#And more for either enjoyment or historical relevance

[the-busy-ghost]

Finally learnt what a dactyl actually is and I’m going to have to take a moment to lie down 

[flowersofevilvn]

I'm reading flowers of evil because of you BTW. It's really good! I was never one for poetry because I thought I was just too stupid to understand it, but I feel I have been missing out.

How have you been? Any development or life issues that we can help with? I think your game is really something special. Take care. 💚

I'm so glad to hear that!! I'm a firm believer that art and writing is for everybody and it always makes me happy to hear people are expanding their genres and experiences :) there are lots of resources that provide annotated versions of classical poetry so flowers of evil is actually a great text to look at if you're wanting to break into the romantics a little bit more! Different translators also change the tone of the work significantly, I have 3 separate copies of Flowers of Evil in the printed English format by dofferent translators, some with and some without original french text and annotations, but my favorite of all time is Ruth White's 1969 early electronica album based on the text! your personal experience with the writing is more important than an "objective" truth some people may try to convince you is true of the thing- historical context and literary analysis only go so far. Your enjoyment of a text doesn't have to have anything to do with what is academically accepted. I like flowers of evil the poetry collection mostly because of the visceral descriptions! Other people might enjoy it more because of its peculiar place in its time period, its relevance in the modern goth scene or the classic gothic literary scene, its gorgeous bound editions in book collecting circles, its raunchiness, its holiness, whatever! all that is to say, I don't believe in stupid people, and I belive even less in a stupid way to approach poetry, writing, and art- art is for everyone, and there are lots of ways to feel and interpret an artists work!

I wish I had good news on the development front- I had a week off of work I was hoping to dedicate to working on the game but I mostly either slept or cleaned. Being disabled and working has. Significantly altered my trajectory on the game. I wasn't expecting to have to use my body to work and it's been affecting me pretty brutally. Unfortunately because it's been so long since I started it up I'm wondering if I should gut and reproduce it entirely into something newer and cleaner instead of continuing to roll with a framework I've come to find pretty flawed and hard to work with. I haven't dropped the project by any means but I'm struggling to find the motivation to finish it. In any case! I'm really hoping to have at least a major update by March. fingers crossed, and happy reading to you!

[joker-daughter]

It's something that I think @stanleyl said once, but Tom needs a GROWN role so bad, something sexy, something appealing. I don't think romance is mandatory per say, but for him, at this stage of his career, I think it's the one thing that will set him free from the image of the "golden retriever innocent man child" that he has on, and I hate to say it, OFF screen too (which indirectly has an impact on the range of characters he's offered to play)

I don't really like to compare their careers because they're different in so many ways, but it seems relevant in this context: Zendaya picks her projects [and costars] really meticulously. She knows what will make people talk and pop off. I mean, I think they're all talented and don't want to take that away from them, but they're also really beloved by the masses , Timothee, Mike, Josh and now Robert. She's not afraid to use that appeal and her star power. She's now associated with these men as they're telling a fictional story, yes, but also on a broader scale, during promo and in the real world. It's all jokes I know but all those "she's collecting those white boys like Thanos" memes show how people not only accept it, but crave for it. They don't know anything about the synopsis and ultimately it won't really matter (because let's be honest, Challengers story isn't life changing in any way but it's sexy! and fun enough to be enjoyable to watch). What matters is seeing "desirable" actors doing their stuff, it sounds shallow but its true. And it's a smart thing to do Imo. It's what sells tickets, make people talk and ultimately what studios are looking for. not to be crude, but the audiences are "horny" for that, to see sexy people on screen in sexy stories, love and epic stories.

Tom's taste in movies seem to be much more grounded, either historical stories or biopic or more gloomy and dark fictions. He needs to switch to something else in my opinion, at least once. to build something new, outside of Spider-man (and his pairing with Zendaya) and outside of the depressing stuff he already tried. He is a 28 years old actor but doesn't feel like one for most people. so picking Something that could change that perception is maybe the right move now, by building his sex appeal back, the one thing that movie stars need to thrive and book things nowadays (and I'm not saying he doesnt have sex appeal, I'm saying he doesn't play his cards right)

yeah, I hear you…and I do agree to a certain extend, I’m just here for whatever (with a good story, might I add) but a role that makes use of his sex appeal and establishes him as being more mature in general would be great…as long it’s not The Winner tho

[insurrection-if]

Barbenheimer season: would the ROs watch Barbie, Oppenheimer, both or neither?

Aha, I've been gone so long that this answer might no longer be relevant by now. (；´∀｀) Apologies, truly.

Also, uh, admitting my bias here and now . . . I fell asleep during Oppenheimer. ( ;´д｀) But I also don't really remember what happened in Barbie all that well, so please take this answer with a grain of salt! Anyways . . .

Akil would prefer to watch Oppenheimer but is willing to watch Barbie if that's the preference of his company. He has no nostalgic sentiments about Barbie, but he does have an inclination towards the historical. Really though, neither movie would normally draw much of his interest on their own. Akil, being an absolute workaholic, is not one easily swayed by or much aware of pop culture trends.

Kamiko would defer the decision to whoever she was with. She has little interest in films, and less interest in the loud and stuffy environment of movie theaters. I don't think she would much enjoy either film, really. Any enjoyment from her would be derived from the joy / investment of whatever well-liked company that has managed to drag her to a theatre in the first place. And her enjoyment from their reaction would be more than enough to make the experience pleasant for her.

Sigmund would verbally suggest Oppenheimer, but he would have more enjoyment from the Barbie film due to the more comedic moments. And yet, it wouldn't really cross his mind to be the one to suggest Barbie if whoever was accompanying him didn't have some previously expressed nostalgia / interest in the film. Maybe if he saw some memes about the film, and knew they appealed to the taste of someone he knew and wanted to spend time with, he might come to the idea of recommending and watching it with them all on his own. Otherwise, it's a blip on his radar.

