, loving your nation is loving self, loving the environment is loving self, loving an ideology is loving self; no matter how selfless or sacrificial the nature. Thus, I have made the cheeky decision to sub them all under this title.

Romantic love

The most sought after, most regulated, most distracting and arguably the most delusional of loves. Romance is where we can write our own fiction and relies on our own imagination to create a world where it can function. Driven by our libidinal desires, we seek to conquer the heart of another. Our romantic interests becoming personified virtues who make us feel like we’ve never felt before (until they don’t).

It is here we are forced to learn a gender and organise our desires around them. Our bizarre sex-sentimentality makes romantic love a safe space to be completely uninhibited. Eroticism is confined to the couple as is building a life project (cohabitation, economic merging, child-rearing).

We have a set criteria of what we look for in a partner (our fantasy), too busy setting up our Tinder to question why our list is identical to the next persons and what is informing these ~ preferences ~. The success of romantic interactions are contingent upon the degree to which projective identification is continually effective, that is when a person projects their fantasy onto another so that they feel inclined or pressured to fall in line with the projective fantasy. In romance, this is typically one of amour passion where by confessing your feelings the other now hopefully joins you in this romantic fantasy.

We must then commit to this person, overcommit then merge. The merging process frequently comes with the dissolution of autonomy and boundaries because complete trust in the other is a requirement. We simultaneously create rules and install dependencies to solidify this union because subconsciously we know that love is not enough to keep two together.

Unpaid labour is an intrinsic part of romantic love and it’s usually gendered - maintaining a healthy relationship requires work (cishet women and those taking the role of woman/femme/more domesticised doing most of the labour). So is it that we enjoy working 9-5 + unpaid overtime or do the promised benefits of coupledom outweigh the cons?

Those who opt for singledom and see no sense in romantic love are considered immature or are diagnosed with the infamous disorder the therapists call ‘fear of intimacy’. Those who are single by circumstances are told that “the one“ will soon come and/or are often pitied. The social worth of an individual increases when they are in a couple as the partner is pretty much considered personal property.

Unions formed on the basis of romantic love are the only ones that are eligible to sign a contract with the state (think about why) and in exchange are afforded a multitude of benefits from adoption rights and tax deductions to immigration and residency for partners from other countries. These unions, called marriage, are usually accompanied by an expensive celebration party where friends and family are expected to attend and bring gifts.

So what is the purpose of romantic love and why do we desire it? Lynn Paramore sums it up.

“Romantic love is not based on companionship, but on the feeling of being desired. This kind of love appears to give us the opportunity, just as money does, to constantly remake ourselves, to project new version of our lives. It’s about longing, fleeting highs, the same stimulation we feel in buying a new car, a new wardrobe. As the married couple’s romantic attraction wanes, the need for stimulation is transferred to the next big purchase, the washing machine, the wide-screen TV. Capitalism goes humming along.”

Platonic love

Where there’s romance, love is expected to consume you. Friendships aren’t similarly expected to be as emotionally weighty and intoxicating; we expect support in good times and bad, someone to laugh, gossip and cry with and a companion to embark on new adventures with. We hope for our friendships to last long but don’t spend as much time deliberating about our future, we truly live in the present with those we consider friends.

These relationships are usually built off of shared values and interests, and an appreciation of the stark realities of the individual characters. They aren’t typically sought after but are formed by being in the right place at the right time. Friendships usually have no issue respecting autonomy, there’s something more rational and ethical about the bond. The voluntarist nature of the entanglements allow this and in comparison to romantic love, platonic love expects little.

The performative actions designed to win affection that are part and parcel of romance are left at the door. Platonic love isn’t devoid of affection but arbitrary limits are put in place e.g sexual intercourse. According popular culture sex ruins a friendship (loooool). Friends do typically seek a level of validation and affirmation from their peers, considerably higher (from my observations) for those socialised as men.

