elephant-in-the-bloom - Tumblr blog

elephant-in-the-bloom · 26 days ago

Text

Secrets of the Darkest Art: How to Make a Horcrux

So I saw many theories regarding how to make a Horcrux, but none of them really made perfect sense to me, so I decided to give it a crack myself as part of my mission to understand Lord Voldemort/Tom Marvolo Riddle (Which I think I did, big post coming about that at some point, this is but another piece of that puzzle of a man)

So this is my reverse engineering of a ritual to create Horcruxes based on book evidence, my knowledge of real-world alchemy, real-world ancient Greek cults and rituals and linguistic analysis.

How to reverse engineering a dark magical ritual:

The first thing is to define what we know for certain:

The name: "Horcrux"

The creator is an Ancient Greek wizard named Harpo the Foul.

A death is required in the making.

A Horcrux holds a piece of the caster's soul that anchors them to life so they won't die.

I'll actually start with the third point.

How to split a soul?

Both Dumbledore and Slughorn mention murder being required to tear your soul to make a Horcrux, and that never really sat right with me. It magically doesn't make sense and even the canon examples we have for Horcrux murders make this statement iffy.

We have seven examples of murders used to create Horcruxs (thanks to one Tom Riddle being dramatic):

The Diary - Myrtle Warren - killed by a basilisk. Sure, Tom freed the Basilisk, but it hardly seemed targeted at Myrtle specifically and you can argue he didn't actually kill her (more a manslaughter by negligence). He didn't cast the spell, so how come this tore his soul? (I also think Myrtle was an accident and wasn't meant to be killed, but I digress)

The Ring - his father (Tom Riddle Sr) - Avada Kadevra.

The Cup - Hepzibah Smith - she was poisoned by her house elf. Sure, the elf was under the imperious, but it wasn't a first-degree murder, and like with the Basilisk I find it hard to consider this the same as casting a killing curse. Magically those are very different things.

The Locket - Muggle Tramp - Avada Kadevra

The Diadem - Albanian Peasant - Avada Kadevra

Harry Potter - himself - backfired Avada Kadevra

Nagini - Bertha Jorkins - Avada Kadevra

Now, I used the term "magically different" or "magically make sense" what do I mean by that?

Well, besides the fact I'm going to make a full post about how I see magical theory in the Harry Potter Wizarding World, I'll say it takes a lot after occult philosophies from Alchemy that are very old, Slughorn mentions as much in book 6 and there are a few other references to it. I'm just gonna cover the basics required for this theory.

In Alchemy, everything (people, animals, plants, and rocks) is built of three base components:

The Salt - the body - the physical form.

The Sulfur - the soul - the self that holds the divine flame.

The Mercury - the spirit - the life essence that binds the salt and sulfur together.

Now, in Alchemy, the main study is in purifying and combining these different aspects of material. Let's look at a herb, for an example:

If we want to retrieve its salt, we'll dry the herb completely using fire to leave behind a fine light grey ash that represents only the physical form.

If we wanted its mercury we'd distill all liquids from it until we get a purified, clear liquid which in the case of plants would be alcohol (it's why alcohol is referred to as "spirit").

And if we wanted its soul, we would take the remains from the distillation and drying process which would be a kind of oil.

(it can get more complicated with different materials, but this isn't a post about Alchemy)

Now, back to Horcruxs.

So, if we would want to split a soul, Alchemecly, how do we go about it?

Well, we don't. Not really. See a soul can't really be split, as every part of it, every bit of that oil from our random herb represents the entire soul. It's why something like a Horcrux could theoretically work in giving a full life to the diary the way we see in Chamber of Secrets.

Additionally, to work with any material in Alchemy, you are required to purify it first. It means that to get a piece of soul to bind to a diary, you need a pure soul.

Killing someone else won't sever your own soul from the spirit and the body, it's not how this works. Killing someone severs their spirit and therefore splits their body, spirit, and soul. Besides, an Ancient Greek man, like Herpo was, would hardly consider murder as vile as we do today. It wouldn't even cross his mind that any murder (even an indirect one) could harm one's own soul.

No, the only way to "split" a soul is to first sever it from life, disconnecting the bond between soul and body. Essentially, the only way to promise you immortality is to kill yourself.