Imka would prefer to watch Barbie, enjoying the vibes and aesthetic of the film, and would most definitely have a far better experience than if she were to watch the more pensive and troubled mood of Oppenheimer. A viewing of Barbie would leave her pleased and charmed whereas a viewing of Oppenheimer would leave her thoughtful and quiet. She's open to either, however, and being such a people-pleaser, she'll likely feign an equal interest for both films if asked to pick which she'd prefer to watch / whether to watch both in order to direct the final decision onto someone else.

Elouan would suggest and prefer Barbie, not too keen on enduring a long and (to him) tedious film that takes such a serious and dour tone. I think he would enjoy Oppenheimer well enough if he were to watch it, though, and he'll have much to say on it in the hours after the film. If he really likes his company, he'll endure the "wasted time" of watching both and pretend that he's having a wonderful time through the whole experience. Movies, however, are a bit of a sore point for Elouan, so do expect some wistful nostalgia to distract him from whatever he's watching now and then.

Jae would push for Barbie right out the gate. The events in Oppenheimer do not interest her in the slightest, a fact further aggravated by the mere run time of the film. She doesn't have an intense personal attachment to Barbie dolls either (though she likes the fashion and messages she sees in the brand) but the trend of dressing up for the film would really catch her excitement. Expect her to go all-out for it and assist anyone who wants to join her for the movie with dressing the part as well.

Niccolò is down for whatever, whenever. He'll love Barbie as much as he'll love Oppenheimer, and he'll definitely want to hop on board the Barbenheimer trend the moment it comes to his attention. Dressing the part is a fun boon on top of it all, especially if he can coordinate his outfit with others to maximize the 'meme potential' (which is the phrase he will use without fully comprehending what it even means). He'll laugh and smile through Barbie. He'll watch with rapt attention all throughout Oppenheimer. The meme makes the entire experience a double win - one that becomes a triple win when it also gives the excuse of light-hearted goofing around with those he cares about for the sake of a mutually enjoyed meme / joke / trend.

Mutya would voice support for watching Oppenheimer if pushed into giving her opinion on which to watch and may just enjoy that more than the Barbie film. Mutya doesn't care much for the Barbie brand, but she would find the film to be serviceable as a piece of entertainment even if it's not quite to her tastes. Similarly, Oppenheimer would not leave a major impression on her, but she would leave the theatre with a nod of approval, nonetheless.

Fyodor would choose whatever seems the most lighthearted based on the promotional material outside the theatre, hence latching onto Barbie. Especially if people were partaking in the pink attire trend at the theatre which he would consider humorous and cute, thus assuming the film to be just that (humorous and cute) as well. Honestly, Oppenheimer would likely have one of two outcomes if he were to watch it: drag down his mood for the rest of the night (leaving him uncomfortable and a little lost as he watched it) or lulling him into a nap as it seems to drool on endlessly. Fyodor does not enjoy depictions of troubled homes and relationships, takes little interest in much anything academic or historical, and has a mind that is likely to wonder in a such a long conversation-heavy film.

Then again . . . The whole concept of a doll wishing to find her own human independence, and Ken’s struggle to find meaning beyond his blind devotion to someone he desperately wants to be loved by, might stir up more bad memories than it’s worth if he were to put much thought in it. It’s more than a little reminiscent of his former ties to Dollmaker and any current romantic prospects he may be pursuing (or even platonic ones, if romance is not applicable). Best to keep him distracted with snacks and comments during the movie so he doesn’t have an existential crises by the end of the night.

And as for the minor ROs . . .

Curadora would state that she'd prefer to watch Oppenheimer. She does enjoy historically based films and would hope that interest will translate to Oppenheimer as well. If she ended up watching Barbie, however, she would admit that she enjoyed that film experience more due to the tone and positive messages it attempts to convey.

Dearil would rather watch neither simply due to the public (and, in this case, crowded) nature of theatres that are prone to filthiness, incessant noise, and human eyes that seem to burn him with an unshakeable discomfort. If the films were to be available for an 'at-home' watch, he would much prefer Oppenheimer, not particularly keen on the aesthetics, humor, or brand of Barbie. Plus, as someone raised in deep isolation from the outer world for his entire upbringing, Dearil rarely passes up a chance to learn more about historical events and notable persons from the past.

Lempo would definitely push for Barbie, delighted with nostalgia, and would leave the theatre more elated than usual. She would urge everyone she knows to watch the film with her and partake in the trend of pink dress-up. She would absolutely adore the film from top-to-bottom and would be a bubbly ball of energy in the hours after from the great time she had while watching it.

Retriever would be down to view both, especially back-to-back for the meme alone. He doesn't have much nostalgia for Barbie, but he appreciates the often preppy and positive vibes of the Barbie brand as well as the nostalgia so many others have for it. On top of that, Retriever is the type to have a passive interest in American history which would make him keen on the depictions of historical events in Oppenheimer. Overall, though, he would have a better time watching Barbie, and would enjoy it most with others.

Mishka would have to be worn down by much insistence and coaxing to bother with either. Oppenheimer, however, would be a more enjoyable experience for them due to the historical nature of its events and the more complex, messy relationships it depicts. Might have a lot of questions after the showing. Maybe too many questions.

Thank you for the ask, and apologies again for the outdated response! （；^ω^）

[homdec]

From Functional to Fabulous: Transforming Bunk Beds into Room Focal Points

In an increasingly crowded world with a growing population, living spaces are shrinking. Bunk beds offer a practical solution for those residing in cramped environments where space is at a premium. These beds are ingeniously stacked on top of each other, allowing multiple individuals to share a room without sacrificing comfort. What's more, bunk beds are surprisingly straightforward to assemble, and you don't need to be a DIY expert to set them up. 

What is a bunk bed? 

Bunk beds are a specific type of bed design characterized by two or more beds stacked vertically, effectively creating a compact sleeping arrangement. These beds typically rely on four corner posts for support and are connected by side rails or equipped with a ladder for easy access to the upper bunk. Bunk beds find common use in shared living spaces like dormitories, hostels, and summer camps, where the need arises for multiple individuals to share a single room. Additionally, they are a popular choice in children's bedrooms, offering an enjoyable and practical sleeping solution for siblings or friends.

