bookwormtck

[bookwormtck]

hadestown orpheus and eurydice are so. she loves her cringefail husband. he looks like a 16 year old boy at his first prom. he plays wonderwall for her so good it solves climate change. she's a runaway from everywhere she's ever been and just wants him to take her home. he unionizes amazon. they are everything.

[bookwormtck]

OKAY SO HERE ARE RANDOM HAMILTON THE MUSICAL FACTS NO ONE ASKED FOR

• After Maria mentions she is "helpless" in Say No To This, Eliza doesn't mention it for the rest of the play

• In That Would Be Enough, Eliza says: "I wrote to the general a month ago". In Stay Alive we can see her writing the letter

• In Take A Break, when Angelica and Eliza reunite and say each other's names there is a slight pause for "and Peggy"

• In Stay Alive (reprise), Phillip says to Eliza "Mom, I'm sorry for forgetting what you taught me" because Eliza taught him how to count to 10 in Take A Break and he thought that mr. Eaker counted to 10 even though he didn't

• Phillip had trouble with number 7 in Take A Break, got shot at number 7 and died at Sept-7 (guess it wasn't exactly his lucky number)

• Burr always repeats that he's willing to wait for it and Alexander always repeats that he's not throwing away his shot, but in The World Was Wide Enough, Burr doesn't wait for it and shoots Alexander and Alexander throws away his shot by aiming his pistol at the sky

• In Hurricane, Alexander says: "I couldn't seem to die" and the backing vocals/ensemble say: "Wait for it, wait for it, wait for it, wait for it.." because Burr is going to shoot him in 9 songs

• If we count all of the songs in Hamilton + Lauren's interlude, there is exactly 47 songs. 47 is also the age Alexander Hamilton died at

• In Best Of Wives And Best Of Women both Alexander and Eliza say exactly 37 words, which is also how many songs they were married for in the musical

• In Who Lives, Who Dies, Who Tells Your Story when Eliza says: "I speak out against slavery," Washington makes a surprised face behind her because he owned around 120 slaves

• In What'd I miss when Jefferson gets the letter from Washington he says: "Sally, be a lamb, darlin' won't you open it," reffering to a slave of his

[bookwormtck]

Just in time for national writing month...

Mixing up settings and professions:

Arctic Cowboys

Desert Divers

Lunar Lawyers

Underwater Pilots

Jungle Sailors

[bookwormtck]

So cool! This Fall semester I've been enjoying different adaptations of Cinderella (Ever After, Ella Enchanted etc) but none are as grand as Branagh's, to me. I want to study what makes her character so timeless.

Non-English "Cinderella" adaptations that might have influenced Disney's 2015 live action remake

Rossini's La Cenerentola (Italian opera, 1817). In the opera, the king has died, and the prince's search for a bride is motivated by his pending coronation. (The 2010 German Märchenperlen version also makes this choice.) In the 2015 film, the king is mortally ill, and later dies after the ball. Thus the opera's Cinderella and her 2015 counterpart both ascend straight to the throne in the end. Also, the opera's "fairy godfather" Alidoro disguises himself as a beggar and rewards Cinderella for treating him kindly, just as the 2015 Fairy Godmother does. (Although the Fairy Godmother also does this in Prokofiev's famous ballet.) The opera's Prince Ramiro also has a constant male companion, his valet Dandini, much like 2015's Kit has the Captain of the Guard (although many versions of Cinderella's prince have similar companions). Last but not least, both princes disguise themselves as a servant at some point: Ramiro switches clothes with Dandini for the ball to observe the true characters of the ladies, while Kit disguises himself as a guard to secretly observe the slipper-fitting.