I know it sounds a little confusing, but, essentially, once the soul is severed from the spirit and body you can split it. Think of the herbal oil, once you have the oil, separate from the rest of the plant parts, you can combine it with new ingredients. You can only work on a specific aspect once you severed it from the other two and as what binds all three together is spirit — life — the only way to do it for a human soul — is death.

But really, how?

Well, here comes the second thing we know about making Horcruxs — that dear Herpo was from Ancient Greece.

In Ancient Greece they had multiple different religious cults, some of which were Chthonic cults. These cults dedicated themselves to death or ditties and heroes associated with death and more importantly — rebirth.

Many of these cults were dedicated to figures like Orpheus, Dionysus, and Persephone, characters in mythology who are known for going through the underworld — through death — and coming back out. These cults were very secretive and not much is known about their practices, but some are.

What is known is that they had rituals where they reenacted a death and then rebirth (usually drinking wine — water of life, was the representation of rebirth).

This created a very clear idea in my head — to split a soul, you'll have to ritualistically, magically kill yourself, severe a piece of your soul, and then revive yourself with a water of life — a potion.

This potion is never mentioned, but I believe it exists due to these Chthonic cult rituals and how they were structured. Not only that, but the Greek underworld did have a river known for being incredibly painful to drink, literally made of fire, but being able to bring the dead back - The Phlegethon River.

Note: Lethe River Water (the river in the Greek Underworld that makes the drinker forget) is a canon ingredient in a Forgetfulness Potion.

So what is the dead body for?

Well, congratulations, you killed yourself to retrieve a sliver of your soul and revived yourself so you won't stay dead. You found an item you can keep secure to tie that sliver of soul, too. Now, how would you bind then? After all, the only thing meant to bind a human soul to a body is a human spirit - a human life... you get where I'm going with this.

This is why Tom didn't have to be the one to do the deed. As long as he had a recently deceased corpse to harvest the life from to use to bind his newly split soul and the item of his choice.

It explains why nothing was missing from the bodies. Myrtle and the Riddles were investigated by the Ministry of Magic. One would assume the Aurors would've noticed if any corpse was missing a hand due to the killer eating it (as other Horcrux theories suggest).

Not only was nothing missing from the body, the soul was intact. Myrtle became a ghost after death, a ghost is quite literally, just the soul, no body, no spirit.

So the only thing that was taken from Tom's victims was their life, quite literally at that.

Is that all? Can we make a Horcrux now?

Not really. See, when analyzing spells in Harry Potter, one thing super important to note is their name.

Avada Kadevra - is a reference to an Aramaic healing spell "Abracadabra" pronounced in Aramaic as: "Avra Kadebra" and meaning "I will create as commanded". Merged with the Latin word "cadaver" meaning "corpse" to create -> "I will create dead bodies as commanded"

Or Wingardium Laviosa - is a cross of the English word "wing", the Latin word "arduus" (meaning "high, tall, lofty, steep, proudly elevated"), or "arduum" (meaning "steep place, the steep" and the Latin word "levo" (meaning to "raise, lift up"). So together the spell means -> "lift high up".

So, it's pretty clear spells, their names, and incantations are very self-explanatory. So a Horcrux should be no different.

I've seen some attempts at translating the name Horcrux. Unfortunately, these attempts treated the name as Latin, modern Greek, or Old English. Herpo, was Ancient Greek, though, so I went and translated a few possible meanings from Ancient Greek (Classical Greek and Homeric Greek are what I looked at):

ὅρκος (orkus, pronounced "hor-kus") - an oath, the object by which one swears, bound by oath (still used in modern Greek).

κρόκες (crukes, pronounced "cru-kes") - saffron-colored (blood red in Greek), crocus flower. The crocus flower symbolizes both death (the saffron that is the spice) and rebirth (the golden crocus which brings renewal and joy) because Demeter wears them when Persephone returns from the underworld in myth.

So what we have is a spell called "binding oath of death and rebirth" which all around sounds fitting.

There might also be a "made in blood" tucked at the end due to the association of κρόκες with the color of blood.

But why does it matter?

Well, now with this name, I expect the binding between the spirit from the victim, the split soul, and the item would be done in a sort of oath - an orkus.

The association with blood gives us another hint. Blood is the part of the human body most representative of life. Therefore, in Alchemy, your blood is your spirit. So it'll make sense that your own blood would be used in the binding process or more correctly in the process of turning another person's spirit into your own. Making the thread to bind the body (item) and the soul piece your own. As it also refers to just a red firey color, it can indicate the Phlagatton potion I hypothesize should be part of the ritual due to how Chthonic rituals usually went, as the Phlagaton river is made of fire.

