#(the one with the Hit Piece and the Bibliography)

[carolinanadeau]

sometimes I worry that that blocked blog I almost-openly hate on here by saying everything short of naming names is actually a sideblog and they will find me anyway

[inhonoredglory]

Good Omens Season 3: Heaven and Hell dividing humanity; humanity as Leviathan; and Aziraphale locking the doors of Heaven and throwing away the key [A Meta]

(This meta is long, but I swear there's some good stuff in here. It took me 2 months to get it together for these two longsuffering Anons. Thank you so much for asking me these very important questions.)

In preparation for answering two Asks above (and to aid my own predictions of Good Omens 3), I read and reviewed the Book of Revelation, W.B. Yeat’s iconic poem “The Second Coming,” Terry Pratchett’s Small Gods, Neil Gaiman’s deleted scene from American Gods (Shadow meeting Jesus in America), and Doctor Who showrunner Russell T Davies’ 2003 miniseries The Second Coming (starring Christopher Eccleston!). The first two are definitely going to be referenced in season 3, Davies’ show is one of the few stories dealing head-on with the coming of Christ, and Terry and Neil’s bibliographies are probably the biggest resources for how Season 3 will shake out thematically.

🕊 How Aziraphale Will Change Heaven

I think GO s3 is the season we see Aziraphale really come into his own, when we see him implement the moral vision he’s taken this long to coalesce, when all the pieces he and Crowley have put together are finally put on stage in a terrifying, beautiful display (all that righteous anger and conviction, merged with his kindness and empathy is going to be Something Else).

There’s an angel in the Book of Revelation who stands between the Earth and the Sea. This angel wears a rainbow halo and speaks with the voice of seven thunders, and yet John (the writer of Revelation) is told not to write down what this angel speaks. (Sounds like someone has hit on the Ineffable Plan?) If Neil and Terry were going to pick up an image from Revelation for Aziraphale, I really like this one, because it feels like an intermediary role (between two Sides), one that god dare not make public because it speaks an uncomfortable truth. And it’s about speaking and revealing knowledge, instead of fighting or destroying something.

Because even though we know Azi and Crowley will fight to stop the second End Times, fighting itself is not a theme Neil Gaiman or Terry Pratchett really champion. Instead of war, Aziraphale will oppose Heaven in all the little ways he and Crowley opposed it before: By enjoying human comforts (Azi will definitely bring food and trinkets to Heaven and send scrivener angels and seraphim alike to tour earth). By asking questions (Heaven’s new suggestion box). By telling stories about humanity and why it’s important to know who these humans are before anyone kills anybody (Azi was, after all, brought on board because of his human expertise).

Aziraphale will become what Crowley wanted to be before the Fall, but Azi’s got the benefit of thousands of years of knowledge, cunning, and intelligence about how both Heaven and humanity work. He knows Heaven’s weaknesses, he knows humanity’s strengths, he knows his own capabilities, and he knows where Heaven will turn a blind eye. He’s going to be such a bastard the likes of which we’ve never seen. And he’s going to drop truth bombs like there’s no tomorrow.

Season 2 brought back the book banter about “the lower you start, the more opportunities you have.”

Season 3 will bring back Aziraphale’s most badass book moment. This scene takes place after Azi possesses an American televangelist talking about the fire and brimstone of the End Times and the Rapture (the mass teleporting of all worthy believers to Heaven). Says Aziraphale,

Aziraphale is fed up with Heaven’s hypocrisy and he's scathing in his condemnation of both Heaven and Hell. Everyone will die and become collateral damage, no matter which side is doing the killing.

Sound familiar?

That's the arc Aziraphale is heading towards: that blazing conviction of Crowley's, spoken out loud and fearless and in spite of his eons of trauma. And Season 3 will see Aziraphale get to that place, where he gets to tell off Heaven, but not just in the privacy of the bookshop or the bandstand, but to their faces in Heaven's hallowed halls.

The demons and angels in Season 2 were much less icky and ethereal (respectively) from their appearances in Season 1. Because it's working towards a further humanization of both sides in Season 3. Because one of the biggest themes in s3 will be Aziraphale humanizing Heaven in all the little quaint ways he loves humanity. All in preparation for the endgame of Heaven and Hell not existing at all.

(Season 3 deep dive continues under the cut...)

Because angels and demons won’t be fought, but changed. Maybe not by much, but just enough to break the loyalty they have to a Great Plan no one understands. This is how both Neil’s American Gods and Terry’s Small Gods conclude, with the build-up to an incredible battle, and then for the human hero to step in and talk down the gods and armies into seeing sense and reason.

I don’t think Aziraphale himself will be that person. It might be a very human Jesus. Or (more likely) a random human being caught up in this craziness (maybe someone in Tadfield, per the working title of the second GO book: 668: The Neighbor of the Beast). But Aziraphale will be fundamental in changing the atmosphere of Heaven in the little ways Earth changed him.

🗝 Season 3 Themes: Morality and God

In the Job minisode, Aziraphale casually but boldly assumed that god didn’t want the goats and children to be killed. Because Aziraphale has a firm and dogged idea about what god should be. It’s his own personal morality, but he calls it god’s because he doesn’t want to imagine the symbol of ultimate goodness being anything other than what he Aziraphale himself feels to be true.

And I don’t think that’s a theme that Good Omens will deny for Aziraphale. Because it’s not really about how evil or good god is. It doesn’t matter what god thinks or is. god doesn’t answer questions, doesn’t deliver messages we can understand, doesn’t show up when needed. god is inscrutable, shifty, absent, “a Dealer who won’t tell you the rules, and who smiles all the time.”

What’s important is what humanity has done with god, what humanity has said about god, what they do in god’s name, what they interpret god to be. That’s the real danger.

And Aziraphale, in his profound goodness, will become the person he wants god to be. Because that’s the injunction we all have. To live up to the ideal we have made for ourselves: In many ways, that’s what god is.

Aziraphale is now in a privileged place that allows him to affect basically the entirety of Creation with that driving idealism. He will level the playing field in Heaven. I firmly believe Aziraphale will be the one to close the doors to the pearly gates and throw away the key.

So, like you asked Anon, will Aziraphale try to make Heaven better or stop the Second Coming? I think those are the same goal. Changing Heaven will fundamentally change how the Second Coming happens, because just like the End Times in Season 1, Heaven and Hell’s scheme will be turned on its head because the Chosen One refuses to follow the script.

The Second Coming will end, not with a bang, but a whimper, because everyone decides to turn in their guns and forget the whole thing.

⚔️ Heaven and Hell v. Humanity

But before that ending happens, I think there will be another threat the world has to face: the individuals who are so sure of their own righteousness that no amount of sense could stop them from destroying anyone who thinks differently. This is an important theme in both Neil and Terry’s works (see Vorbis, the Exquisitor in Small Gods, who tortured unbelievers for the Church), and I believe it will show up in the new season.

There's never been a true war that wasn't fought between two sets of people who were certain they were in the right. The really dangerous people believe they are doing whatever they are doing solely and only because it is without question the right thing to do. And that is what makes them dangerous. –Neil Gaiman, American Gods

Because it’s humanity who takes Faith and shapes it into Religion. We are the ones who created the Heaven we see in GO: cold, unfeeling, strict, judgmental. And I think Season 3 is going to address this fundamental belief of both Neil and Terry: that humans are just so damnably human (fundamentally innocent and stupid and wonderful) and yet there’s a few of us who will take things too far and think that Someone wants them to destroy everything in the Name of God. And in these changing contemporary political times (the passage of an old generation, still clinging to their old ways and growing more extreme by the minute *cough*Trump*cough*), the dangerous people become even more vocal and violent, like the frightening, monstrous creature in WB Yeats’ poem “The Second Coming,” a devastating scourge on the world born in the name of God:

Surely some revelation is at hand; Surely the Second Coming is at hand. […] A shape with lion body and the head of a man, A gaze blank and pitiless as the sun, […] And what rough beast, its hour come round at last, Slouches towards Bethlehem to be born? –WB Yeats, "The Second Coming"

That’s who I think the Metatron will team up with in the end, someone like Vorbis. Because we’ve already seen how petty and small Heaven and Hell is, especially in Season 2. Only the Metatron really carries some heft and foreboding. I believe he’ll team up with some extremist faction of humanity who wants to see the End of Days and divide the world into Yours and Mine, with Heaven taking a portion and Hell taking a third and calling it a day. Not a War, but a divvying out of souls. With no consent or permission on the part of humanity.

That’s what I think the zombie reference is all about. Like Gabriel said in 2x03:

Yes, we’re going to get zombies. And it’s going to be insane and funny and horrifying (and I think we’ll get to know one or two historical figures who pop back up to earth). But the thematic and fundamental metaphor of zombies is how they have no free will. They’re not alive, they have no souls, they have no choices. That’s what Heaven and Hell want humanity to be: To do away with the dance of choice and free will and divide humanity once and for all between both sides. That’s how Heaven and Hell team up against the human race.