These beds are typically crafted from either wood or metal and are available in a range of sizes and styles to cater to different requirements and aesthetic preferences. Some bunk beds come with built-in storage options, such as drawers or shelves, helping to make the most of the limited space in smaller rooms. Others adopt a twin-over-full configuration, with a larger bed at the bottom and a smaller one on top, offering versatility in accommodating different sleepers. While bunk beds offer a practical and space-saving solution for shared sleeping areas, it is crucial to use them safely and adhere to the manufacturer's assembly and usage guidelines.

Unique transformation from functionality to interior design 

The journey of bunk beds from mere functional sleeping solutions to integral components of interior design is a captivating transformation that has unfolded over time. 

Historical Functionality: Bunk beds were initially designed with a clear focus on functionality. They were born out of the necessity to maximize the use of available space, especially in settings like military barracks, ships, and tight sleeping quarters. Their primary purpose was to provide a practical way for multiple individuals to sleep efficiently in a confined area.

The Shift Towards Versatility: As time went on, designers and manufacturers began to recognize the potential of bunk beds beyond their utilitarian roots. They realized that these space-saving structures could be adapted to accommodate various design preferences and aesthetics. This shift marked the beginning of the transformation from functional to fashionable.

Aesthetic Diversity: The modern marketplace now offers a wide range of bunk bed designs. You can find options to suit virtually any interior design style, whether it's minimalist, rustic, contemporary, or anything in between. Bunk beds have become an exciting canvas for design innovation. They come in diverse materials, such as wood and metal, and can incorporate elements like decorative headboards and footboards, creating opportunities for personalization and style expression.

Space Maximization and Multifunctionality: Bunk beds continue to excel at maximizing space, making them particularly relevant in today's world, where living spaces are becoming increasingly compact. Moreover, many bunk beds now come equipped with built-in storage solutions, such as drawers, shelves, and even desks, further enhancing their multifunctionality. This aspect is crucial for those seeking to optimize their living spaces.

Safety and Durability: Alongside the shift towards design, there has been a simultaneous focus on safety and durability. Modern bunk beds are engineered to meet stringent safety standards, ensuring that they are not only stylish but also secure for use in various settings.

Customization and Personalization: Bunk beds are no longer one-size-fits-all solutions. They can be tailored to meet individual needs and preferences. This personalization aspect has become a driving force behind their inclusion in interior design. Homeowners can select the size, color, and additional features that align with their vision for a particular room.

Enhancing the Room's Focal Point: Bunk beds are no longer tucked away in the corner of a room but are strategically positioned to draw attention. They can become the focal point around which the rest of the room's design is built. Lighting, decor, and accessories are often used to highlight bunk beds and make them an integral part of the room's aesthetics.

Tips for interior design with bunk beds 

Here are some valuable tips for interior design with bunk beds to help you make the most of these versatile furniture pieces:

Choose the right style: Select bunk beds that align with the overall style of the room. Whether you prefer a modern, rustic, industrial, or classic look, there are bunk bed designs to match your aesthetic.

Consider the Room's Layout: The placement of bunk beds in the room is crucial. Opt for a location that maximizes space and allows for easy movement. Consider the placement of windows, doors, and other furniture when deciding where to position the bunk beds.

Opt for Neutral Colors: If you want your bunk beds to blend seamlessly with the room's decor, choose neutral colors for the bed frames and bedding. Neutrals provide a versatile backdrop, allowing you to add pops of color and accessories as desired.

High-Quality Bedding: Invest in high-quality bedding, including comfortable mattresses and stylish linens. This not only enhances the comfort of the beds but also adds a touch of luxury to the design.

Personalize with Accessories: Use pillows, throws, and cushions to add personality to the bunk beds. These accessories can introduce patterns, textures, and colors that complement the room's theme.

Accent Lighting: Consider installing wall-mounted sconces, pendant lights, or LED strips around the bunk beds to create a cozy and inviting atmosphere. This can also serve a functional purpose for reading or other activities.

Storage Solutions: If space is limited, opt for bunk beds with built-in storage features. Some bunk beds come with drawers, shelves, or even a trundle bed that can be pulled out when needed, offering extra storage space.

Decorate the Ladder or Stairs: If your bunk bed includes a ladder or stairs for access to the upper bunk, use these as an opportunity to enhance the design. Paint them in a complementary color, add decals, or incorporate them into the room's theme.

Create a Cozy Nook: Add curtains or canopies to the bunk beds to create a sense of privacy and coziness. This is particularly appealing for children's rooms, creating a fun and playful sleeping space.

Safety First: Always ensure the bunk beds are assembled and used safely. Follow the manufacturer's instructions for proper setup and regularly inspect the beds to ensure they remain secure. Safety rails are essential, especially for upper bunks.

Flexibility for Growth: In children's rooms, consider bunk beds with a flexible design that can adapt as the children grow. Some bunk beds can be separated into two single beds, offering long-term usability.

Artwork and Decor: Adorn the walls around the bunk beds with artwork and decor that complements the design. This can tie the entire room together and create a cohesive look.

Conclusion 

Bunk beds have transformed from practical space-savers to stylish room focal points. When incorporating them into your interior design, consider these tips: choose the right style, optimize room layout, use neutral colors for a versatile backdrop, personalize with accessories and lighting, maximize storage, customize ladders or stairs, add curtains or canopies for a cozy nook, prioritize safety, and select flexible designs for children's rooms.