So we have a general idea of how to make a Horcrux. You need an item of your choice to bind your soul to. You need a life (spirit) harvested from a human that you transformed into being your own using your blood. And you need a piece of your own soul, which you get by killing yourself and then reviving yourself. And you finish it off by binding it all together with an oath.

But how could you make one accidentally?

So, everyone knows Voldemort succeeded in somehow making a Horcrux accidentally, something a lot of theories I saw don't account for. Becouse whatever process you need to go to to make a Horcrux, Voldemort went through all of it the night he died the first time and marked Harry.

All the steps for my method of making a Horcrux were met that night.

The item in qustion is baby Harry, nothing interesting there.

The soul sliver was split the way it always is — through death. Voldemort died, killed by his own killing curse and that is what splits his soul.

The life or spirit that then binds his soul to Harry isn't Lily's spirit or James'; it's his own spirit that acts as a binder between Harry and Voldemort’s split soul. Because the spirit was already his, there was no need to transform it by blood so the additional ritual wasn't necessary.

Step-by-step guide to making Horcruxes:

I'm not going to actually give the full step-by-step least a budging dark lord is looking for this information. I do have notes about exact incantations and even the full recipe and instructions for the Phlagaton potion I'm going to mention. These instructions won't be here since they are more in the realm of speculation and headcanon. This is just the overview of the ritual based on canon information and the occult philosophy I mentioned above. (edit: the full step-by-step headcanon with my potion recipe and everything does appear in the reblogs)

Step 1 - Life and Blood

Get access to a recently deceased human and extract their Mercury (Spirit or Life Essence).

Submerge the retrieved life essence with your own blood on a new moon (life and vitality). (7 drops of blood will probably do)

Step 2 - Water of Fire

To complete the cycle of death and rebirth you’ll need the Phlegeton Water potion to return you to life at the end of the cycle.

As you brew the potion, it must be brewed in a dark room, preferably underground to remind as much of the underworld as possible.

While brewing the potion one must be in the mindset of the Phlegeton, must be willing to go through agony to achieve eternal life and imbue these thoughts in their potion. (In alchemy, when working, it is believed you imbue your work with your thoughts during the Alchemical process. As an Alchemical process affects both the material being worked and the Alchemist themselves)

Likley Ingrediants:

Saffron spice

Golden crocus flower juice

Pomegranate juice

Step 3 - The Ritual Preparation

Set up your space so none of the components may escape the ritual space and so the ritual will not be interfered with.

Make sure the spirit you retrieved is within reach.

Make sure the item you desire will hold the Horcrux will be within reach as well.

Coax the spirit into the item and prepare it to tie your soul to the next step.

Step 4 - Death and Rebirth

To create a thread of your soul to tie to the ritual, you must die figuratively. Go through death to return stronger from the underworld.

Once you feel like death has reached you and your soul is separated you should heal your soul and finish the cycle, bringing you out of death and back to life by drinking the Phlegeton potion.

After the pain subsides you will feel healthier than before, stronger than before, and you’ll have an additional thread of sulfur (soul) in your chest to be pulled out and placed into the Horcrux.

The split-off soul should, on its own, try to search for life and a body to be bound to. If it doesn't, coax it out yourself and bind it to the Horcrux with the spirit you made in step 1.

Step 5 - Oath of Life

The connection between the body (the item), soul, and spirit is still unstable, if most likely strong enough to hold.

Swear the oath of life to finalize the bond between you, the Horcrux, and the soul thread together to ward off death.

I'll end with this note I made regarding Horcruxes when I started working on this theory:

I don't know what all goes into the process of making a Horcrux but I don't believe a person who truly likes themselves and doesn't want to inflict pain on themselves could make a Horcrux. Tearing up your soul is an act of arrogance above nature, sure, thinking you deserve to change the laws of the world and be the exception is part of it, but it's also an act of self-hatred. You need to hate yourself enough to be willing to kill yourself, hurt yourself, and tear yourself up in the most unnatural ways — hence why so few can do so, let alone more than once.

And Tom Riddle does seem to have that exact mix of arrogance, spite, and low self-esteem that would allow it.

#harry potter #hp theory #horcrux #voldermort

331 notes · View notes

elephant-in-the-bloom · 26 days ago

Text

Parseltongue question all welcome please!