🐳 Leviathan (Job 41:19) as Humanity

And that’s how I believe the Leviathan fits in, who is the subject of the quote from Muriel’s matchbox:

The Leviathan is a magnificent creature, and this passage goes on and on about how fearsome this being is:

Who can penetrate its double coat of armor? Who dares open the doors of its mouth, ringed about with fearsome teeth?… Nothing on earth is its equal—a creature without fear. It looks down on all that are haughty; it is king over all that are proud –Job 41:13b, 33-34

And yet why does god want to explain how amazing the Leviathan is? To show how god has control of it. God says,

Can you pull in Leviathan with a fishhook… Can you make a pet of it like a bird or put it on a leash for the young women in your house?… Can you fill its hide with harpoons… No one is fierce enough to rouse it. Who then is able to stand against me? –Job 41:1, 5, 7, 10

The reasoning is that because god created this dangerous and terrifying being, then god must be even more dangerous and terrifying. And if god can so easily abuse and humiliate this beautiful monster, then god must be worshipped and respected. (Yes, it’s as messed-up as it sounds.)

I can’t help but think of this Leviathan as a metaphor for humanity. A beautiful, ferocious being whose ownership and control is the focus of god’s attention and qualification for worship? Of the Leviathan, Job says: “Will traders barter for it? Will they divide it up among the merchants?” (Job 41:6). That’s how humanity is going to be treated in Season 3.

Because both God and Satan want to control humanity. They want to put their thumb on human souls and claim them for each side. But humanity doesn’t have to be so easily fooled, because we are more powerful than we realize. Our hearts and imaginations can forge a path of purpose and goodness without the entrapment of organized religion and fundamentalism. We, like Leviathan, are ferocious and angry and fed up with being treated like this. We can and will fight back.

🌟 Becoming Gods

Ultimately, we will shuffle off the need for Heaven and Hell (symbolized by the shutting down of both at the end of Season 3). We will lose the need to unquestionably defer to a Being who plays dice with our lives. I’m reminded of the opening passage to Terry’s Small Gods:

The lowly tortoise will learn to be the eagle; humanity will learn to be like god. Because we are as powerful as god, since we created god. Adam Young pointed out that having a god figure to solve all our problems doesn’t make humanity any more responsible for the evil things we’ve done. We need to learn that we are all we’ve got, and we have to answer for the shit we’ve done to each other and to the world.

I like how Russell T Davies put it in his show The Second Coming, where Jesus comes down again in the body of ordinary human Steven Baxter and tells humanity:

You are becoming gods. There's a new master of creation, and it's you! Unraveled DNA, and at the same time you're cultivating bacteria strong enough to kill every living thing! Do you think you are ready for that much power? You lot? You lot? Cheeky bastards. You're running around science like kids with guns, creating a new world, while the world you've got is stinking…. If you want the position of god then take the responsibility. –Russell T Davies, The Second Coming

I legitimately think that’s how Jesus in Good Omens 3 will come down. In the body of a regular 30-something off-the-streets guy, who thinks the pomp and circumstance made about him is insane. And Aziraphale will be his minder, trying to tell him how the whole scheme is supposed to play out and giving him wise asides on how warped Heaven’s standards are and trying to tell him how to go about changing things for the better. (Jesus will be terribly confused, meanwhile; he just wants to go out for a pint and get on with his human life, none of this god business.)

🐍 Crowley’s Growth

There will be some big things at play in Season 3. I think Aziraphale will change how Heaven operates and close Heaven for good. I think Aziraphale will initially try to get Jesus on board with Azi’s own private mission of Goodness. I actually think Crowley will end up becoming Aziraphale’s “back channels” to Earth, and they’d exchange trite, bantering messages about the state of affairs from secret rendezvous points in America. (There was a whole thing about Jesus getting lost in Times Square, according to Neil Gaiman.)

I think Crowley will learn how to trust Aziraphale and learn that doing the right thing means being brave and selfless. He’ll realize that humanity is worth saving, even if it means dying. In fact, his depression at the start of Season 2 will probably only get worse after the loss of Aziraphale, and his altruism might get colored by the taint of suicidal recklessness, because he might as well go out for what he believes in, if what he wanted most in the world chose being selfless over being with him. (If Crowley’s character takes a suicidal turn like the Tenth Doctor after losing Rose, I’m gonna scream.)

This is how Aziraphale helps Crowley be brave in the finale of the Good Omens book. That’s what I think will happen in Good Omens 3:

Aziraphale here displays a gentleness and kindness that comes from a place of grounded knowledge and responsibility. He knows how much he and Crowley have in their own ways fucked up humanity too, and he knows that no matter what their own personal feelings, they each need to do something to defend the human species they've come to love so much.

Crowley is scared of risking everything to help save humanity, but with Aziraphale's encouragement and wisdom, he realizes that doing the right thing is the only option he can choose, no matter the risk to his own happiness and safety.

So I believe Crowley will learn to understand why Aziraphale chose to return to Heaven and fight in the trenches. Crowley will see it as a choice made to save, not just each other, but the world they love so much.

Ultimately, I think Crowley on earth will take on Aziraphale’s strongest qualities: being selfless and bold to protect humanity at costs, and connecting to humanity on a personal, individual level.

While Aziraphale in Heaven will become like Crowley: asking questions, sabotaging the System, and condemning Heaven with all the uncomfortable truths they need to hear.

[princesssarcastia]

i can't say that we do america's youth a disservice by making them read the western literary canon nonstop from the time they're eleven to the time they're eighteen, because that practice helps us develop a ton of necessary skills, and exposes us to the kind of arts and culture that expand our internal horizons.

but man, does it make some fantastic pieces of writing into a chore, an utter bore, one we may not be primed to properly understand or enjoy.

the first time I read one of shakespeare's plays and felt like I understood it was my senior year of high school; it was King Lear, and it hit me like lightning. it remains my favorite of his works to this day. shakespeare's language and meter finally felt like music in my head, a full six years into that inconsistent tour american kids take of his bibliography. every single work of his we read before then—Romeo and Juliet, Hamlet, Macbeth, even Much Ado About Nothing—went in one ear and out the other the second exams were over. I struggled with the language and the meaning, and it drove me to hate them.

probably, struggling through his work for six years leading up to that moment helped make it possible! but I still hate that the struggle and the lack of understanding kept me from the joy in those stories for so long. even after King Lear, I didn't have any great interest in reading his stuff, or watching performances and adaptations.

do I have a larger point here? I'm not sure. Maybe it's this:

if you hated everything you ever read in school, try picking some of those books and poems and essays up again. you may find you finally have the mental tools to understand and enjoy them.

[bonnielass23]

Writer WIP Poll Game

Rules: make a 24-hour poll with the names of your wip's, let it run, then write one sentence for every vote the winner got.

I was tagged by the lovely @astarkey and @alwaysupatnight. Thank you for allowing to open the floodgates of just how many WIPS I have.

Since I was tagged by a fellow Dusk fan I'm gonna list my fdtd wips all of which are sethkate. Some serious. Some complete crack. Most of these do not have titles yet

Outside of my fdtd friends who have already posted, I'm gonna tag everyone else across multiple fandoms : @lilmissuncreative @saltyunderscored @kelkat9 @fortysevenswrites @psilocybinlemon @elialys @milkshakemicrowave @kelkat9 and anyone else I missed or wants to do it!

Some of these have an official summary, some is just me throwing out the info. It should be obvious which is which lol

If anyone has any questions about these feel free to hit me up!

Raccoon Amaru - Canon divergent post season 2. With Kate surviving the blood well and Seth bringing her back to Jeds from the hospital to recover, Amaru finds herself in a different vessel.

La Jefe - Canon divergent post season 2 episode 9. At the blood well Kate stays up on the hill with Richie. It’s only after he’s gone down to try to take the blood for himself, in a move that is peak dumbass, that Kate has to intervene. With Richie wounded by a Xiblaban weapon and lying useless in the backseat of the car it’s up to Kate to deliver the blood and unwittingly become the new La Jefe, the head of Malvado’s empire. Seth lives his best life as a sugar baby and Richie is crying in a corner because he's supposed to be the boss.

Wild West AU - Wild West likely with supernatural elements. Kate frees Seth from the jail in Bethel the night before he's set to hang in exchange for him helping her track down her brother who disappeared with Carlos six months earlier. (Also the memorial piece for my mare, Bandit, who passed away almost a year ago and will be written in as Seth's horse.)

SethKate Wedding Date AU - Modern Day. No culebras. Kate is invited to her cousin's wedding and decides to ask Seth to be her date

“He’s not just my date, Scott.” A maniacal grin spreads over Kate’s face. “He’s my weapon. You really think I’m gonna walk in there with all their passive aggressive, pretending to be concerned comments? No, Scott. I’m going to fight fire with fire.” “That’s not fighting fire with fire Kate. That’s fighting fire with a nuclear warhead!”

Shangri-La - Canon divergent post season 2. With Eddie in critical condition and his chances of survival slim, the Geckos chose to go through with the plan to rob Malvado, even managing to save Kate’s life in the process. After coming back from their meeting with the lords, their relief at the news of Eddie’s survival is soon eclipsed by the sheer panic of realizing they now have to explain to him that not only did they pull his Shangri-La, swan song job without him, but they also lost the money.

Hero Twins AU - Canon divergent post season 2 episode 2. Kate reveals to Seth that she's pregnant during their fight in the car. After Sonja gets Seth clean, and with Eddie's help they hide away from the culebra world. 7 years later Richie and Kisa come crashing in with the news that their daughters are the next set of Hero Twins, destined to shake up the culebra and Xibalban hierarchy.

This leans very heavily into Mayan mythology, including a bibliography of academic sources, that will be included. It could be considered an exploration of the hero twin archetype told through Seth and Kate's fictional twins.