[re-dracula]

@the-bluebonnet-bandit had a great Q in the replies of a post and I wanna talk about it! They wrote: “i'm curious how this adaptation will handle some of the explicit racisms in the peice? Because on the one hand it did happen and providing context and warnings towards it could enrich the awareness of modern day listeners...On the other hand, its not as if its all "load bearing" racism or is plot relevant, and making small edits for ease of fluidity could be very inviting to many of us who had direct experiences in real life (Ex: Lucy's comment about Black men being left out, or gy*psy being simply switched to the accurate: "romani")

And yeah, that’s something we’ve thought a lot about! We’ve been planning to have content warnings at the top of each episode, at minimum because we think it’s really important to not leave the historic racism unaddressed. While there’s something to be said for “full text accuracy,” we think there is also something to be said for not having unnecessary slurs. Right now we are planning on some light editing in exactly the direction you’ve stipulated. I personally have had moments reading the Dracula Daily emails and going “OH RIGHT this was written by a racist old man” and losing a bit of enjoyment from it. I think the podcast will be more fun and enjoyable as a whole if there’s less.... of that. And like, I don’t wanna subject the people of color on our cast to that shit either, ya know?

But our goal is, ultimately, to have this adaptation as verbatim to the text as possible. (If someone is looking for a more modern adaptation, can we suggest Murray Mysteries?). We want to experiment with grounded readings of Dracula - the sort of intimate acting that audio drama so often excels at. Part of the challenge is the words as is! So I do think people who might be grumpy about us going and editing mister Stoker should know we are not exactly happy about it. But I’d also hope those people can understand that maybe a little bit less racism in our adaptations is okay.

[ellesliterarycorner]

hello :D do you have any tips on how to drop info without info dumping?

Hi, anon! I'm so sorry it's taken me so long to get to your ask! Info-dumps are definitely some of the hardest things about writing, and I have always struggled with finding the balances between giving your readers necessary information and info-dumping things that are completely irrelevant to the plot. For anyone who doesn't know an info-dump is whenever an author gives a very long exposition either in the narrative or through dialogue, just dumping all of the information on the reader instead of weaving it through the story. One thing to keep in mind though: Info-dumps can be extremely subjective. Some things that I considered reasonable world-building, some of my friends have thoughts were terrible info-dumps, so definitely keep that in mind, and not all info-dumps are bad. Sometimes they're necessary for the story, so here's how to drop info in correctly.

Ah, Those Villain Monologues

Unfortunately, these days it’s not just villains who are monologuing. Everyone from heroes to villains has decided that right in the heal of battle that its their new favorite pastime. One way I often see authors disguise an info-dump monologue is by having a character tell another character a story of some important historical event, but it’s still an info-dump, unfortunately. You can make a monologue work in your story, and there are certain book monologues that I actually do enjoy. BUT, having more than one info-dumpy monologue in your story probably isn’t a good thing. They will inevitably bore your reader, and the information may not even get across in the way you imagined it. Plus, realistically, how often do people monologue in real life? Not every often. If you really need to get all the info across in a specific point in your story in dialogue form, a conversation between two or more characters can probably get the job done in the same way and will probably be more way more engaging for your reader! Also, a conversation can allow you to reveal characterization and the relationship between your characters which will advance the story even further!

But Is This Relevant??

You would be shocked at how many info-dumps I read that are not at all relevant to the story, or ones that are relevant, but are simply out of place. Info-dumps like these pull the reader out of the story. It can mess up your pacing and make you lose any momentum you have in the story. For example, even though descriptions are important and setting a surrounding for your readers is good, stopping in the middle of a fight scene to describe the dungeons your characters are fighting in is probably counterintuitive. To remedy this, evaluate all the info in a scene, within the context of the scene. A description of the dungeon, from my above example would be helpful to create visualization for the fight scene, but dumping that info at the top of the scene before the fight starts would be much more beneficial. If you need to dump a little bit of information, make it related to whatever is happening in the story. Readers are more likely to forgive an info-dump that relates to the current happenings of the story and that help them understand it.

Weave The Info Throughout The Story

Information in a story to me is like ranch on top of a salad. Bear with me here. Most people don't want to dump the ranch on their salad all in one spot. Most people nicely drizzle the ranch over their salad, making sure that the whole bowl gets the ranchy goodness. That was a weird analogy, but I hope it helped illustrate my point. Dumping all of the info at one point in your story serves no good, especially if it's info that foreshadows an event or plot twist. Drizzling the detail throughout the story is a much better, more enjoyable option. This can hard, so I actually would recommend writing a big chunk of information that you want to share about a current event. Then, break up the big blocks into smaller parts and look for places where you can stretch it out across the story! This helps you know what info you want to share while also making sure that you're not info-dumping it.

Elle's Bonus Tip: Check the Starts

Just like animals prefer certain climates, info-dumps prefer the starts of things. The first chapter, the first time you meet a new character, the first time your character visits a new place. If you go back through your story, those are all of the most common places for info-dumps to make their home. It's natural for writers to want to explain every little detail about a new character or a new place because we think that information is necessary. And while the reader shouldn't be left in the dark, they probably don't need all of the information that's inside of your head on their first time seeing a place or meting a character. You want readers to be intrigued enough to turn the page, and not dumping info and giving them just enough to keep going is the perfect place to do it.

[vanquishedvaliant]

So there’s this trend I’m seeing on social media about people boycotting / encouraging people not to buy the upcoming Mass Effect remasters.

The reasonings being somewhat varied, some valid, others not, but mostly centering around one thing in specific; cut content relating to same sex relationships that didn’t make it into the games.

Now, I understand not being interested in the product being offered; I’m probably not going to buy it myself for a lack of specific features like multiplayer and... just not needing the buy the game for my fifth or sixth time. It’s completely valid to think the remasters are just not doing enough for you to justify a purchase, or that their faith in the company doing it properly in their current state isn’t there. I get that.

But the mood that’s come up lately isn’t just disinterest; it’s downright outrage. Violent, ideologically charged opposition to even the concept of the remasters because of a perceived failure to meet their extremely specific and often high standards and notions of progressiveness.

Now it’s not exactly news that Bioware has had a rocky relationship with inclusivity over the years, with queer characters flitting in and out of recognition and prominence, appropriation of queer archetypes, and less than stellar execution of what characters they do include. I’ve had my complaints with these myself from time to time, though it’s still always struck me historically as a generally positive, if clumsy attempt at progress that I appreciated despite the flaws; remember that the original Mass Effect 1 came out in 2007, and was the focus of a major media scandal about even including romantic relationships at all in the game, nevermind same sex ones. That’s 14 years ago! The most recent game in the series is 9 years old!