Ok got into slightly snarky debate with strangers online: I thought Rowling’s plotting is not perfect regarding how Ron imitates Harry’s Parseltongue and got into the chamber of secrets.

It’s already debatable whether Parseltongue can be learned. (Spoiler: official website says it can. But canon also says it’s an “extremely rare gift”). But we found a way around it - Ron was just “imitating” not learning. Fine.

The main problem for me is that I find it unconvincing that Ron, who sleeps even more than Harry, hears Harry speaking snake in his dreams so much that he picks up on how to open the chamber of secrets. (When Harry himself can’t always speak Parseltongue unless he’s faced with a snake directly).

Also - it took Rowling the whole of book 6 to build a lead up to Dumbledore finding hints to locate a horcrux, but a matter of few lines to set up Ron to open the chamber of secrets? Without any prior foreshadowing at all? This just doesn’t read like a very clever plot, but more like Rowling is in a hurry to wrap up the series.

What do you think???

#Harry Potter #Ron Weasley #Parseltongue #snake #JK Rowling

9 notes · View notes

elephant-in-the-bloom · 2 months ago

Note

i wanna know about the ring composition meta!

Ok, so, I am a bit unhinged about this 😂 I quite literally froth over all the parallelism, the foreshadowing and chiastic structure of these books, so I decided to put it all in once place and write a meta ... but the trouble is, there is SO much ground to cover that I am having difficulty breaking it down. Here are some of the main snippets and a few of my favourite points -

If something is characterised by chiasmus it denotes a structure in which words/events/stories are repeated in reverse order. For a Harry Potter relevant and more visual representation, it looks something like this -

PS, CoS, PoA, GoF, OoTP, HBP, DH

or refer to this excellent little diagram -

The chiastic structure and ring composition in Harry Potter can be broken down in a few main points -

The beginning (PS) and end (DH) meet - a story in which the beginning and end are at one point.

The 'big turn' or central line and Parallel halves - If the beginning and end are going to meet, the story needs a 'big turn' (a 180 so to speak) at some point to divide it into two halves, with the first half of the story being the outgoing and the second half, the returning. In the case of the HP books this is done by creating seperate sections (PS, CoS, PoA) that are placed against one another (OoTP, HBP, DH) across a central dividing line (GoF), thus making these halves parallels of one another.

Here are a few of my favourite examples of the joined beginning and end

The Forest Again: Harry's first encounter with Voldemort takes place in the forbidden forest, having stumbled upon the dead unicorn. This first encounter is echoed in 'The Forest Again' in DH which is to be Harry's supposed last encounter with Voldermort.

Hagrid and Harry, together again (🥺): Hagrid brings baby Harry to Privet Drive on Sirius's motorcycle, Hagrid takes adult Harry away from Privet Drive on Sirius's motorcycle. Hagrid introduces Harry to the Wizarding World and is the one to tell him about Voldemort, Hagrid witnesses Harry's supposed death at the hands of Voldemort in The Forest Again and carry's his body to Hogwarts.

Parents at Christmas (this one has to be my favourite): Little Eleven year-old Harry sees his parents for the first time over the Christmas Holidays, full of hope and longing, he is fascinated and absolutely entranced by their living reflections in the Mirror of Erised. On Christmas Eve in DH, Adult Harry visits his parents graves for the first time and, perhaps also for the first time ever, grieves fully. He sees his would-be home for the first time and experiences the murders of his parents through Voldemorts memories.

The other Gryffindor champion (ahhhh another fav!): In PS, Dumbledore awards Neville Longbotton, the decisive last-minute points necessary for Gryffindor's victory over Slytherin for the House Championship. Similarly, in DH, it is Neville's contribution in the final hour, his killing of the serpent Nagini with the Sword of Gyrffindor, that takes Voldemort over to mortality, thus ensuring victory once more.

And some of the parallel halves

in CoS Harry takes a wrong turn in the floo network and ends up inside the vanishing cabinet at Borgin and Burkes where he spies on Draco Malfoy. In HBP, Harry once again finds himself spying on Draco Malfoy at Borgin and Burkes when he should be with the Weasleys, suspicious about what Draco is purchasing, which incidentally turns out to be, yep, the very same vanishing cabinet.

Both CoS and HBP have major plot points around the significance of a mysterious book, CoS - Tom Riddle's diary, HBP - the Half Blood Princes textbook.