Witch AU - Modern day with supernatural elements. No culebras. Kate comes from a line of witches cursed to die when they begin to manifest their magical abilities. When she starts to have visions of her own death she goes to a professor of the occult Richard Gecko to try to figure out why her family keeps dying young. A witch himself, he tries to help her figure out the curse along with Seth who has turned his back on his supernatural abilities. It's a race against the clock to see if they can save Kate before her visions of her death come true.

Selkie AU - Coming home from college to attend her mother's funeral, Kate finds a package Jenny had left her. Kate's seal skin and an explanation of what she is. After going out to learn more about who she is her skin is stolen and she has to rely on the owner of a nearby bar, Seth Gecko, and his friends to steal back her skin.

[halucygeno]

The Strugatsky brothers: general notes on style and storytelling

Heya. If you want something to disagree with right out of the gate, here’s my tier list:

Ok, but seriously, I'm about halfway through the whole Strugatsky bros bibliography, and it's been kinda hit-or-miss. Some books are fantastic in terms of both storytelling and themes, some are a bit confusing and start very slow, but stick the landing with the drama and philosophy kicking into high-gear towards the end, and others are just... meh.

Anyway, here’s a loose, disorganised list of things I’ve noticed:

1) The Strugatsky's style of narration feels a tad homogenous after a while. Their POV character is usually a pragmatic, goal oriented man, intelligent enough to analyse themselves and the world around them, and often cynical to the point of distrusting simple, comforting narratives (voicing their scepticism through dry wit or sarcasm). The main variation seems to be in the protagonist's level of refinement vs. crudeness (some of them have a short fuse and poor manners), and how much they are motivated by a sense of duty vs. self-interest. The other character archetype they sometimes do is the "inexperienced young man with ambition and spunk" ("Space Apprentice", "Monday Begins on Saturday"). Yet there's some crossover - Sasha from "Monday" often shifts between bewildered novice and confident snarker, depending on the scene - and it all still "sounds" quite similar. I guess you could say this is their authorial voice - the "Strugatsky style", if you will - but to me, it makes reading their books back-to-back feel a bit... same-y.

2) Mystery is everywhere. Im surprised the Strugatskys only wrote one detective novel (which kind of turned out not to be a detective novel anyway), when tons of their works start with some inexplicable, mysterious event which then goes on to be gradually unravelled. I mean, half of "The Waves Extinguish the Wind" is just reports from an investigation into the motives of a mysterious alien species. "Beetle in the Anthill" is one long hunt for a mysterious fugitive, gradually finding out who they are and why they're so dangerous, and "The Final Circle of Paradise" is about busting a crime ring peddling a new, mysterious drug. But even when it’s not explicitly about detectives or investigations, they still often focus on an unexplained event or series of events ("Space Mowgli", "One Million Years to the End of the World").

A lot of the appeal which keeps the stories engaging for me is that they either set up a big question and slowly reveal pieces of the answer, or set up a lot of small questions that get much quicker answers, which then lead to more questions (sometimes both). In one case, they even nested a mystery within a mystery! “Beetle in the Anthill” is both a question of “where is Lev Aboukin hiding and what is his next move” and “who is Lev Aboukin and why was I ordered to track him down”?

Maybe this mystery focus is just part of the wider space fantasy sci-fi genre. Alien contact, phenomena beyond our understanding... these are very conducive to mystery; A few other sci-fi authors I've read have very similar set-ups. Well, whatever it is - authorial style or genre trope - I love it. It gives stories this feeling of discovery and learning, often with only half-satisfying conclusions that leave room for interpretation and reflection.

3) Holy shit, their representation of women is (mostly) terrible. I've heard a few people call the Strugatskys' writing misogynistic, and while I was sceptical at first (Guta from "Roadside Picnic" struck me as pretty cool and strong), after reading more, I definitely see it now. Most of the time, they depict women as trivial side characters, love interests for the protagonist, or worse, symbols of promiscuity, decadence and stupidity. I could maybe argue that some of these portrayals are more nuanced than it would first seem, but others are just... blegh.

A handful of their works ("Space Mowgli", "Monday Beings on Saturday" and "Space Apprentice") show women working alongside men as equals - suggesting some progressive ideals. "Space Apprentice" even has one chapter where they take down Shershen - a controlling, misogynistic professor who tries to sabotage his female student's career because he doens’t think women should work in space.

But none of this counters the causal sexism displayed generally, even in these seemingly positive examples. Stella's introductory scene from "Monday Begins on Saturday" shows her cowering in fear from Vybegallo's upiór, screaming hysterically. While she goes on to be much cooler in Story 3 of that book, she's still a rather lowly employee of the institute - not as experienced as the magisters (who are, you guessed it, all men).

Maya Glumova in "Space Mowgli" - the female character with perhaps the most screen time and agency from everything I've read so far - is still hinted to be more emotional and motherly towards the alien which the team discovers. So even when the female character is important and actively participates in the plot, she is partially defined by her femininity. And when she comes back in "Beetle in the Anthill", she's basically just a childhood love interest, acting as another clue to the mystery of Lev Aboukin's identity.

Natasha from "Space Apprentice" is the only time I've seen the Strugatskys write from a female POV, and even so, it only lasts two chapters, with her being completely irrelevant for the rest of the story. For the short while we get to see from her perspective, she mostly sits around and listens to other people, rarely taking the initiative to do anything. Some of her scenes feel like they could be commentary on workplace sexism, but they're too short and fleeting for the message to read clearly.

All these baby steps towards decent female representation are even harder to appreciate when you consider... everything else. Most egregiously, some visual descriptions of female characters are just gross, focusing on the lips, curves and skin in a very sexualised way. At first I thought that maybe this was a condemnation of the POV character, showing that we're following a crass, tactless protagonist who isn't above ogling someone they find attractive; a contemptible person who doesn't reflect the opinions of the authors. But without clear textual elements criticising this creepy behaviour, it really feels like it's being treated as normal, which... no, it really, really shouldn't be. At least the Strugatskys had the decency not to use this kind of sexualised, beauty-obsessed language when describing the aforementioned respectable worker women - Stella, Maya and Natasha.

On two occasions, women are shown arguing in favour of shallow, self-interested hedonism - an ideological foil to our responsible, socially-minded male protagonists. While this is a fine direction to take a character (and some male characters are criticised in a similar way - mostly in "The Final Circle of Paradise", where hedonism is a central theme), it feels like a waste to use an already small female presence as fodder for this philosophical debate.

So yeah, even though I love these stories, my appreciation is heavily dampened anytime a female character is introduced and turns out to be underutilised and irrelevant (which is disappointing), some dumb bimbo for the protagonist to sexualise (which is cringe), or a proxy for an ideology the Strugatskys want to criticise (which is disappointing).

4) Bromance! While the Strugatskys’ depictions of relationships between men and their female love interests are rather underdeveloped (a side effect of women having so little prominence, I think), the way they write emotional relationships between men and men is quite amazing. Most of these stories are brimming with a sense of camraderie and emotional closeness, with the male characters inspiring each other, guiding each other, criticising each other, learning from each other, etc. My three favourite dynamics have to be from "The Inhabited Island", "Space Apprentice" and "Monday Begins on Saturday".

In "The Inhabited Island", Maxim manages to gradually deprogram Guy from his nationalistic, fascist ideology by just being there, acting kind and showing him that an alternative way of thinking is possible. He points out inconsistencies in the government’s propaganda in a non-confrontational, innocuous way. Then, we see Guy's inner conflict when Maxim defects from the military and joins the resistance - having to view this close friend as a "traitor", despite having a lingering affection for him. And when Maxim finally gets Guy to defect and join his side, this affection is twisted into something monstrous and horrifying in a scene that I dare not spoil. It's an emotional roller-coaster, that one.

"Space Apprentice" has an interesting tension between two role models. Young Yura Borodin, despite his somewhat mundane job as a space welder, is eager to travel the stars and self-actualise. He's hungry for action, and would rather die than retire. Due to unfortunate circumstances, he's unable to catch his flight for the planet Rhea, and has to join the crew of another ship as a trainee (kinda like hitch-hiking, but in space, haha). He ends up under the supervision of Yurkovsky and Ivan Zhilin, both of which try to impart different lessons onto him. Yurkovsky is the embodiment of Yura's ideal - a world-renowned planetologist past his prime, still yearning for exciting work and hoping to make the "discovery of his lifetime". Zhilin is the ship's engineer, and has a far more cautious, protective attitude. Both of them like Yura's youthful enthusiasm, but while the former encourages his ambition and adventurous spirit, the latter tries to temper his expectations and teach him about responsibility. The stops along their route form a series of unrelated vignettes where we see the two philosophies in practice, and the ending resolves this tension in a really beautiful, heart-wrenching way.

"Monday Begins on Saturday" is just one huge "me and the boys" meme and I fuckin' love it. We have the confused yet curious newbie, Sasha Privalov, the measured and wise mentor figure, Roman Oira-Oira, the talented but rude snarker and critic, Vitya Korneev (who is still affectionate in his own way - he doesn't actually hate people, just enjoys banter), and the polite and helpful sidekick, Edik Amperian (+ a whole bunch of other colourful characters). The shenanigans these lads get up to are just a wonderful romp, as they juggle their own eccentricities and the absurd bureaucracy of a magical Soviet institute. Despite the chaotic nature of their work, often wrought with disagreement and a lack of resources, everything has this undercurrent of mutual respect and affection. I swear, this book has the most idyllic workplace culture I've ever seen, to the point that it makes it actually fun to read about office politics.