Three Nuts (or Three Wishes) for Cinderella (Czech/German, 1973). In both this version and the 2015 film, Cinderella steals a few moments of freedom by riding her horse into the forest, and there she meets the prince on a hunt and stops him from shooting a deer. (Although in the 1973 film she throws a snowball at him, he chases her, and they taunt each other, while in the 2015 version they share a philosophical discussion about kindness and tell each other a little about their lives.) Both of these versions also hark back to the Grimms' tale early on, with Cinderella's father figure (the manservant Vincek in 1973, her actual father in 2015) going on a journey, and Cinderella asking for the first branch that hits his nose (1973) or brushes his shoulder (2015) as a gift. (In 1973 the branch contains the three magic hazelnuts that take the place of the Fairy Godmother in this version, while in 2015 it doesn't serve the plot, but is poignantly brought to her by the messenger who breaks the news of her father's death.)

Sechs auf einen Strech ("Six at one Blow"): Aschenputtel ("Cinderella") (German, 2011). Cinderella repeats a mantra that she learned from her mother: "You must never lose courage." In the 2015 film, she has a similar mantra, also from her mother: "Have courage and be kind." She also first meets the prince while he's hunting in the woods in this version, and the end sees them about to become king and queen, though in this case the old king is still alive, he just chooses to retire.

Zolushka (Russian, 1947). Cinderella has blonde hair, which she wears in fluffy shoulder-length curls at the ball, while the prince has wavy chestnut brown hair. (These could be coincidences, though.) The Fairy Godmother first appears as a humbly dressed old woman (although not as a beggar in 1947), then reveals her true, magical and glamorous form. The prince is also portrayed with boyish vulnerability as well as with courtly charm, and he even cries in one scene. (The '47 prince in the woods when he thinks he's lost Cinderella forever, 2015's Kit at his father's deathbed.)

When I posted my review of the 2015 film, @ariel-seagull-wings noticed the parallels with the 1947 Russian version. She suggested that Kenneth Branagh might have been influenced by that version, since British viewers are more likely than Americans to see the adaptations from continental Europe. The more I think about it, the more I realize that Branagh and the 2015 screenwriter Chris Weitz might have been influenced by more than one European Cinderella.

[bookwormtck]

i am now a college senior!

and wow, it sure is fun so far. I will never run to class again.

what i've been learning and experiencing so far:

i live in an apartment complex that has a building specifically for married people, and the RA hosted an outdoor get-to-know-you dinner, so I got to meet a lot of them. They are quite young and all exploring the workforce/grad school. It's intriguing to me to live alongside people in this next stage of life.

I don't recognize ANYONE anymore; I feel like I only know juniors and some sophomores. But my freshman year feels like yesterday.

I helped jump a car twice this month and it's surprising how much that opened my mind to learning more about adulting.

I'm still in a fuzzy state of mind in terms of job searching, car insurance/registration, rent, and (honestly) homework...

I am in a crisis, choosing between 1) become a nun and devote my attention to prayer and my small circle of friends 2) putting myself out there, downloading dating apps, and getting eyeliner tattooed on.

[bookwormtck]

If Tumblr is the shrine for hyperfixations that originated in one way or another from our cringey middle school years, what other niche websites did you discover and actualize your interests on? For me it was Scratch.mit.edu :)

[bookwormtck]

Footage of a 12-week fetus reacting to the lethal injection during a selective reduction abortion.

Selective reduction means one or more fetuses from a set of multiple fetuses is killed in utero. The other twins are left to grow while their sibling's body is "digested" (decays/reabsorbed). This is a common practice in IVF.

This footage (and more like it) is available publicly on YouTube from doctors in Asia.

Narration by flower.fetus.416

[bookwormtck]

I wonder what the Renaissance equivalent of sharing art was? Honestly, any time before social media, was it just through rich patrons that artists made a living?

[bookwormtck]

I'm not a gamer but I love how art and science come together for people to enjoy them! :) I'm glad that creators are standing up for themselves.

SAG-AFTRA IS STRIKING AGAIN

This time, for video games.

Some key information:

They are striking so all performers will have protection against AI

The struck companies are those signed to the Interactive Media Agreement

The listed companies by SAG-AFTRA include Activision Productions Inc, Blindlight LLC, Disney Character Voices Inc, Electronic Arts Productions Inc, Formosa Interactive LLC, Insomniac Games Inc, Llama Productions LLC, Take 2 Productions Inc, VoiceWorks Productions Inc and WB Games Inc. Though this may not be everyone.