In PoA Harry is introduced to his godfather, in OoTP (need I say more? 😭) he loses him.

In PoA we witness an authetnic prophecy made by Professor Trelawney, in OoTP we witness the authentic prophecy made by Professor Trelawney.

In PoA Snape is furious with Harry at the story's end, he is borderline unhinged because he suspects Sirius's escape has everything to do with Harry. in OoTP Harry is furious with Snape at the story's end, he is borderline irrational after Sirius's death for which he wants to believe Snape is responsible.

There are many, MANY more, but these will have to suffice for now, this is already turning into a thesis 😂

The last point where the ring composition in HP is concerned is -

The rings within the rings - What really takes this from interesting to remarkable is that not only is the series as a whole structured this way, but so is each individual book. Each and every book has its own joined beginnings and endings, an echoing midpoint and story turn, and chapters that echo one another across the story in axis. There are rings within the rings.

Some super quick examples of this are (it's important to note that the chapters mentioned below are almost always each-others actual numerological parallel within the book) -

First and last chapters of CoS (1-2, 17): Harry meets Dobby on his Birthday, Dobby gives him a dire warning and tries to imprison him to keep him away from Hogwarts. In the latter, Dobby's warnings come to fruition and Harry gives Dobby freedom.

Chapters 4 and 20 of PoA: The trio frets over Scabbers failing health, mysterious longevity and about the ministry's efforts to capture Sirius. In the latter chapter, the trio corner Sirius, learn of Scabbers real identity and the true reason behind his seemingly ill health.

Chapters 8 and 30 of GoF: Harry sits in the top box with Barty Crouch Jr, Ludo Bagman, top Ministry officials and the Malfoys a the Quidditch World Cup. In the latter chapter, Harry finds himself sitting in spectator-full courtroom to watch the trials of Barty Crouch Jr, Ludo Bagman and other former Death Eaters by top Ministry officials.

Fourth and Fourth last chapters of OoTP (4, 35): In what is Sirius's first appearance in this book, we see him fighting with and pulling a curtain over his mother, an insane member of the Black family. In what is Sirius's last appearance in this book, we see him fighting with and being sent behind a veil by his cousin Bellatrix Lestrange, an insane member of the Black Family.

Again, there are many, MANY more but I think I'll stop rambling and save them for the meta 😆 sorry for the extremely long winded answer here!!

192 notes · View notes

elephant-in-the-bloom · 2 months ago

Text

!Live reaction! Rewatching HP and the Philosopher's Stone

Harry is just wallowing in happiness trying to "grab a letter" in the air. Doesn’t even care if he’s got any, he’s dancing! So precious!!!

Hagrid in gringotts whispering to the goblin he wants to withdraw “u know what” in vault “u know which” - such children literature mystery. Love it.

Except I also wondered how Harry is able to hear a word he said, Hagrid is so massive it must sound like he’s speaking from 2nd floor lol

Also like, can’t Harry’s gold not be lumped and piled up with no decipherable order? At least put like every 1,000 together or something (yes I know, it’s to make Harry's fortune look like they’re endless hills and heaps)

Olivander’s wand shop was since 382 BC. What’s the wizarding world’s relationship with religion anyways!! This has bothered me on many a sleepless night.

Harry buying snacks on the train, he bought everything without even knowing what anything costs just knowing that he’s got enough gold for everything lmao

Such a child’s dream, the first thing u buy after coming to an inheritance is sweets

Boats towards the castle, such a classic shot. My heart swells seeing Hogwarts, it’s like coming home!

That’s not Maggie Smith, that’s Minerva Mcgonegall. You know on first sight this is not a woman u want to mess with.

Oh come on Albus you can’t be so obvious in favouritism! (Dumbles: oh yes I can. 500 points to Gryffindor!)

What a bloody cute and cozy dorm I wanna be here!!!!

youtube

Fucking hell snape! U wanna break the door?

Quidditch - slytherin plays so much foul??!!!!

Hermione IS a know it all! Snape is jinxing the broom? Instead of telling Hagrid who’s a full grown adult next to her, she’s gonna take him on herself lol

Harry looks so surprised when he spit out the snitch, what? He didn’t know he just almost swallowed the ball?!

Emma’s wearing large front teeth, that’s why she had to speak so hard. Awww

Harry meeting his parents in the Mirror of Erised the first time, I teared up and this isn’t the first time

Poor Ron. He looked sooo scared when he moved his knight to be sacrificed. Poor baby :( brave boy.