5) They start in medias res and fill the gaps with natural-sounding exposition. This is one of the core things that I believe makes the pacing of (most) Strugatsky novels feel very brisk. Characters are dropped into already unfolding situations - no lengthy backstories or elaborate speeches about the history of the world. Flashbacks are relatively rare and often contextualised (some focal point prompts the memory, making for a smoother transition). The majority of what we learn about characters comes from clues in their speech, thoughts and actions. Same applies to the world - details are drip-fed to you as they become relevant.

That's not to say that the Strugatskys never drop exposition dumps on the audience, but it's less common, and even then, is usually done intelligently. Most often, a character will see something and, in the process of expressing their opinion, bring up background details that show how they feel about it - we get both world-buiding and characterisation at the same time.

An even better way they disguise exposition dumps is by having characters casually debate something - in a moment of respite from the action, they sit together and bounce arguments back and forth: “is X thing ethical”, “what would happen if Y”, “these Z activists are starting to get on my nerves”, etc. As they make their points, they bring up examples, facts, anecdotes, and very quickly, not only do we know what they believe, but also learn about a whole bunch of things that exist or happened, all while never being explicitly told.

This is probably the best lesson you can learn from the Strugatskys - if your setting has interesting elements, either show them directly in the action of the story, or make them a talking point which characters have conflicting opinions on (better yet, do both - the Zone in “Roadside Picnic” is a masterclass in being a springboard for both characters and plot). If not, don’t bother - you’ll just distract the audience with pointless guff.

* * *

That’s about it. I could probably go on, but I’m too tired to continue writing. I’d love to pick apart more specific examples of points 2), 4) and 5), so maybe I’ll make separate posts for them in the future (lemme know if that’s something you’d be interested in). Mostly, though, I'm desperate to find other people as obsessed with the Strugatskys as I am and discuss their lesser known works. I personally feel that "The Final Circle of Paradise" is a hidden gem of theirs, one that has flown under the pop-culture radar but is well worth discussing.

Peace.

[friendly-rat-king]

2023 Books

In October I decided to start writing short tumblr posts in response to each book I read. Did I follow through with this decision? Absolutely not! Here's a half-assed list of books I read in 2023, assembled way after the fact:

Fingersmith by Sarah Waters (4/5)

I enjoyed comparing/contrasting it with The Handmaiden (aka Park Chan-wook's 2016 film adaptation, which shifts the setting from Dickensian England to Japanese-ruled Korea and dramatically changes the ending). As with The Handmaiden, which I watched first, I feel like if I cut the story into pieces and Frankenstein-ed it together into two separate stories, I would end up with one of my favorite books and one of my least favorite books.

Why I read it: in the process of reading Sarah Waters' entire bibliography.

2. Bunny by Mona Awad (2/5)

This book sucked, BUT there was a really funny scene about 1/3 of the way in where the narrator's high school crush inexplicably shows up and dances with her. It might be worth reading just for that scene (you can stop reading immediately afterwards).

If a book is supposed to be a satire about wealthy women attending graduate school, its not a great sign when it seems like the author has never met a rich person, a woman, or a graduate student. This is even stranger because the author, a woman, attended an Ivy and got a graduate degree in creative writing. I'd love to read the book this is trying to be, but this isn't it.

Why I read it: my sister-in-law recommended it to me specifically (yikes) and I felt obligated to finish it.

3. Infamous by Lex Croucher (5/5)

In the summer of 1816, 18-year-old Mary Shelley famously stayed at the Lake Geneva villa of noted jackass Lord Byron. Trapped inside by shitty weather, Byron's guests competed to see who could write the best ghost story (the winning entry was, of course, "Frankenstein"). Lex Croucher obviously thought this setting in itself was a great book premise, and was absolutely correct.

I was expecting the basic shape of this novel after reading the back cover, and my assumptions about the plot were basically correct. I was NOT expecting even the most minor characters to feel three-dimensional and complicated or to be hit so hard by - well, I can't tell you without spoiling it, but three different conflictto s that are simultaneously of their time and cut very, very close to home. I also wasn't expecting to laugh as hard as I did.

Why I read it: people on my dash kept recommending Gwen & Art Are Not In Love but I didn't want to read YA.

4. The Name of the Rose by Umberto Eco (4/5)

It took me forever to finish this one because I kept finding myself pausing to design a digital glossary to accompany the book. What if, as you read through the description of the garden, the glossary's map of the monastery was suddenly filled in with all of the herbs mentioned, and as you hovered over each illustration (drawn in a pseudo-medieval style, of course) you could learn about the purported and actual properties of each herb? What if I illustrated the intricately carved portal and thoroughly researched the symbolism and history behind each of its components?

Anyway, I was lukewarm enough about the actual ending that I gave up on the project. It would probably be impossible for any ending to live up to a beginning this ambitious, to be fair.

Why I read it: I read that it was an inspiration for Pentiment (a game I still haven't finished, oops).

5. The Bell by Iris Murdoch (4/5)

I might try reading this one again -- there was obviously a ton of cool symbolic symmetry going on that I never quite got the significance of. What I did enjoy was Dora's POV. There's this really wonderful scene near the beginning where Dora spends several paragraphs internally justifying why she shouldn't give up her seat on the train for an old woman. Then, the moment the old woman asks, she impulsively gives up the seat without even thinking of it. Dora spends the rest of the story stumbling haphazardly between moments of grace, never quite aware of why she does any of the things she does, in a way that's simultaneously alien and yet completely plausible.

Why I read it: @conven1encestorewoman mentioned it was one of her favorite books.

6. Either/Or by Elif Batuman (5/5)

I would read anything she wrote. Fingers crossed she makes this into a four-part series.

Why I read it: I loved The Idiot. (Shout-out to @a-rhombus to loaning me her copy.)

7 + 8. A Free Man of Color & Fever Season by Barbara Hambly (5/5)

The book that made me love murder mysteries. The author obviously did a ton of research on 1830's New Orleans and I do love great historical fiction, but what really made it shine was that the "red herrings" weren't dead ends -- each one was essential to the themes of the novel. Highly recommend.

Why I read it: I think @sea-changed mentioned that it was good, I added it to my library queue, and then didn't think about it again until I was notified it was ready to checkout.

9. Tender is the Flesh by Agustina Bazterrica (2/5)

Mehhhhh. All (attempts at) shock, very little substance.

Why I read it: my baby sister recommended it.

10. Geek Love by Katherin Dunn (5/5)

"Geek" as in "circus geek," a performed who bites the heads off of live chickens. Tender is the Flesh fuckin wishes it had what Geek Love has. (I have reached the point in this post where I realize I'm not even at the halfway mark and decide to hurry up -- sorry Geek Love, you deserved better.)

Why I read it: @mylestoyne mentioned there were some cool parallels to The Tempest and I decided to check it out.

11. The Haunting of Hill House by Shirley Jackson (5/5)

Absolutely lived up to the hype.

Why I read it: the hype.

12. The Turn of the Screw by Henry James (4/5)

The rare book I consumed in audiobook format -- reading James' prose was very difficult for me, and filtering it through an actor helped. I don't know that I enjoyed the process of listening to it, but I really enjoyed thinking about it afterwards.

Why I read it: the prologue of The Haunting of Hill House name-dropped it.

13. The Tempest by William Shakespeare (3/5)

Look, I bumped it up to 3 stars because I felt like I couldn't give Shakespeare anything lower than a 3-star rating, but I really disliked this. Part of is is that I was already familiar with the highlights, and putting them in context diminished them. Ariel's song is way less interesting when you know for a fact that the man supposedly undergoing a sea-change is completely fine; Prospero's final monologue feels less like it's tying together broader themes and more like Shakespeare thought it would be cool to break the fourth wall at the last minute.

Idk, maybe I'm just an idiot. I immediately sought out a series of lectures on youtube about the play + texted people I know who love this play to elaborate on their opinions so they could correct my incorrect opinion, but so far, no dice.

Why I read it: because of the Geek Love parallels.

14. What the Dog Saw by Malcolm Gladwell (2/5)

Bad, as previously discussed.

Why I read it: someone at by brother's wedding said the essay on ketchup was worth reading (it wasn't).

15. A Wizard of Earthsea by Ursula K Le Guin (4.5/5)

Why I read it: because I wanted to read the sequel.

16. Man's Search for Meaning by Viktor E Frankl (4/5)

Discussed previously.

17. A Gentleman in Moscow by Amor Towles (4/5)

(Already reviewed this on Goodreads so I can just copy-paste, hurray!) An enjoyable read. The pacing was great, the scene composition reminded me of a Wes Anderson film, and the footnotes were a very effective way of shifting the POV from third person limited to omniscient and back again. I checked the author's Wikipedia page midway through and was unsurprised to learn that he is an investment banker from New York; after all, the villain is the only character who refers to Rostov as "Comrade" (everyone else continues to deferentially call him "the Count") and he doesn't even know his wine pairings! The idyllic representation of pre-revolutionary Russia partially undermines the author's ability to convey the horrors of Soviet Russia. That being said, the tone of the novel is mostly light, and I was able to have fun in spite of this.

Why I read it: my older sister mentioned it was the last book she tried to read before she had kids and they took over her life. So I guess I tried to... symbolically finish it on her behalf? Who knows.

18. Fever Dream by Samanta Schweblin (5/5)

No idea how to describe this one, so I'm just screenshot-ing the first page:

Why I read it: an @a-rhombus recommendation.

19. The Merry Spinster by Daniel Lavery [reread] (5/5)

Extremely effective horror retellings of fairy tales. Impossible to pick a favorite.