We can talk about the social standards of the times and the progress we’ve made, and we can also talk about the merits of restoring and improving media as it was, or recreating it to more closely reflect the values of today and which or both of them is a worthwhile pursuit, but I don’t think that’s what’s being sincerely argued here.

What we see instead is some protestation that failure to make the exacting changes that they see fit according to their personal ideology is some kind of radically regressive statement, as if it’s a conscious, malicious decision and not either one made in good faith or not at all. This movement has collectively decided that the remaster needs to contain exactly the changes that fit their fleeting whims or the entire thing’s at best a wash and a wasted effort, and in some cases a ‘homophobic’ statement of hatred, or cynically callous laziness. 

Let’s remember; the focus of this argument is the presence of available simulated dating options in a 14 year old game. The arguments posits that some of these alternative options are ones that were cut from the release of the games, notably the first one, and have some or numerous assets that exist in various forms within the game files that with some work can be accessed in the game with user-made modifications. Some of this is true; though much of it is exaggerated or misconstrued in terms of its scope or viability.

Many of these people just assume that this cut content that someone else has restored in a mod somewhere is just some sort of simple toggle done in moments without effort, ignoring the work those modders did on their own time and money to introduce those features. 

Even if we just hand wave any standards of quality or continuity or polish and integration these mods have, you have to consider the dozens to hundreds of volunteer man hours of labor these fans put into many of those mods to make them viable that a company paying it’s employees a fair wage and time to do without overworking has to budget. Which I should mind to you is something also incredibly topically relevant in game dev these days. Adding new content costs money. Restoring old content, still costs money.

Even then, the viability of many of those original assets is at question in itself; the 'ingredients’ used to create the content are not equivalent to the ‘cooked’ content found in the game files, so some of them are difficult to work with or lacking in features or quality. Hell, we know for a fact that half of the god damn development data for ME1 is just fucking gone, which is why the DLC isn’t making an appearance in the remaster at all; it just doesn’t exist anymore and would need to be remade from utter scratch.

Now there’s a dozen reasons undertakings like these would or wouldn’t make their list of priorities for remaster given the other work they are doing re; texture and model uprezzing, gameplay updates, etc. It’s not exactly strange for them to recreate the game largely as it was with a more limited scope of changes. Perhaps the decision was made to preserve some parts of the game largely as it was; with mostly minor cosmetic changes to things like Miranda’s camera angles; things that don’t have much overhead or ripple effect. Perhaps restoring the content was considered, but didn’t make the cut- maybe for the same reasons it didn’t make it into the game in 2007. Maybe for different ones.

Only the people involved know.

Now, would I like to see some of that content restored and improved? Sure! I think it’d have been a great thing if they’d promoted the series as having new or restored content; if they’d promised us such things. But they haven’t, and while it’s one thing to praise taking an initiative like that if they had, I think it’s completely unreasonable to be outraged that they didn’t.

We can celebrate that kind of outstanding and excellent steps forward in inclusivity, but we have to understand that while someone not being ahead of the curve may not be exciting or even disappointing; it is not in itself an act of directed aggression. And treating it like one is a waste of time and energy that we can direct to protesting actual aggression, or celebrating those outstanding steps.

But here’s the major thing that kills me; all those mods they love and praise aren’t going anywhere.

The remaster will come out and unless Bioware is so completely tone deaf and media blind from the past year they pull a WC3, the old versions of the game will all still be available. All those user made mods they cite in these arguments about “how easy” it is to add content to the game will still be there, ready to play as they always were. Some of them might even work or be easily made to work with the new versions!

All of that will still be there! And we’ll have access to a new version of the trilogy that is far more accessible to new players who haven’t yet been exposed to so much of the games content that they are desperate for more of it.

Just look at Mass Effect 1; that game has not aged well, and it was kind of a sloppy mess even when it came out! How many new players can we get to enjoy all the good things the series has to offer with an easily accessed, more enjoyable package to play through the entire series without issue? I’ve done numerous replays of the trilogy through the years, and Mass Effect 1 is always a huge stumbling block. It’s just a pain in the ass, straight out. Don’t you want at least the option to fix that?

And if not, you don’t have to buy it and no harm is done to you! Enjoy your existing version with your mods and familiar features and flaws.

And if you truly, genuinely care so passionately about Bioware improving their record of inclusivity; look instead to the new game that’s coming out and look forward to that instead. Every game in the franchise has been better than the last at this; ME1 cut the same sex relationships, but ME2 had some. ME3 had even more, and then Andromeda had yet even further than that after patching!

How many will the new game have?

Look forward to that and make it clear to bioware you’re looking for that in their games; just.... ease off this ridiculous vitriol in trying to get people to avoid the remaster because it’s not good enough for you. No one needs to have this bullying done to either the developers themselves or the players looking to buy the game for themselves or others. It’s simply not productive.

Especially with this franchise’s sordid history with excessive media outrage and entitlement that’s been absolutely exhausted.

Just... relax. And have some perspective.

[blackswaneuroparedux]

Anonymous asked: I really enjoyed your book review of Sebastian Junger’s Homecoming. Perhaps enjoyment isn’t the right word because it brought home some hard truths. Your book review really helped me understand my older brother better when I think back on how he came home from the war in Afghanistan after serving with the Paras and had medals pinned up the yin yang. It was hard on everyone in the family, especially for him and his wife and young kids. He has found it hard going. Thanks for sharing your own thoughts as a combat veteran from that  war. Even if you’re a toff you don’t come across as a typical Oxbridge poncey Rupert! As you’re a classicist and historian how did ancient soldiers deal with PTSD? Did the Greeks and Roman soldiers even suffer from it like our fighting boys and girls do? Is PTSD just a modern thing?

Part 1 of 2 (see following post)

Because this is subject very close to my heart as a combat veteran I thought very long and hard about the issues you raised. I decided to answer this question in two posts.