Important things from the FAQ:

Some games from struck companies are non-struck (due to the Collective Bargaining Agreement still being in effect)

Localisations will be affected if covered under the Interactive Localization Agreement

Actors who are part of SAG-AFTRA cannot work for non-union or independent/low-budged productions during the strike unless they are signed to an Interim Interactive Media Agreement, Interim Interactive Localization Agreement or a Tiered-Budget Independent Interactive Media Agreement

Similarly to the previous strike, struck work cannot be promoted. This includes accepting awards for performances in struck games. This does NOT include hosting/performing a skit at an awards show and San Diego Comic Con (the latter due to the close proximity to the calling of the strike)

As implied by the point above, SAG-AFTRA performers cannot partake in panels related to struck games or companies, including finished games produced by struck companies

The best way to check if a game is struck is to use the search tool provided by SAG-AFTRA

Most importantly: You are NOT being asked to stop playing video games, as highlighted in the FAQ for creators and streamers. This does NOT cross the picket line. Though please do talk about the strike and show your solidarity

I expect to see the same amount of support from y'all that we saw in the last strike. Just because it's video games doesn't mean performers deserve any less support and protection.

Also please reblog with any additions (with sources - we are NOT here to spread misinformation)! And please correct me if anything listed here is incorrect.

SOURCES:

Video Game Strike FAQs | SAG-AFTRA (sagaftra.org)

SAG-AFTRA Members Who Work on Video Games Go on Strike | SAG-AFTRA (sagaftra.org)

[bookwormtck]

the feminine urge to become fluent in every language on earth so I can read literature in poetry in their native tongues to get the full effect

[bookwormtck]

I JUST found out that the author of my most obsessed-over childhood book is GAIL CARSON LEVINE?! No wonder the writing was so captivating! By the way, has anyone read her new book (Sparrows in the Wind, 2022)?

[bookwormtck]

No WAY!!! I am so excited about this! It'll be the year that I student teach, so it will give me something to look forward to in between lesson planning.

LEVIATHAN First look - Coming to Netflix in 2025

[bookwormtck]

Thanks for your thoughts!! I see it too. Initially I was disappointed with Jimmy's character; he felt like a weak attempt at comic relief and a shallow side character. Giving him a voice and more of a story really adds to the show.

I dunno if it's just me but I'm getting the vibe that in My Adventures With Superman, they are setting up Lex Luthor as not a narrative foil to Clark Kent, like most people would, but to the flame bird himself, Jimmy Olsen. And that's just really interesting to me.

Jimmy Olsen is Superman's pal. Clark Kent's best friend. And as Clark said in episode four of season 2, was the first person outside his parents that made him feel safe and secure as an alien. As an outsider. Jimmy Olsen pursues the unknown with his flamebird vlog with a pure joy of wanting to find these things, (Aliens, cryptids, what have you) not to judge or persecute them. But to befriend and understand. Jimmy Olsen sees the non-human and reaches a hand out to it happily and welcoming.

Contrast that to Alexander 'Lex' Luthor. One who sees the non-human side of things and only seeks to control and destroy. He reacts not with joy and compassion like Jimmy, but anger and fear. Like Jimmy in the show, he starts off more or less a nobody. He doesn't have his own company at first, he is just assistant to someone else. Similiar to Jimmy woth his Flamebird Vlog. They are both starting out and getting looked down on. Then Superman comes into their lives, and both rocket to success. Jimmy as a department head in the Daily Planet, and Lex as head scientist of Task Force X.

Both had their lives drastically changed by Superman. And both have strong opinions on alien life. One is Superman's best Pal. The other is his worst enemy.

[bookwormtck]

Interesting... I was wondering if the US would ever come to this sort of "ah, the good old days, no use thinking about the present" mentality that the article talks about. Then I realized, as messed up as it is, the US feels like the forefront of media and governance in this world. Melting pot as it is. So there's not much reason to be nostalgic, especially if it is a younger country.

The story Southeast Asia likes to tell itself is that, by the late 1990s, it had something like its “end of history” moment.