Quirrell clicked his fingers and the fire lit up in the final room hiding the stone - windless magic!

Children literature villain strikes again ;u; his way of being intimidating is just to shout and yell.

Quirrell died, but the fire didn’t go out, must be a bug. Thought when a person dies the spell they cast would be broken as well. (Dumbles killed by Avada kedevra)

Oh but maybe because Voldy is still "alive" so the spell still works? Honestly who knows.

And my god, from Jude Law to Richard Harris, what’s happened to Dumbles’ fashion preference and hair!!

Dumbledore bullying Slytherin in front of the whole school at the year end feast. SMH.

Also, from my memory being a teenager, having your name and deeds shouted out in front of the whole school (even if they’re good deeds and win your house points) is a supremely embarrassing experience!! Help!!

#Harry Potter #Philosopher's stone #Ron Weasley #watchblogging #hermione granger #quirrell #voldermort #minerva mcgonagall #mcgonagall #gryffindor #slytherin

2 notes · View notes

elephant-in-the-bloom · 7 months ago

Text

Oh my word. Seeing everything in a new light.

Richard Papen: The Master of Illusion

Why did Richard become an accomplice, how could he so easily be swayed to ''Allow'' murder? The answer is simple: He longed for the picturesque—at any cost.

Richard grew up isolated, and seen as an inconvenience; Nineteen-years-of-life and not a single mention of an old friend (Apart from an ex-girlfriend he was desperate to rid of)—It's why he idolises Hampden and the Greek Scholars to such a fictitious degree, they represented everything he did not have: Fundamental familial experiences with love, being cared for, and feeling wanted.

They were beautiful, but beauty cannot replace what he hadn't had.

The Motive: To sum it all up in a pretty bow for you; Richard left his morals at the door once Henry rescued him—All of his fears had not only been amplified in chapter 3, but realised; His Parents distain, his Teachers neglect, his lack of companionship, his very existence unperceived (tainted): All of which almost led him to his own grave, with nowhere else to turn.

The side-character to his own story, the man everyone felt passive-disdain for (Not even hatred, that would be too impassioned—To personal.) But for the first time, someone caught him when he fell. For the first time he was shown compassion, Henry stayed by his bedside when he was too ill to do much else other than lay in pain, and Henry made it clear he would recover within his own home and very bed—An action Richard could never forget—Of course he'd put Henry atop a pedestal, and become so agreeable for his Messiah; Richard had never experienced such guidance nor support in his entire life.

After a life of desperation for an escape—After everything which previously had been brimmed with dread, suddenly leaked beauty: Was it really a question of if once glanced, whether he'd franticly flail to grasp it again? Of if he'd insert himself into these people's lives, and make any sacrifice possible to return their tranquil silence once it had been so foolishly broken by Bunny?

Now the real reason I am creating this post: That's right I fooled you into reading my theory MWHAHA!—Richard Papen was the one to push Bunny, not Henry. I figured I'd get his motive out of the way before we'd delve into pure insanity.

The most notable part of the actual murder is it's never written who pushes Bunny. One of the general ideas for the reason is it didn't matter who it was, simply that they were all complicite... But that's a little boring, so let's pick at this wound. It simply couldn't have been Henry; He was thirty-feet-away, his shear distance keeps coming up too—But with Richard, Bunny was practically breathing down his neck, he was close enough to read the label on the bear bottle.

He describes being overwhelmed by Bunny's sudden appearance, but really it was anticipation: Because Richard realized he'd have to be the one to push him. If Henry had tried to push Bunny it couldn't of logistically worked, there is no element of surprise as Henry is too faraway and within Bunny's direct sight, he has his full attention. Henry may be large but so is Bunny, it's even directly mentioned here how he's 6 foot 3; Not to mention Bunny had fully been expecting Henry to attempt to murder him at some point.

You could argue he was just to stupid to fight back—However, Richard may never describe the push, but he does go into deep details on the shear surprise and shock on Bunny's face; He well and truly hadn't seen his emendate death coming. Dumbassery doesn't entirely dull out your reflexes nor does it suddenly make you the size of Francis scrawny ass.

Bun entirely trusted Richard, all Richards previous machinations of Bunny's jealousy for him he'd made up in his own mind and didn't actually match in Bunny's actions.