Why I (re)read it: because I read a bunch of other good horror fiction this year (not my usual genre) and it reminded me how much I love this collection.

20. The Mask of Apollo by Mary Renault (5/5)

Set during a failed attempt to make Plato's Republic a reality (a historical event I somehow didn't know about but that is Highly Relevant to my interests), told from the perspective of an artist (the most interesting viewpoint Renault could have chosen). The descriptions of places made me desperately want to hike across Greece when I get the chance.

Why I read it: @catilinas posted an excerpt that compelled me.

21. The Once and Future Sex by Eleanor Janega (3/5)

Spends a lot of time proving a thesis about modern women I basically already agree with when what I really wanted was more historical details. My fault for not taking the blurb at its word.

Why I read it: a friend I play D&D with recommended it.

22. The Tombs of Atuan by Ursula K Le Guin (6/5)

Ok it's almost midnight and I don't want to fuck up one of my New Year's resolutions (10 minutes of yoga/day) when I'm only three days into the year. Real summary coming soon (hopefully. maybe).

Why I read it: one of my favorite worldbuilding youtube channels mentioned it was in her top 5 books.

23. Borne by Jeff VanderMeer (3/5)

The thing about giant flying bears is that they're just kinda silly.

Why I read it: the Southern Reach Trilogy was so good.

24. Some Desperate Glory by Emily Tesh (4/5)

Very strong start -- strong enough for the four-star rating -- but the final act pulls way too many punches.

Why I read it: I heard emilyenrose was publishing original fiction.

[percervall]

Hi Mar!! ✨ been thinking a lot about the process of creation recently and I would love for you tell us about a piece of writing of your own that’s near and dear to your heart! What inspired you writing this piece, what were some outtakes that didn’t make the final cut and what you hoped the readers felt or took away from the story? What did you imagine happened after your story ended? Also feel free to discuss fun trivia that led to its creation! Love you and your work 💕

I have three fics that immediately came to mind when I saw this question so I'll try to answer it for all three. Buckle in, this is about to be a long-ass answer

What inspired you writing this piece? Okay so, like I said, 3 fics immediately came to mind: la gente que es mi hogar, the past has tasted bitter for years now and there's a sorrow (in the corners of your mind). The first one was inspired by a song, Hogar by IZAL which was just filled with this nostalgia and a wistfulness that hit me right in the feels without really understanding the lyrics and when I looked at the translation it hit me how much it reminded me of the beginning of Gerlonso -that partnership between Xabi and Stevie. I mean, the first verse literally translates to: "Today I stay With my feet glued to this ground That is mine and at the same time the rest Of the people who are my home" Yeah. I'm not okay. The Iker fic (the past has tasted bitter for years now) was inspired by my curiosity when I wanted to know for some weird reason if real madrid had club songs similar to Liverpool for the players. I'd also read two different fics in the same time period that dealt with Iker's retirement and then I came across a club song that translated to my heart is a madridista and it just spiralled from there really, because Iker came through the academy, he was the personification of Real and when you read how the club treated him towards the end of his career there, I truly ached for him (and then the poetry in him having to quit football after suffering a heart attack. Don't get me wrong, I don't wish that fate to my worst enemy, but knowing he loved his childhood club so much only for them to turn around and spit him out, for him to move to a different country and for his body to give out on him? You know that phrase the body keeps the score? well, that's how that news felt; almost as if his body finally caught up with what had happened and it just... it just shut down) And then I fell down a rabbit hole of research and ended up reading article after article about Iker's departure from Real and the fic is technically me just giving you an interpretation of those articles. I kid you not, this fic has a bibliography of like 9 different pieces of evidence. And finally, the Darwin fic was actually inspired by something you posted and I couldn't stop imagining how he'd look. And then it just snowballed into this fic about a man who's just barely older than a boy, suffering from his need to be good enough for the people he loves and admires, who carries the weight of the world on his shoulders and the season that's anything but the dream start to his Liverpool career and oh god it made me ache. There was something almost so.. i don't know.. In a way Darwin's start at Liverpool feels Grecian to me, in a way, like in a Greek tragedy kind of way. He reminds me of Atlas and there was something so heartbreakingly beautiful about that analogy, especially combined with his partner reversing the roles and wanting to take care of him for a change that I just had to write it. Ended up writing it in a day. Also ended up giving myself all the feels when I was done.

Outtakes For the last two, there are none. I usually don't save the scenes that don't make the final fic, but I did save one bit from the Gerlonso fic that I ended up scrapping: The call had come sort of out of the blue. His former manager hadn’t been surprised and when he had told Xabi at the end of the season that clubs would be calling, Xabi had categorised that as improbable. Sociedad was a small club, and had never been one of the greats who competed for the title season after season. Yet they had found themselves second at the end of last season, something that hadn’t happened since the late eighties. Finishing that high in the league had also meant the club would play in the Champions League, which Xabi had to admit, had been a short lived experience, but it had left him wanting more. It made no sense to him why other clubs would pay attention now. Raynald told him after Spain was knocked out of the EUROs that despite them not even progressing beyond the group stage, he had told him people had been impressed by him. I think a version of this did end up in the final fic though, but timeline wise this version didn't fit in with the fic.

Takeaways Oof. I think the biggest takeaway for all three is that there's always more to a story than what meets the surface, that people are infinitely more complex than we perhaps give them credit for, that it's so easy to judge someone solely on what you see. That, maybe, despite the fact that we think of these footballers as being lucky and privileged, that they are human first and foremost. We are so used to just watching them perform, praising them when they score and criticising when they don't that we maybe sometimes forget that they are people with real feelings and real emotions.

After the story ends For the Gerlonso fic, I created a whole playlist of songs that reflect their journey. If anyone is interested, let me know and I'll make a separate post for it. But basically, it's a story of drifting apart, of wanting different things in life. Don't get me wrong, Stevie and Xabi both want to chase that taste of success, of lifting that CL trophy, but the difference between the two is where Xabi is able to uproot his life in the chase for success (first back to Spain and then to Germany), Stevie has the weight of a city on his shoulders -an albatross around his neck if you will. Liverpool is Steven Gerrard and Steven Gerrard is Liverpool. And I think that during their careers/relationship, this lead to a quiet resentment that ultimately turned into acceptance on Stevie's side. His career would always be tainted by the almosts where Xabi's is littered with trophies. For Iker it's a story of healing and acceptance, of reconnecting with old friend and repairing what was broken. It's repaying Sergio for all the support and being there for his best friend as he faces the same fate Iker faced: being forced out of a club you thought would keep you until retirement. But also about re-discovering who you are without football. For Darwin, it's a story of growth, of vulnerability. It's about becoming comfortable being in your own skin and accepting that there are things outside of your control. It's about being open and honest about your feelings and emotions and that transition from surviving to thriving.

Thank you so much for this wonderful ask ivy! 🥰

[preyed-llama]

It’s frustrating when assignments make you include your bibliography and references in your word count- like I am going to source every claim I make and I will use different sources at times to mitigate the bias because we are talking about people talking about experiences and then you hit me with ‘too many sources’ like no. Not enough sources. One opinion piece is not enough.

[miniaturemoonheart]

Login The Network

In Lyrics

By Artist

by Album

      PDF         

Dynasty

Listen online

Miia

Follow 2 fans

Miia

3:45 3,842 #11

Play "Dynasty"

on Amazon Music Unlimited (ad)

 Become A Better Singer In Only 30 Days, With Easy Video Lessons!

Some days it's hard to see

If I was a fool, or you, a thief

Made it through the maze to find my one in a million

Now you're just a page torn from the story I'm living

And all I gave you is gone

Tumbled like it was stone

Thought we built a dynasty that heaven couldn't shake

Thought we built a dynasty like nothing ever made

Thought we built a dynasty forever couldn't break up

The scar I can't reverse

When the more it heals the worse it hurts

Gave you every piece of me, no wonder it's missing

Don't know how to be so close to someone so distant

And all I gave you is gone

Tumbled like it was stone

Thought we built a dynasty that heaven couldn't shake

Thought we built a dynasty like nothing ever made

Thought we built a dynasty forever couldn't break up

It all fell down, it all fell down,

It all fell, it all fell down, it all fell down

It all fell, it all fell down, it all fell down, it

It all fell down, it all fell down, it all fell down

And all I gave you is gone

Tumbled like it was stone

Thought we built a dynasty that heaven couldn't shake

Thought we built a dynasty like nothing ever made

Thought we built a dynasty forever couldn't break up

It all fell, it all fell down, it all fell down, it

It all fell down, it all fell down, it all fell down

It all fell, it all fell down, it all fell down (and all I gave you is gone)

Thought we built a dynasty forever couldn't break up

 Become A Better Singer In Only 30 Days, With Easy Video Lessons!

Play "Dynasty"

on Amazon Music Unlimited (ad)

SHEET MUSIC      PDF     

Written by: HILLARY BERNSTEIN, JOACHIM RYGG

Lyrics © POSITION MUSIC INC., BMG Rights Management, REACH MUSIC PUBLISHING

Lyrics Licensed & Provided by LyricFind

Discuss the Dynasty Lyrics with the community:

0 Comments

Notify me of new comments via email.

Citation

Use the citation below to add these lyrics to your bibliography:

Style:MLACHICAGOAPA

"Dynasty Lyrics." Lyrics.com. STANDS4 LLC, 2023. Web. 10 Apr. 2023. <https://www.lyrics.com/lyric-lf/1173013/Miia/Dynasty>.