By 1999, the region was free of colonialism, with the last push made by Timor-Leste, which that year held a referendum to throw off Indonesian imperialism. With that development, the region’s national borders appeared to be finally decided and revanchism, although it was still voiced on the fringes, had ended. 

All Southeast Asian countries, except Timor-Leste, were members of ASEAN. Communist Vietnam and Laos were stable and internationally accepted. Anti-communist tyrants like Indonesia’s Suharto, Burma’s Ne Win and Ferdinand Marcos in the Philippines had either resigned or been ousted. 

And the worst crimes of the Cold War-era, including the Khmer Rouge genocide in Cambodia, were not just over but there was to finally be some sort of justice. In 1999, the holdout Khmer Rouge leaders finally surrendered and Ta Mok, its former army chief, was symbolically arrested by the local authorities. 

Today, however, Southeast Asia finds itself trapped by history. 

On the one hand, it became evident in February 2021 that not all of 20th-century history was over. The military coup in Myanmar that month awakened many to the reality that some elements of the pre-Cold War period had not been solved. 

Indeed, Myanmar has been trapped in the early 20th century since independence from Britain in 1948. Whereas all other Southeast Asian threw off their colonial powers and then resolved their internal battles over what form of government would follow, Myanmar did not. 

Myanmar as outlier

Anti-colonial struggles are conflicts against a foreign aggressor and civil wars at the same time. It is not enough to claim self-determination; it must be determined what sort of self you want once free. 

The partition of Vietnam was both things at once. Many historians date the Cambodian Civil War as beginning in either 1967 (with the Samlaut Uprising) or 1979 (with the Lon Nol “coup”) but those same political schisms were latent, though blanketed, under Nordom Sihanouk’s regime that ruled after independence. 

The People’s Power uprising in the Philippines in 1986 was essentially the answer to the question — constitutional or personalist rule — that was posed when the country gained independence from Spain in 1898, and, indeed, was the internal debate within almost all of José Rizal’s writings. 

But Myanmar never went through this process — or, rather, successive military juntas never allowed the question to be seriously explored. The 1962 coup effectively froze in time the question of self-determination of Myanmar’s myriad ethnic minorities, a remnant of colonial rule.

In two ways, Myanmar under the military remained a colonial holdout: The Bamar center colonized the ethnic periphery and the anti-colonial struggle was never allowed to fully run its course. The cataclysm of the 2021 military coup appears to be the event that will finally bring this historical question to a proper solution. 

The answer offered by the anti-junta movement, centered on the National Unity Government, is a revolutionary federal state, in which Myanmar maintains its same territorial borders but vastly more power and autonomy is given to the ethnic areas, while at the same time the national army, a product of anti-colonialism, will be dissolved and something (perhaps a network of militias) will take its place. 

The junta’s answer, the same that its predecessors offered, is devolution based on the permission of a central authority, implemented through peace talks. The problem with this answer, as has been the case in the past, is that it is dependent not upon rules or laws but the whims of whichever general is sitting in Naypyidaw, so essentially yet another delay in answering the post-colonial civil war question.

Yet, for now at least, according to some hopeful observers, the forces of revolution are prevailing over the forces of reaction in Myanmar.

Baked-in crisis

Alas, the rest of Southeast Asia seems unwilling to accept that a historical reckoning must happen in Myanmar for there to be any progress. 

One can put aside the fatuousness of permitting Myanmar entrance into ASEAN in 1997 before those civil-war conflicts were solved, yet ASEAN still doesn’t accept that by doing so it institutionalized those conflicts into the regional system.

In other words, by accepting Myanmar into the ASEAN bloc, the rest of the region (perhaps) unwittingly accepted a share of responsibility for solving those historical conflicts. This point is still not appreciated by ASEAN in its continued insistence that the solution to the current crisis is to return to a point in time: the status quo ante. 

Yet, even if that return was feasible, which it isn’t, ASEAN would still be left with the situation of Myanmar’s 20th-century conflicts sparking another similar crisis at some point in the future. 