This is Part 1 and Part 2 is the next post.

My apologies for the length but this is subject that deserves full careful consideration.

Thank you for your lovely words and I especially find its heart warming if they touched you. I appreciate you for sharing something of the experience your ex-Para brother went through in coming home from war. I have every respect for the Parachute regiment as one of the world’s premier fighting force.

Working alongside them on missions out in Afghanistan I could see their reputation as the ‘brain shit’ of the British Army was well deserved. They’re most uncouth, sweary, and smelliest group of yobbos I’ve ever had the awful misfortune to meet. I’m kidding. The mutual respect and the ribbing went hand in hand. I doff my smurf hat to the cherry berries as ‘propah soldiers’ as they liked to say especially when they cast a glance over at the other elite regiments like HCav and the guards regiments.

Don’t worry I’ve been called a lot worse! But I am grateful you don’t lump me with the other ‘poncey’ officers. Not sure what a female Rupert is called. The fact that I was never accused of being one by any of those I served with is perhaps something I take some measure of pride. There are not as many real toff officers these days compared to the past but there are a fair few Ruperts who are clueless in leading men under their charge. I knew one or two and frankly I’m embarrassed for them and the men under their charge.

I don’t know when the term PTSD was first used in any official way. My older sister who is a doctor - specialising in neurology and all round brain box and is currently working on the front lines in the NHS wards fighting Covid alongside all our amazing NHS nurses and doctors -  took time out one evening to have a discussion with me about these issues. I also talked to one or two other friends in the psychiatric field too. In consensus they agree it was around 1980 when the term PTSD came into usage. Specifically it was the third edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-lll) published by the American Psychiatric Association in 1980 partly because as a result of the ongoing treatment of veterans from the Vietnam War. In the modern mind, PTSD is more associated with the legacy of the Vietnam War disaster.

The importance of whether PTSD affected the ancient Greeks and Romans lies in the larger historical question of to what extent we can apply modern experience to unlock or interpret the past. In the period since PTSD was officially recognised, scholars and psychologists have noted its symptoms in descriptions of the veterans of past conflicts. It has become increasingly common in books and novels as well as articles to assume the direct relevance of present-day psychology to the reactions of those who experienced violent events in the historical past. In popular culture, especially television and film dramas, claims for the historical pedigree of PTSD are now often provided as background to the modern story, without attribution. Indeed we just take it as a given that soldier-warriors in the past suffered the same and in the same way as their modern day counterparts. We are used to the West to map the classical world upon the present but whether we can so easily map the modern world back upon the Greeks and Romans is a doubtful proposition when it comes to discussing PTSD.

Simply put, there is no definitive evidence for the existence of PTSD in the ancient world existed, and relies instead upon the assumption that either the Greeks or Romans, because they were exposed to combat so often, must have suffered psychological trauma.

There are two schools of thought regarding the possibility of PTSD featuring in the Greco-Roman world (and indeed the wider ancient world stretching back into pre-history, myth and legend) – universalism and relativism. Put simply, the universalists argue that we all carry the same ‘wetware’ in our heads, since the human brain probably hasn’t developed in evolutionary terms in the eye blink that is the two thousand years or so since the Greco-Roman Classical era. If we’re subject to PTSD now, they posit, then the Greeks and the Romans must have been equally vulnerable. The relativists, on the other hand, argue that the circumstances under which the individual has received their life conditioning – the experiences which programme the highly individual software running that identical ‘wetware’, if you will – is of critical importance to an individual’s capacity to absorb the undoubted horrors of any battlefield, ancient or modern.

Whichever school one falls down on the side of is that what seems to happen in any serious discussion of the issue of PTSD in the ancient world is to either infer it indirectly from culture (primarily, literature and poetry) or infer it from a comparative historical understanding of ancient warfare. Because the direct evidence is so scant we can only ever infer or deduce but can never be certain. So we can read into it whenever we wish.

In Greek antiquity we have of course The Illiad and the Odyssey as one of the most cited examples when we look at the character traits of both Achilles and Odysseus. From Greek tragedy those who think PTSD can be inferred often point to Sophocles’s Ajax and Euripide’s Heracles. Or they look to Aeschylus and The Oresteia. I personally think this is an over stretch. Greek writers do; the return from war was a revisited theme in tragedy and is the subject of the Odyssey and the Cyclic Nostoi.

The Greeks didn’t leave us much to ponder further. But, with rare exceptions, the works from Graeco-Roman antiquity do not discuss the mental state of those who had fought. There is silence about the interior world of the fighting man at war’s end. So we are led to ponder the question why the silence?

This silence also echoes into the Roman period of literature and history too. Indeed when we turn to the Roman world, descriptions of veterans are rare in the writings that survive from the Roman world and occur most often in fiction.

In the first poem of Ovid’s Heroides, the poet writes about a returned soldier tracing a map upon a table (Ov. Her. 1.31–5):

...upon the tabletop that has been set someone shows the fierce battles, and paints all Troy with a slender line of pure wine:
‘Here the Simois flowed; this is the Sigeian territory,
here stood the lofty palace of old Priam, there the tent of Achilles...’

This scene provides an intimate glimpse of what it must have been like when a veteran returned home and told stories of his campaigns: the memories of battle brought to the meal, the crimson trail of the wine offering a rough outline of the places and battlefields he had experienced. The military characters in poems and plays show a world in which soldiers are ubiquitous, if somewhat annoying to the civilians. Plautus, for instance, in his Miles Gloriosus, portrays an officer boasting about his made-up conquests – the model for the braggart in A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Forum – and Juvenal complains about a centurion who stomps on his sandalled foot in the bustling Roman street.

Despite this silence, compelling works have been written that interweave vivid modern accounts of combat and its aftermath with quotes from ancient prose and poetry. At their best, these comparisons can illuminate both worlds, but at other times the concerns of the present-day author are imposed on the ancient material. But the question remains are such approaches truthful and valid in understanding PTSD in the ancient world?