Powered by CITE.ME

Missing lyrics by Miia?

Know any other songs by Miia? Don't keep it to yourself!

Add it Here

Browse Lyrics.com

#ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ

Our awesome collection of

Promoted Songs»

Could This Be

Free Quincy

GET PROMOTED 

Quiz

Are you a music master?

»

Who made a hit cover for "In the Army Now" by Bolland & Bolland

A. Slade

B. The Spectres

C. The Beach Boys

D. Status Quo

Free, no signup required:

Add to Chrome

Get instant explanation for any lyrics that hits you anywhere on the web!

TWO CLICKS INSTALL »

Company

Home

About

News

Press

Awards

Testimonials

Editorial

Login

Add new Lyrics

Add a new Album

Become a Member

Meet the Members

Recently Added

Song Parodies 

Activity Log

Most Popular

Sell Your Lyrics

Services

Your Playlist

Tell a Friend

Bookmark Us

Promote 

Help me Out!

Lyrics API

Top on Radio 

Lyrics Generator

The Lyrics Quiz

Marketplace 

Articles

Legal & Contact

Terms of Use

Privacy Policy

Contact Us

Advertise

Affiliate Program

 

Get the Apps:

  

The STANDS4 Network

Abbreviations

Anagrams

Biographies

Conversions

Calculators

Definitions

Grammar

Literature

Lyrics

Phrases

Poetry

Quotes

References

Rhymes

Scripts

Symbols

Synonyms

Zip Codes

© 2001-2023 STANDS4 LLC.

All rights reserved.

Original text

Contribute a better translation

[canichangemyblogname]

Congrats on one year! You have such a thoughtful, detailed approach to everything you write/theorize. Do you have any particular research you do when writing, or do you outline what you’re going to write?

IRIS! Thank you so much!! ☺️

I am so glad that people find my lil essays and whatnot to be thoughtful. I don't *feel* like I put a lot of thought into them, but I've learned that's because all the things I learned during my education and/or through reading have more-or-less become knowledge.

When I'm writing a little analysis on, say, the symbolism of Syril Karn trading in a brown shirt for a suit and tie and how this relates to the "new" uniform of white supremacy, I am writing about something I have knowledge in. I do sometimes link sources or further reading, but this is Tumblr and I want to write about the things I know and their representation in Star Wars without putting in all the work to create a bibliography.

I do have two shelves full of all the (second hand, paperback) books I had to buy for school over the years. My favorites- the only ones I bought new (they didn't have used)- are the "A Very Short Introduction" books from Oxford University Press. It's like an academic's version of "for dummies." It introduces you to the topic and some essential things to know before introducing you to further reading. Sometimes, I do reference the books on my shelf or look back to them for something specific I'm thinking about when I'm writing.

Now, if I were writing an essay for a program or lecture there would be lots of research and well-cited sources. If it's a research paper, specifically, my outlines are extensive because I have to hit such things as a literature review and a methods, etc. If the paper is just a narrative or a non-research based paper, my thesis statement in the intro paragraph lays out the rest of the paper well enough, imo.

Because of this, I used to feel as if I were always pulling papers and writing out of my ass. I'd spend several hours writing something the night before it was due, turn it in the next morning and would get it back with, like, a 93 on it. I just figured I was bullshitting my way through school. I was not, but I still felt like I was a terrible and incompetent student. It took me a lot of years to realize that maybe I had developed a skill in writing.

When it comes to creative writing, like stories, my outlines and research depends on the length of the story. I put lots of planning into my novels. I'll have a story outline plus profiles for each important character and important location and each important event. There is often a good bit of research that might go into this, depending on how realistic and detailed I'm going for. Reader's don't need to know the intricacies of how cast iron is made, but I do need to know whether a story taking place in 1500s England could have any cast iron (the answer is yes).

My favorite tools when I'm writing are a thesaurus, an encyclopedia, and the delete button (or the cut function). Sometimes, I need to find a different word. Sometimes I need to look up whether a flintlock pistol existed yet. Sometimes I just need to start over.

And that's what I do. A lot. No matter what I'm writing. I start and restart sentences. I cut or delete entire paragraphs. I cut and move stuff around. If I can't make it work; if it still sounds "off" or awkward, I just get rid of it. I probably delete more than I write, even before I get to an editing process. If I had the time and the will, I could write about a chapter or about 2,000-4,000 words a day. I had a week off once and ended up hyper focusing on a project and I wrote some 18,000 words in 6 days. I cut that down to just under 11,000 after some tweaking and editing.

If I'm really attached to a piece of information or a scene that I wrote into the story, but need to cut for the sake of length and cohesion, I have a separate word document titled "misc excerpts" with a table of contents and a title for each scene. That document is longer than my actual projects, sometimes. I also do this (kinda) if I'm stuck. If I'm stuck, I'll cut the scene and paste it into a separate document and then start working on it from this new document.

I also highlight things as I go along. If it needs fixing, I'll add a little [FX] at the end of the sentence with a comment attached like: "awk" or "unfired gun?" or "who tf is this?" or "why? do you need this detail?" or "this is too convenient," etc. I'll also leave comments along the way for background. If I introduce a character, I'll leave a comment by their name explaining their further relevance to the story. If I introduce a Chekov's Gun, I'll leave a note explaining how I'll use this detail later. My goal is to not have any extraneous details or plots or features in my stories.

I feel all of this makes editing quicker and more efficient later, especially as it's real easy to search up [FX] and find everything that needs an immediate fix before I get into the weeds of editing for grammar.

[marcholasmoth]

OSRR: 3053

i'm finished with my capstone.

i took a little bit of time at the end of my day at work before i left to write up a bit about what i wanted to say but how i speak instead of overly formal, but i got all of the points i wanted and i was able to answer questions without hesitation at the end. i'm pretty proud of myself. and my group mates were happy with it too - they and others said i knocked it out of the park! i'm just proud of myself. i went from being frustrated and lost and confused to broken and frustrated and lost and confused, to hitting the ground running and getting a ton of things done in a week.

hell yeah.

anyway, the paper for the other class remains. i have a lot to do for it, so i anticipate sending in pieces over the next day or two before getting the chance to sit down and write on wednesday and thursday. i'll be done by then. the good news is all of my research is done. i just have to read now. and my annotated bibliography doesn't have to be all of my sources either, just a good collection of a few i'll most likely use.

also after work today i stopped for gas for the first time in a month and picked up some snacks for joel. i brought them over to him and he grabbed me and pulled me down to cuddle with him. i was happy to see him. i miss him when i don't get to see him. :(

but he should be getting his job offer this week. yay!

and i got approved to be paid through the kiddos' school, so nancy doesn't have to pay out of pocket for me anymore. which is a win-win.

i gotta get up early tomorrow to go get my tire pressure sensors checked - i think one may have been jostled out of its correct position as i drove to work this morning. the tires are new, so it makes sense.

but i gotta sleep now, im pretty fuckin tired.

[camiladaviladigitalmediablog]

Blog Post #2

   In this second class, the main focus was Gesamtkunstwerk, which means a total work of art. Of course, that statement can be difficult to perceive. Although we can analyze pieces of media through the lenses of Karl Friederick, specifically under the popularized view established by Richard Wagner during the 19th century that presented theatre as the ultimate medium. Fortunately, artists today do not have the obligation to accommodate to this definition. And their pieces can be dissected via their medium and other elements or categories.

   Returning to last week’s blog post, about the movie Incendies, I would consider it Gesamtkunstwerk. Since not only is an audiovisual work, that includes music, environment design, acting, etc. It is also a tragedy in the same way as Oedipus. It would probably be approved by Friederik. It was also originally a theatre play. This film takes the ancient Greek tragedy in a contemporary setting, and as a well-crafted film, it resorts to the works of a scoring band, a dedicated cast, writers, stage supervisors, etc.

   Now, analyzing a different piece of media. Like the movie Network, from 1976. Which revolves around the people working in the news section of a TV station that is going to shut down due to low ratings. Today that movie is praised for its accuracy of how media in general, no matter the focus, has turned into entertainment that needs to cling to the average viewer’s life and finally turn into a parasocial relationship between the piece of media and the spectator. All social media today benefits from the perpetual attention of viewers.

   The movie is almost 50 years old, and yet, it touches on media convergence and how intertwined we are now with everything consumed by almost everyone in today’s society. Basically, the people running this news section turn it into a hit show not only tuned by everyone but with influence in their lives beyond watching the show. By that logic, their work, the news show, becomes not only Gesamtkunstwerk (the movie demonstrates all kinds of work behind the result) but also lies in the media convergence territory. It may be not digital because at that time everything was still analog, but it is still the connection of information among people with the technology available during those times. As I said before, the movie manages to show how a news section turns into entertainment to gain better ratings and the way they managed to do so is via parasocial relationships. By the end of the movie, the spectators augmented and no one wanted to be excluded, the news section became part of their routines. This connection by the end of the movie transforms into interdependence. Where people look forward to the (no longer) news show to alter their daily lives. 

    This cycle of media consumption and media production with the latest technology is what most of us live in our daily lives. And the movie The Network was able to do that in 1978.

Bibliography:

Incendies. (2010). [film]. Directed by Denis Villeneuve. Canada: Micro_scope

Network. (1976). [film]. Directed by Sidney Lumet. United States: Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer

Network (2016). YouTube. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1cSGvqQHpjs (Accessed: 09 January 2024). 

[jambjars]

ACADEMIC BLOG POST 1- Narrative: Can It Boogie?