ASEAN is, therefore, trapped in apparently thinking that Myanmar is unique in that it won’t have to go through the same bloody processes that the rest of the region did — a final reckoning of post-colonial civil wars — and clearly thinks that the region’s responsibility is to forestall, not assist, this process.

On the other hand, Southeast Asia is also in a history trap of believing that the post-Cold War era is still alive. 

It can be fairly said that the region, aside from China, was the biggest beneficiary of the world order left after the collapse of communism in Europe. A cursory look at how the region has developed economically, culturally and socially since 1989 is enough to make that argument. 

But what should we call the period between 1989 and, roughly, 2019? The “Chimerica Era”, that chimera when the United States and China thought they could get along and when the West thought that Beijing was playing by the same rules? Or, perhaps, the “Inter-Cold War Era?”

Nostalgia not enough

In any case, that period is now over. Yet, Southeast Asia’s leaders still think that they can deny its disappearance by repeatedly stating their opposition to what has come after – a “New Cold War” – as if denying something’s existence makes it not exist.

They hold onto the hope that Washington and Beijing will finally see sense and agree that because things were much better for all in the 2000s that should be their shared vision for the future. 

If there is a purpose to “hedging”, it is presumably to play both superpowers off against one another to extract the most benefits. Yet the downside is that you make yourself dependent on both sides, as has been the case: As a share of overall ASEAN trade, the United States and China have taken on a larger, not smaller, percentage in recent years. 

Hedging, as manifested today, is to take both sides, rather than to take neither side. That is problematic, to say the least, if there is a possibility of both sides going to war, when you will be forced by events outside your control and at a time not of your choosing to decide which side to take.

None of this is unreasonable from an emotional level; it’s only natural for Southeast Asian leaders, by 1999, to have been jubilant that the horrors of the 20th century were over and that their societies could finally have the stability to become prosperous – thanks to the Inter-Cold War Era. 

It’s only natural to want the good times to continue. Sadly, they’re over and the world is once again a far more unstable and unpredictable place, including in ASEAN’s northwest. Nostalgia for times past will only get you so far. 

David Hutt is a research fellow at the Central European Institute of Asian Studies (CEIAS) and the Southeast Asia Columnist at the Diplomat. As a journalist, he has covered Southeast Asian politics since 2014. The views expressed here are his own and do not reflect the position of Radio Free Asia and RFA sister organization BenarNews.

[bookwormtck]

we were robbed

[bookwormtck]

It's 2024 someone with skills make this happen!!!

Consider: A generally lighthearted buddy comedy movie about two characters, out of whom one is british and the other is american, who meet by happenstance and need to join forces to achieve some mutual goal, going from resentful strangers genuinely going "ugh why are british people like this/why are americans like that" to doing that as jovial roasting between good friends. But instead of it being two white dudes, it's two women, of whom one is British Indian and the other is Native American.

And peppered between the lighthearted banter and a running joke about peoples' confusion about the word "indian", every once in a while there's a brutally dark joke of either of them pointing out - and bonding over - their own generational trauma and the horrors of colonialism.

[bookwormtck]

While this made me smile initially, I wonder if we're looking at the message in the wrong way? I read an article explaining the artist's intent on jalopnik.com (a car website) and it concludes by saying:

"This art installation is a poignant reminder that we are still just little flesh sacks on a rock flying through space, no matter how far we think we have come as a society. An object that many people dream about one day owning can be rendered valueless in an instant... What society should really value instead of money and possessions is happiness, joy, and making the most out of the short time that each of us has on this planet..."

And I agree that Western society needs a wake-up call with AT LEAST this level of intensity. But when the author says "no matter how far we have come as a society," isn't that acknowledging that top-notch technology for the sake of human flourishing is a positive advancement? What I mean is, does the artist want us to return to a time in history when sculptures of deities were the pinnacle of civilization?

I'm just as unhappy about corporate greed and the U.S.' fallen morals as the next American, but I still think that a Tesla in and of itself (an electric vehicle designed to be an environmentally friendly, produced through curiosity and innovation--let's not think about the brand name value for just a sec) shouldn't be wasted just because of what it represents.

I LOVE YOU