Richards within shoulder length, and Henry, who limps and is too far to seize the element of surprise: The push—The fall, Richard watches each and every moment of Bunny's death at an intimate proximity.

It just couldn't have been Henry, I'm sorry.

It all loops back to why Richard would've felt the need to commit this murder, because yes Henry manipulates Richard well and truly but it completely backfires due to Richards traumatic history: Ultimately he killed Bun out of his own volition, and selfish desire for the picturesque lifestyle he'd only so recently acquired.

And finally, Donna Tartts quote of The Greeks and The Irrational

Dionysus [is] The Master of Illusions, who could make a vine grow out of a ship's plank, and in general enable his votaries to see the world as the world's not.

We are reminded of who our narrator is, and then must listen to Richard try desperately to twist his language in order to fool us into believing Henry had well and truly committed the murder without implicating either of them.

But no man who was a mere witness describes a murder in the way Richard chose to, it is morbid and soaked in guilt. He goes on a tangent about murderers always avoiding telling the meat of their crimes, but really he was doing so to avoid telling us the true events of that evening; He goings in circles around the incident constantly, never landing on the mark.

God this post got long, if you made it through the entire thing oh my gosshhh hiiiiiiiiiiiiiii how are youuuu :)

#the secret history #richard papen #henry winter #tsh analysis

481 notes · View notes

elephant-in-the-bloom · 8 months ago

Text

The Secret History: A Theories Guide

Richard Papen: The Master of Illusion

Julian Morrow: ''Honesty Is A Dangerous Virtue''

Henry Winter Wasn't In A Car Accident.

What Led To Henry Winters Death

Bunny Corcoran: Neglect In Plain Sight

When the Hare knows the Devil is out Hunting. [Bunny Analysis]

Francis Is The Worst Character (And Why You Should Think So Too)

Camilla & Henry: A Relationship Analysis

Stripping Back Richards Perspective—The Macaulay Twins

^Character Analysis^

The Mountain Lion: It Isn't A Theory

The Secret History's Dream Sequences.

The Secret History Isn't purposely Queer. (Richard Is Still Gay though, Here's Why!)

^Extras^

[ IF A LINK IS BROKEN, PLEASE COMMENT! ]

This post is officially completed, so I'd like to commemorate through shouting out my personal favourite TSH accounts. Who may I add, helped me form a lot of my own theories.

Theorist/Analysis Peoplez

@estherdedlock On how Bunny told Julian he should take Richard on as a student.

@miroana for this post “It is better to know one book intimately than a hundred superficially” (Tartt, 31).

@vivienlacroix For their ‘’Everything is cheap in hell’’ post (It's why my blog is titled that)

And of course, @henrywinterswife Who stopped posting long ago, but who I remember dearly.

Incredible Artists (Who you should comissions if their comissions are open cus their awsome)

@tovaperson I love their Bunny & Henry artwork, it's so fr.

These TSH cast headshots by qiornono Bunny & Richard are my favourites oh oh and this one too

@droptheguillotineplease One of legitimately one of my favourite artists on all of Tumblr. I mean, look at this shit.

I reblog posts so I can come back and reference them, so many of these are off my blog now because I won’t be making anymore more TSH posts. But I still wanted to thank these people and show my appreciation somehow.

Also let’s never forget my own post that ended up on reddit, and then was called thoughtless because it was a ‘’quickshot take.’’ Made me laugh, perhaps it was for the best the redditors didn’t find my other posts, they're deranged.

3K notes · View notes

elephant-in-the-bloom · 8 months ago

Text

Yeah, she’s a bitch, but she also has her iconic moments, let’s bffr

195 notes · View notes

elephant-in-the-bloom · 8 months ago

Text

of course he's read the secret history!!

7K notes · View notes

elephant-in-the-bloom · 8 months ago

Text

Lady Mary Sharma is a bad mother (to Kate at least)

There are many reasons to love watching Bridgerton, or even to defend it to haters - costumes and music aren't meant to be historically accurate, the show is known to be a frivolous escapade and audience should embrace it. But one thing I will never be able to get behind is how badly the characters are written. Let me start with an arguably fringe character - Lady Mary Sharma from season 2. Spoilers below.