What makes a story compelling? Is there one answer that applies to all narratives, and, if there is, is it so horribly broad as to be utterly useless? From Aristotle to Campbell to Juul, we've been trying to figure out a way to pin down the key to a good story for centuries. Like many modern narratologists we covered in the lecture, I have trouble coming up with an all-encompassing, meaningful theory that's inclusive of the video games I enjoy and traditional narratives. Interactive media, especially video games, can follow a strategy all its own. That's not blasphemous to the media before it.

While researching some articles on ludology for this lecture topic, I came across an article that, while risqué, does have some points to make about the merits of viewing video game narratives through an entirely different lens. I believe Shira Chess's piece The queer case of video games: orgasms, Heteronormativity, and video game narrative to be an extremely welcome takedown of the Freytag and subsequently the Brooks model. It's true that many traditional narratives have a singular climax, and indeed many video games can fall under this mold as well, but at the urging of Chess to consider other viewpoints of ludological narrative, I'm quite pleased at the prospect of games not following that route in favor of "little victories"-- incremental pockets of pleasure in limbo.

Figure 1: The main characters from hit 2019 video game Disco Elysium: The Final Cut

DISCO ELYSIUM

I sincerely doubt Propp had anything like Disco Elysium in mind when he penned his theories, and yet it's a game that rings true to everyone I've known that's played it-- especially myself. It's dense, jam-packed with 20+ hours of fully voice-acted dialogue, and tightly woven into a story both alien and familiar. Sure, it has a beginning, middle, end, and you could even fit some characters into Propp's archetypes in there if you pleased*. Not only is it an interactive narrative, however, it leans into its own absurdity to a degree that can derail the entire story itself. In an interview with some of the minds behind this grand-scale narrative, writer Argo Tuulik admitted that a great deal of Disco Elysium's success is owing to the creative team's naive willingness to explore even the most off-the-wall idea and not being too precious about the moral integrity of its characters. That's something I really, really value in a piece of media; the ability to not let any character be utterly invincible or badass without reason, for even the most level-headed to be open to humiliation and bizarreness.

*Here, I'll rattle some off now: Harry is the hero, Kim is the helper, Klaasje could be a false hero, the Thought Cabinet is a Dispatcher, etc.

Figure 2: Disco Elysium Character Sheet Screen.

Gameplay is almost Dungeons-and-Dragons-esque in nature. As a player, you must level up your skills, each representing a different facet of your ability to do your job. While each route is plotted, this is a massive departure from the narrative styles we are so used to in traditional media.

Figure 3: A brilliant graphic of the Disco Elysium cycle by Gabriel Chauri.

There are standalone events in Disco Elysium, set in stone or otherwise, and they are fantastic, but so much of the fun of the game lies in the mechanics themselves.

As a 2D animator, my skills would still be valuable in creating such a game-- while I'm picking up Blender on the side, Disco Elysium's still utilizes 2D animation and overlays on top of 3D models. It feels grungy and artistic and gross, something I would adore emulating on my own time. Perhaps After Effects can help me out.

Bibliography

Aarseth, E. (2004). Genre trouble: Narrativism and the art of simulation. In N. Wardrip-Fruin & P. Harrigan (Eds.), First person: New media as story, performance, and game (pp. 45–55). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.]

Brooks, P. (1977). Freud's Masterplot: Questions of narrative. In S. Felman (Ed.), Literature and psychoanalysis: The question of reading: otherwise (pp. 280–300). Baltimore, Md: Johns Hopkins University Press.

Campbell, J. (1949). The Hero with a Thousand Faces. 3rd ed. Novato, Calif.: New World Library.

Chauri, G. (2021). Disco Elysium RPG System Analysis. [online] Game Design Thinking. Available at: https://gamedesignthinking.com/disco-elysium-rpg-system-analysis/ [Accessed 11 Oct. 2023].

Chess, S. (2016). The queer case of video games: orgasms, Heteronormativity, and video game narrative. Critical Studies in Media Communication, 33(1), pp.84–94. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/15295036.2015.1129066.

Freytag, G. (2012). Freytag's technique of drama: An exposition of dramatic composition and art. London: Forgotten Books. (Original work published 1863)

Inderwildi, A. (2021). What the Epic of Gilgamesh can tell us about Disco Elysium’s most troubling character, the Deserter. mashxtomuse. Available at: https://www.mashxtomuse.com/single-post/what-the-epic-of-gilgamesh-can-tell-us-about-disco-elysium-s-most-troubling-character-the-deserter [Accessed 14 Oct. 2023].

Juul, J. (2005). Half-real : Video games between real rules and fictional worlds. Cambridge (Massachusetts, Usa): The Mit Press.

Roof, J. (1996). Come as you are: Sexuality and narrative. New York: Columbia University Press.

Williams, L. (2022). How a collaborative writing process birthed Disco Elysium. [online] Games Hub. Available at: https://www.gameshub.com/news/features/disco-elysium-narrative-writing-process-18597/ [Accessed 1 Nov. 2023].

ZA/UM (2019) Disco Elysium: The Final Cut [Video game]. ZA/UM

[hedgewitchgarden]

”It’s me, hi, I’m the problem, it’s me.” -Elisabeth Báthory

In July of this year, an independently-published book called Witchtoker’s Grimoire appeared on Amazon, the description of which stated, “This Grimoire is a collection of spells, how to’s, [and] magical writings, by a collective of creators from Tiktok.” I myself was unaware of said book until a snarling gaggle of videos about it popped up on the witchier corners of the Clock App, and the fury with which the Grimoire was being discussed piqued my curiosity, so I started doing some digging.

I am not sure when work on the Grimoire actually began, but from what I’ve been able to piece together, the creator behind it reached out to a handful of other WitchTok personalities and asked them to contribute spells, recipes, etc. A few people took issue with this — claims floated around that the creator would not accept submissions from witches she didn’t “approve” of, which seemed counterintuitive to a “community” driven book. But within the greater publishing industry, some projects involve open calls for submissions, while others are invitation only, so if the creator hand-picked her contributors, that doesn’t constitute compromised ethics.

The contents of the book, however, raised legitimate ethical concerns. One essay seemed to suggest that corpse water could be consumed. Another provided instructions for a spell jar that the author had made for a friend undergoing surgery to remove cancer: Because of the phrasing, some readers thought that the author was declaring the spell jar cured cancer.

Having read both snippets (screenshots abound), I can say that the actual problem is a severe lack of editing — like, if the cancer anecdote had been cut, the chapter on the spell jar would’ve been just fine. But it’s this dearth of editorial oversight that led to even bigger problems, primarily accusations that a good chunk of material in the book was plagiarized.

According to allegations, passages from at least seven different published works were lifted whole-cloth and incorporated into the Grimoire. Additionally, someone ran sections of the book through a plagiarism detection engine and apparently found that a number of spells had been copied and pasted directly from websites. And while the Grimoire does feature a bibliography, it does not include citations, which, honestly, would’ve only be helpful had the authors used their own voices to rewrite or summarize the info in question.

In a way, the bibliography almost functions as an admission of guilt. Like, “Oh, you wanna know where we swiped all this stuff? Feast your peepers!”

Lines were immediately drawn in the sand once official controversy hit the algorithm, with people on one side vehemently denouncing the Grimoire, and friends and family of the book’s creator vehemently denouncing the people denouncing it. The online battles escalated, and I decided that not a damn bit of it was any of my business. (Although I did throw the lithomantic stones to see if I should offer some objective clarification on what corpse water actually is. It felt like a neighborly thing to do.)

But as evidence of plagiarism piled up, and the book’s supporters realized that they were going to have to switch tactics if they wanted to stay on top of the situation, one of them said something that made me understand how problematic the Grimoire had been from the very onset.

I was scrolling through my For You Page a couple of mornings ago, flipping past conspiracy theories and videos from disillusioned contributors publicly requesting that their submissions be removed from future editions, when I landed on a live conversation between the book’s creator and one of her more ardent apologists. And that’s when I heard the following:

“[You] put together a conglomeration of people’s submissions. I don’t understand why all this comes on you. Like, you have to double- and triple-check every submission?”

“Or tell people that fire burns,” the creator replied. “Or that water is wet. Or that you should not get in the shower with a hairdryer going.”

And I had to stop for a second and collect myself, because the answer to all of the above is a non-negotiable yes: The editor of an anthology must absolutely double- and triple-check every submission, and the anthology itself must contain disclaimers to protect everyone involved. Whether desktop or traditional, this is how publishing works.

But this also made me understand that the people who put out the Witchtoker’s Grimoire approached publishing the same way they approach witchcraft: It’s something you can just do successfully without any education or training or skill. It’s not about growing, or teaching, or sharing knowledge: It’s about snatching up unmerited authority and using it to bully all of the smaller fish in the pond.

And when called out for troubling behavior, or spreading misinformation, or outright theft, it’s about redirecting the narrative, and manifesting a projective shield of victimhood behind which to hide: Anyone who speaks ill of them is a jealous detractor who doesn’t want you to know the truth.

It’s a shield that tends to collapse and bonk heads when the unbiased truth comes out.

As of this writing, the Witchtoker’s Grimoire has been pulled from publication, and the creator has issued a public apology, taking full responsibility and letting her viewers know that there will not be a revised edition. (The original plan was to tweak the worrisome bits and rerelease it.) To her credit, this was the right thing to do, and it displays some maturity on her part. Although as contrite as the video came across, it may have also just been an attempt to stave off the legal ramifications of selling a plagiarized manuscript.