So if arts and literature don’t really tell us much what about comparative examples drawn from military history itself?

Here again we are in left disappointed.

According to the Greek historian, Herodotus, in 480 B.C., at the Battle of Thermopylae, where King Leonidas and 300 Spartans took on Xerxes I and 100,000-150,000 Persian troops, two of the Spartan soldiers, Aristodemos and another named Eurytos, reported that they were suffering from an “acute inflammation of the eyes,”...Labeled tresantes, meaning “trembler,”. It is that Aristodemos later hung himself in shame. Another Spartan commander was forced to dismiss several of his troops in the Battle of Thermopylae Pass in 480 B.C, “They had no heart for the fight and were unwilling to take their share of the danger.”

Herodotus again in writing about the battle of Marathon in 490 B.C., cites an Athenian warrior who went permanently blind when the soldier standing next to him was killed, although the blinded soldier “was wounded in no part of his body.” Interestingly enough, blindness, deafness, and paralysis, among other conditions, are common forms of “conversion reactions” experienced and well-documented among soldiers today

Outside the fictional world, Roman military history tell us very little.

Appian of Alexandria (c. 95? – c. AD 165) described a legion veteran called Cestius Macedonicus who, when his town was under threat of capture by (the Emperor-to-be) Octavian, set fire to his house and burned himself within it.  Plutarch’s Life of Marius speaks of Caius Marius’ behaviour who, when he found himself under severe stress towards the end of his life, suffering from night terrors, harassing dreams, excessive drinking and flashbacks to previous battles. These examples are just a few instances which seem to demonstrate that PTSD, or culturally similar phenomena, may be as old as warfare itself. But it’s worth stressing it is not definitive, just conjecture.

Of course of accounts of wars and battles were copiously written but not the hard bloody experience of the soldier. Indeed the Roman military man is described almost exclusively as a commander or in battle. Men such as Caesar who experienced war and wrote about it do not to tell us about homecoming.

It seems one of main challenges when we try to see military history through the lens of our definition of PTSD is to first understand the comparative nature of military history and what it is we are comparing ie mistaking apples for oranges.

The origin of military history was tied to the idea that if one understood ancient battle, one might fight and, more importantly, one might lead and strategise more effectively. In essence, much of the training of officers – even in the military handbooks of the Greeks and Romans – was an attempt to keep new commanders from making the same mistakes as the commanders of old. Military history is intended to be a pragmatic enterprise; in pursuit of this pragmatic goal, it has long been the norm to use comparative materials to understand the nature of ancient battle.

The 19th Century French military theorist Ardant du Picq argued for the continuity of human behaviour and assumed that the reactions of men under the threat of lethal force would be identical over the centuries: “Man does not enter battle to fight, but for victory. He does everything that he can to avoid the first and obtain the second....Now, man has a horror of death. In the bravest, a great sense of duty, which they alone are capable of understanding and living up to, is paramount. But the mass always cowers at sight of the phantom, death. Discipline is for the purpose of dominating that horror by a still greater horror, that of punishment or disgrace. But there always comes an instant when natural horror gets an upper hand over discipline, and the fighter flees”

These words offer insight to those of us who have never faced the terror of battle but at the same time assume the universality of how combat is experienced, despite changes in psychological expectations and weaponry, to name but two variables.

Another incentive for scholars and researchers is to turn to comparative material has been the growing awareness of the artificiality of how we describe war. A mere phrase such as ‘flank attack’ does not capture the bloody, grinding human struggle. Roman authors – especially those who had not fought – often wrote generic descriptions of battle. Literary battle can distort and simplify even as it tells, but if the main things are right – who won, who lost, and who the good guys are – the important ‘facts’ are covered. Even if one intends to speak the truth about battle, the assumptions and the normative language used to describe violence will affect the telling. We may note that the battle accounts in poetry become increasingly grisly during the course of the Roman Empire (perhaps owing to the growing popularity of gladiatorial games),while, in Caesar’s Gallic War, the Latin word cruor (blood) never appears and sanguis (another Latin word for blood) only appears in quoted appeals (Caes. B. Gall. 7.20, in the mouth of Vercingetorix, and 7.50, where the centurion M. Petronius urges his men to retreat). The realities of the battlefield are described in anodyne shorthand. In much the same way that the news rarely prints or televises graphic images, Caesar does not use gore, and perhaps for the same reason – to give a sense of reportorial objectivity.

Another element in the interpretive scrum is a given author’s goal in writing an account in the first place: Caesar, for example, was writing about himself, and he may have been producing something akin to a political campaign ad. Caesar makes Caesar look great and there is reason to believe that, if he was not precisely cooking the books, he did give them a little rinse to make him look more pristine. Given the many factors that complicate our ability to ‘unpack’ battle narratives, Philip Sabin has argued that the ambiguity and unreliability of the ancient sources must be supplemented by looking at the “form of the overall characteristics of Roman infantry in mortal combat”. Again the modern is used to illuminate that which is obscured by written accounts and the “the enduring psychological strains” are merely unconsciously assumed.

These legitimate uses of comparative materials have led to a sort of creep: because military historians have used observations of how men react to combat stress during battle to indicate continuity of behaviour through time, there appears to be a consequent expectation that men will also react identically after battle. This creep became a lusty stride with modern books written about the ancient world and PTSD.

After I finished my tour in Afghanistan I read many books recommended to me by family and friends as well as comrades. One of these books is well known in military circles - at least amongst the thinking officer class - as an iconic work of marrying the ancient world and the modern experience of war. I read it and I was touched deeply by this brilliant therapeutic book. It was only months later I began to re-think whether it was a true account of PTSD in the ancient world.