What Lady Mary says about herself and her actions are completely at odds with each other, but the audience is supposed to accept the former and ignore the latter. It's not a problem for a character's words to contradict their actions, oftentimes that's how the depths of a character and a text is created. What Iago says and what he does are never in unison, that's how we know he's a snake, that's how Othello guides audience to read him as a villain. Same thing with Kate and Anthony - Bridgerton shows the chemistry and sexual tension between these two by having them spend over half the series saying how much they despise each other, while their eyes and actions show how they cannot help being drawn and eventually falling for each other. It is the spasm between their words and actions that forms the backbone of season 2, that deepens the delayed gratification which, when it is finally granted, is immensely satisfying because the odds between what these characters say and how the act are resolved. Are the audience to take what they say at face value? - "you're the bane of my existence", "you vex me" - the show itself suggests there is more than a mutual animosity. Were the audience to miss the longing gazes they constantly make at each other, they would have lost the plot.

Now back to Lady Mary Sharma - the tension between words and actions which forms the drama of season two is completely unaddressed when it comes to this mother of two. Despite her telling her parents that she has two daughters, her telling Kate that K doesn't have to do anything to make herself deserving of a mother's love, that she loves Kate as a daughter, when Kate needs her most, Lady Mary is absent. If Lady Mary truly treats both her daughters equally, why then was Kate tasked with preparing Edwina for the marriage market with so little of Lady Mary's assistance? Why was Kate enlisted by Lady Mary help raise Edwina "so [E] would never know [Mary and Kate's] struggles"? Throughout Edwina's childhood and adulthood, Bridgerton implies, Kate was a parental figure - a father figure even - as Kate acts as gatekeeper to Edwina's suitors, much as Anthony did for Daphne in season 1. Kate is older than Edwina by less than 10 years, she was going through the turbulence of teenage years herself, not to mention the pain of losing a father when she was tasked with raising her little sister alongside her stepmother. We are never shown what kindness and maternal guidance Mary has ever given Kate, the show simply has Mary say how much she loves Kate too and this is what the audience is supposed to accept.

Except Mary's grand speech is never shored up by her actions. At Kate's most vulnerable moment, she's not met with Lady Mary's protection but criticism and abandonment. When the Sheffields drag the Sharma women as gold diggers and put Kate on the spot, Mary immediately turns against her - her "what have you done" is uttered with such venomous coldness that it would be a brilliant piece of drama if Bridgerton could steer the audience to see this as a reveal of Mary in light of an evil stepmother. That of course did not happen and so it lost an opportunity to give its characters (esp. Mary) more depth, instead Mary remains on the fringes of society, suffering from being ostracized and bad characterization. Again, as Edwina fled the alter and unleashed her fury on Kate, Mary's reaction and attitude to her adopted daughter had zero maternal understanding or even concern, all she told Kate is to leave.

My problem with all these isn't that Lady Mary Sharma is a horrible mother to Kate, it is that Bridgerton is trying to suggest otherwise - we're supposed to accept that Mary, despite all her failures, loves Kate as much as she loves Edwina?! "I loved you the date I met you". "as a daughter, I never saw you as anything else". We're supposed to take her word at face value after everything that happened to Kate? (Keeping her emotions and longing to Anthony bottled up? Putting her younger sister before herself at all times? Having her heart broken believing that Anthony never loved her? Carrying the guilt of losing her family the Sheffields' fortune and sealing their fate of poverty and social expulsion? Lady Danbury whom Kate's met only a few weeks ago had offered more fatherly and motherly advice in one episode than Mary has done in the entire series.)

With the same lines, if Bridgerton truly possesses half the daring some critics have credited it with for its "colourblind casting", Lady Mary could have been illustrated as a selfish, calculating mother by changing the sentimental lighting and music when she uttered her grand speech of love, and she would have become a much more juicy and rounded (and frankly plausible) character. Her speech near the very end of the episode would have been bets she places after realizing that it is her elder "daughter" who might foster a link with the Bridgertons instead of Edwina, and the whole script would make so much more sense. Now that Kate tearily has lapped up her stepmother's great speech of love, Bridgerton only makes the heroine looks stupid and Mary an inconsistent character that doesn't even have real plot function. (Think about it - the Sharma sisters could have come to Lady Danbury, an old friend of their dearly beloved but deceased mama, and the whole plot of season 2 would not only still make sense but be even stronger).

#bridgerton #Kate sharma #lady mary sharma #edwina sharma #bridgerton analysis #lady danbury #bridgerton season 2 #kanthony

51 notes · View notes