If that’s the case, she’s in for a series of unfortunate surprises. Regardless of how sorry she may be about the debacle, the book went to print, and multiple copies were purchased — if the allegations prove accurate, this means that copyrights were actively infringed, and there will be  consequences for that. A remorseful “whoops” won’t protect her.

I don’t know if she’ll ever try her hand at publishing again, but if she does, she’ll have a very hard time convincing anyone to take a chance on her pitches. Traditional publishers will more than likely give her a wide berth, and freelancers who want to keep their reputations stain-free will avoid collaboration. This particular path has ultimately come to a dead end for her.

Speaking of paths, the whole saga of the Witchtoker’s Grimoire reminds me of Mandrake from the Liminal Spirits Oracle (by Laura Tempest Zakroff; Llewellyn Publications, 2020), and one of Tempest’s interpretations of the card strikes me as a fitting end to this post:

“There is no easy or fast road to big rewards that are truly worthwhile. Eschew tantalizing shortcuts and lazy practices. Fully invest the time and care needed to perform a task properly and responsibly — build any house as if you yourself were going to live in it.”

The results we get out of our craft are directly and prosperously proportionate to the effort we put into it. If we expect good results from whatever it is we’re doing without honest effort — or if we expect results without honesty, period — we’re better off not doing it at all.

And y’all, we don’t just have to live in what we’ve built.

We have to live with it.

[mikeyscontextuals]

A Disquiet Evening_ Brief 4

Welcome once again, everyone!

This is the first post, of many, regarding my journey through this last brief!

So the "gist" of it is pretty much the following: Taking from at least one of the previous themes we had, either Identity, Modernity, or maybe perhaps the Animal, we would have to lead on another separate piece, or continue a previous one we had made, refering to the chosen subject, obviously.

For me personally, it was the Identity brief that was my biggest hit and miss, at least according to my expectations for the given brief.

Therefore, it is said theme that I shall be tackling! Now back to the drawing board. It was here that I curiously ran into a video titled: "The Terrible Paradox Of Self-Awareness | Fernando Pessoa."

It immediately struck my interest for two reasons: Fernando Pessoa is the biggest and most important name in Portuguese history, and because this was all about Existencialism, and that is exactly what I am pursuing, especifically paralleling with his work: "The Book Of Disquiet", which was released in 1982, exactly 47 years after his passing, at just 47 years of age. It was released under one of his many semi-heteronyms: Bernardo Soares, which poses no comparison when standing beside all of his bigger heteronyms, and is a compiliation book, made of over 500 loose texts written by Fernando Pessoa. Consequently, the book has no beggining, no middle and no end! One can loosely open the book at any given text and read a passage that would make himself think, question and ponder. Here are some examples:

“My past is everything I failed to be.” ― Fernando Pessoa, The Book of Disquiet

“I'd woken up early, and I took a long time getting ready to exist.” ― Fernando Pessoa, The Book of Disquiet

“I wasn’t meant for reality, but life came and found me.” ― Fernando Pessoa, The Book of Disquiet

The quotes previously mentioned that should paint a pretty good picture of the Existencialism portraid in this work by Fernando Pessoa.

In further posts I will be developing this subject! Stick around for a great time!

Bibliography:

[thewardenofwinter]

Literally shivering me timbers as I type. I actually recently added to my personal pirate literature collection. I also already use all of these websites myself! My only qualm is with Wikipedia because quite a few of their sources are incorrectly linked but it's a pretty good overall source for basic info, just don't dive in too deep like me and spend 3 hours looking at the sources behind Black Bart... Also sorry for any misspellings it's quite late and I don't fell like running this through spell check.

Since Nopal so graciously already provided some great websites, I will instead recommend other forms of media to check out.o here are my favorite books/authors/youtubers.

Books:

Under the Black Flag: The Romance and the Reality of Life Among the Pirates by David Cordingly- Best entry-level pirate history book in my opinion, formatted well and sensationalized just a tad to keep your attention. Does a good job of discrediting pirate myths while at the same time educating you on the real history.

The Republic of Pirates: Being the True and Surprising Story of the Caribbean Pirates and the Man Who Brought Them Down by Colin Woodard- The same as the book above but focuses more on specific pirates/pirate hunters.

The Pirate Hunter by Richard Zacks- This book shows the true colors of the notorious pirate hunter Captain Kidd and is riddled with historical details/facts concerning the man and the environment he worked in.

The Sea Rovers Practice by Benerson Little- Details the particular methods behind the madness of seaman and their craft.

The Golden Age of Piracy: The Truth Behind Pirate Myths by Benerson Little- Much like Under The Black Flag, Little uses this book to disprove myths and restate the facts behind these men of the high seas. Though I much prefer this book for its credible information and glossary, it reads almost like a textbook and can be a little hard to get into for the casual reader.

The General History of the Pirates by Captain Charles Johnson- Published in 1724 by an unknown captain, this is the book that started it all. Robbers of the high seas, pillaging, plundering, rebellious ladies and gents fighting for their spot in the world. If you can get over the old-timey language, it's a super cool read. But, that being said, this book is seen by most pirate historians as an exaggeration of true facts to entertain readers and relies a lot on unreliable eyewitness accounts. Still, some do consider it credible, just not in its entirety.

Piracy: The Complete History by Angus Konstam- Overview of the history of piracy from ancient times to the present. Since it covers so much time, Konstam doesn't go very in-depth as I would prefer but for a historical lesson outside of just the golden age, this works quite well.

Authors:

Benerson Little- A former Navy SEAL and historical consultant on the hit STARZ network show Black Sails. Author of a few novels above, which are my personal favorites due to his in-depth bibliographies in the back. He has his own historical fiction novel called Fortunes Whelp that I haven't yet finished but so far is quite good. He also goes on a few podcasts and does interviews detailing his knowledge if you wanna check those out too.

Angus Konstam- With his plethora of military and naval knowledge from his time as a naval officer, Konstom has written hundreds of books, many concerning the history of pirates. I've mentioned one of his works above, but he has many many other books that might pique your interest

E.T. Fox- Fox is a historian with his M.A. in maritime history with numerous published works (also has a piratey earing so I trust every word he says). I didn't mention his work above because I haven't finished it, but he has two books called Pirates in Their Own Words that I've read bits and pieces of, so I would recommend checking them out. He also has a book on Henry Every which I am trying to get my hands on.

Nigel Cawthorne- While I have read 2 of his books (Pirates and A History of Pirates) and find most of the info to be passable, for the life of me I cannot tell if this dude is a serious author or not because he has so many bloody books on so many bloody things that have nothing to do with each other. I mean, at least he cites his sources...?

Youtube channels:

Gold and Gunpowder- Gold and Gunpowder covers European colonial sea roving between 1630 and 1730. The legal ramifications of piracy and the societal attitude towards it were unlike any other period of history. My personal favorite channel when it comes to longer in-depth videos and cited information, check his descriptions for his sources.

The Pirates Port- Another channel that focuses on the golden age of piracy and proving/disproving well-known facts. Shortform videos packed with information, and most of his sources are credible from what I can tell personally. He's also coming out with a book soon that I'm stoked to check out!

There's also this great podcast called The Pirate History Podcast that I've listened to a couple times if you prefer audio content.

Hi, I am @writeblr-of-my-own. I am having troubles with finding informations about piracy and you are probably the person most expert on the topic I know here on tumblr, so I was wondering if there were any books or other resources you would recommend/you used while writing.

Thank you very much in advance! :)

Hi Sam! Thank you for the sweet ask! don't mind me wiping the literal tears out of my eyes thank you for thinking of me! 😭

Here are some of the resources that I've used in the past/use now!

https://www.thepirateking.com/index.htm: A great little one-stop-shop type of website I came across some time ago when I was looking for pirate movies other than POTC! There are some pretty good resources regarding terminology, ship types, weapons, navigational devices, and more! This is still one of my fave little corners on the internet for pirate stuff!

https://goldenageofpiracy.org/ : This one is a little more narrow as compared to the one above, but it's still a good place to start your research journey as it hits on a lot of the ships and people that we typically think of when we think pirates!

https://guides.loc.gov/golden-age-of-piracy/print-resources: I really like the Primary Resources listed on this site. From what I can recall, they are available via electronic copy and free! Most of them aren't like what you'll find as far as Wikipedia article-type information that is easy and quick to digest. Most of them are journals that tell the story of travelers who came and went during the Golden Age of Piracy and who may have brushed with pirates at one point or another. They are very interesting to read and some of my faves to set the mood if I'm feeling a little uninspired!

National Geographic's Special Edition Magazine on Pirates: This one is an Amazon link to buy the hard copy of the magazine itself, but there are some really fantastic articles in here and lots of pictures of historical artifacts! Another great place to start your research and just a cool little item to flip through for inspiration or to have on your bookshelf. I happened across my copy of it at my local Target, but I've since spotted it in a few bookstores and magazine shops!

Wikipedia: This is perhaps my favorite resource of all, not just for the pages themselves but for the footnotes and works cited. Once I finish reading something, I always scroll down to the bottom to see the resources they used as reference material. Those have led me down some fascinating rabbit holes of research!

Of course, my pirates are in a fantasy setting, so I've taken liberties with historical accuracy, but it's still important to know the history itself to see what you can actually take believable liberties with!

I will also tag @thewardenofwinter, who I know is a bit of a pirate historian herself and pretty passionate on the subject!