While platonic love doesn’t demand the cognitive bending that romantic love does, it’s similar in the sense that it’s love through favouritism. We give preferential treatment to those who favour us even in situations where logically we would do otherwise. It is expected of us. Platonic love however does not hold the same social value as romantic love and friendships are often “demoted“ once a new romantic interest takes the stage. Andrew Sullivan voiced his disapproval on this common practice:

“The great modern enemy of friendship has turned out to be love. By love, I don't mean the principle of giving and mutual regard that lies at the heart of friendship [but] love in the banal, ubiquitous, compelling, and resilient modern meaning of love: the romantic love that obliterates all other goods, the love to which every life must apparently lead, the love that is consummated in sex and celebrated in every particle of our popular culture, the love that is institutionalized in marriage and instilled as a primary and ultimate good in every Western child...We live in a world, in fact, in which respect and support for eros (romantic love) has acquired the hallmarks of a cult. “

Familial love

Familial love presents in a lot of arrangements. Between two individuals it can be a progression from platonic love or romantic love (though they can coexist). It’s a fondness born out of familiarity, dependency, mutual protection and non-judgmental support. Family can also describe a group of people you share similar experiences and rituals with, such as a church family or work family.

The primal familial love, the “blood is thicker than water“ love that is somewhat universal refers to the instinctual affection and protection we show to those with blood (shared genetics/common ancestors) and perhaps legal bonds (legally bound through adoption/guardianship). The love of a parent towards offspring and vice versa. Or extended blood family. With familial love theres an inherent hierarchy: offspring, spouse, parents-siblings, extended blood family and then other forms of family if chosen. I will refer to familial love as what exists between parent and offspring henceforth as it customarily obliterates the rest.

This familial love conventionally implies unconditional, ultra-protective, “I’d die for you“ love towards child. It’s not given according to their personal qualities (although once they’re no longer a minor it often weakens) and if a child should stray on the wrong path the parent will most likely do everything in their power to save them. The family is the nuclear of civilisation and the most basic unit of society. The education of almost all starts in the family, particularly character and moral education.

The familial love of a parent is one of duty and protection, and for the child it’s one of dependance and trust. As parents are the legal guardians of children, they position themselves as the authority and the child recognises them as such. Parents have a wider understanding of society and often try balance preserving a child’s innocence (I often wonder why) whilst making them aware of the “real world”. In order to ensure a child obeys them and trusts that they know what's best for them they often remind the child that there’s bad people out there that do bad things i.e “don’t talk to strangers, they could kidnap you“. Children are then obliged to submit to the parental safety that the home provides, whilst also being dependent on their parent for sustenance.

Familial love is assumed to be natural and present in all. It’s blasphemy to confess you do not love your parents or you do not love your child. In situations of conflict, familial love is supposed water down any malice, and forgiveness/reconciliation should follow. The family is expected to have your best interest at heart at all time and familial love is thought of as permanent, parents often say things along the lines of: “Your family remains even when everyone leaves“. Loyalty and favouritism is therefore expected and should also trump that of friends and romantic partners.

Many choose to reproduce. They get to experience the reverse of child-parent familial love where they are the ones in authority and build a life project from that. Why do people choose to have children? Some of the reasons people give range from: looking to find a sense of purpose, familism, pressure from peers and family, belief that it is your duty to continue your biological lineage etc. A growing number of people are choosing not to reproduce usually because they aren’t interested in parenting or bringing more people into the world (voluntary childlessness/anti-natalism).

Humanaesfera suggests a political explanation for the desire to create a family:

“Since the emergence of capitalism (ie, the industrial capital, the proletariat and the modern state, simultaneously, eighteenth century), the familism is the central fetish by which the proletarians (ie, those deprived of the property of any means of life) accept willingly to engage in maintaining and improving the enterprise and the government, creating and accumulating with dedication the very hostile power that systematically subjugates them, wears out them, recycles them, discards them and abandons them - the capital. This is because they place their libido (cathexis), their desires, in the family, pseudo capitalist property in which they fantasize are accumulating their own capital on a par with the capitalists. This leads them to support the ruling class and the police, that is, the state as guarantor of this fictitious property.”

#blog post #aromantic #anti-romance #against love #liberatory relating

2 notes · View notes