This insightful book is called Achilles in Vietnam by Jonathan Shay. Shay is psychiatrist in Boston, USA. He began reading The Iliad with Vietnam veterans whom he was treating. Achilles in Vietnam, is a deeply humane work and is very much concerned with promoting policies that he hoped would help diminish the frequency of post-traumatic stress. His goal was not to explain ancient poetry but to use it therapeutically by linking his patients’ pain to that of the Iliad’s great hero. His book offers a conduit between the reader and the experiences of the men that Shay counsels. In the introduction to this work he makes a nod to Homerists while also asserting the primacy of his own reading:

“I shall present the Iliad as the tragedy of Achilles. I will not glorify Vietnam combat veterans by linking them to a prestigious ‘classic’ nor attempt to justify study of the Iliad by making it sexy, exciting, modern or ‘relevant’. I respect the work of classical scholars and could not have done my work without them. Homer’s poem does not mean whatever I want it to mean. However, having honored the boundaries of meaning that scholars have pointed out, I can confidently tell you that my reading of the Iliad as an account of men in war is not a ‘meditation’ that is only tenuously rooted in the text. “

After outlining the major plot points around which he will organise his argument, he notes, “ ‘This is the story of Achilles in the Iliad, not some metaphorical translation of it”.

The trouble was and continues to be is that many in the historical and medical fields began to rush to unfounded conclusions that Shay, on the issue of PTSD in the ancient world, had demonstrated that the psychological realities of western warfare were universal and enduring. More books on similar comparative themes soon emerged and began to enshrine the truth that PTSD was indeed prevalent throughout the ancient world and one could draw comparative lessons from it.

Perhaps one of the most influential books after Shay was by Lawrence Tritle. Tritle, a veteran himself, wrote From Melos to My Lai. It’s a fascinating book to read and there are parts that certainly resonate with my own experiences and those of others I have known. In the book Tritle drew a direct parallel between the experiences of the ancient Greeks and those of modern veterans. For instance, Xenophon, in his military autobiography, presents a brief eulogy for one of his fallen commanders, Clearchus. Xenophon writes that Clearchus was ‘polemikos kai philopolemos eschatos’ (Xen. An. 2.6) – ‘warlike and a lover of war to the highest degree’.

Tritle comments:

“The question that arises is why men like Clearchus and his counterparts in Vietnam and the Western Front became so entranced with violence. The answer is to be found in the natural ‘high’ that violence induces in those exposed to it, and in the PTSD that follows this exposure. Such a modern interpretation in Clearchus’ case might seem forced, but there seems little reason to doubt that Xenophon in fact provides us with the first known historical case of PTSD in the western literary tradition.”

Arguably in the West and especially our current modern Western culture is predicated at baulking at the notion of being ‘war lovers” as immoral. But such an interpretation speaks more of our modern Christianised ambivalence towards war; to the Spartans and Athenians the term would not have had a negative connotation. ‘Philopolemos’ is, in fact, a compliment, and the list of Clearchus’ military exploits functions as a eulogy. There are points where his analysis does not adequately address the divergences between ancient and modern experiences.

For all the talk of our Western culture being rooted in Ancient Greece and Rome we are not shaped by the same ethics. Our modern ethics and our moral code is Christian. There is no such thing as a secular humanist or atheist both owe a debt to Christianity for the way they have come to be; in many respects it’s more accurate to describe such people as Christianised Humanists or Christian Atheists even if they reject the theological tenets of the religious faith because they use Christian morality as the foundation to construct their own. Many forget just how brutal these ancient societies were in every day life to the point there would be little one could find recognisable within our own modern lives.

Now we come to third point I wish to make in determining where the Greeks or Romans actually experienced PTSD. This is to do with the little understood nature of PTSD itself. As much as we know about PTSD there is still much more we don’t know. Indeed one of the most problematic and complicated issues is the continued disagreement around the diagnosis and specific triggers of the disorder which remain little understood. We have to admit there are competing theories about what causes PTSD but, in terms of experiences that make it manifest, there are essentially three possible triggers: witnessing horrific events and/or being in mortal danger and/or the act of killing – especially close kills where the reality of one’s responsibility cannot be doubted. The last of these was strongly argued in another scholarly book by D. Grossman, On Killing, the Psychological Cost of Learning to Kill in War and Society (1995).

Roman soldiers had the potential to experience all of these things. The majority of Roman combat was close combat and permitted no doubt as to the killer. The comparatively short length of the gladius encouraged aggressive fighting. Caesar recounts how his men, facing a shield wall carried by the taller Gauls, leaped up on top of the shields, grabbed the upper edges with one hand, and stabbed downwards into the faces of their opponents (Caes. B. Gall. 1.52). As for mortal danger, Stefan Chrissanthos in his informative book, Warfare in the Ancient World: From the Rise of Uruk to the Fall of Rome, 3500BC-476AD, puts it this way: “For Roman soldiers, though the weapons were more primitive, the terrors and risks of combat were just as real. They had to face javelins, stones, spears, arrows, swords, cavalry charges, and maybe worst of all, the threat of being trampled by war elephants.”

Such terrors are regularly attested. During his campaign in North Africa, Caesar, noting his men’s fear, procured a number of elephants to familiarise his troops with how best to kill the beasts (Caes. B. Afr.72). It should also be noted that it was not unusual for the reserve line to be made up of veterans because they were better able to watch the combat without losing their nerve. Held in reserve, they had to watch stoically as their comrades were injured and killed, and contemplate the awful fact that they might suffer the same fate. This was not a role for the faint of heart.

However, while the Romans certainly had the raw ingredients for combat trauma, the danger for a Roman legionary was much more localised. Mortars could not be lobbed into the Green Zone, suicide bombers did not walk into the market, and garbage piled on the street did not hide powerful explosives. The danger for a Roman soldier was largely circumscribed by his moments on the field of battle, and even here, if he was with the victorious side, the casualties were likely to be light: at Gergovia, a disaster by Caesar’s standards, he lost nearly seven hundred men (Caes. B. Gall. 7.51). In his victory over Pompey the Great at Pharsalus, his casualties numbered only two hundred (Caes. B. Civ. 3.99).

So we are left with the disturbing question: were the stressors really the same?

This is the part where I also defer to my eldest sister as a doctor and surgeon specialising in neurology and just so much smarter than myself.

My eldest sister holds the view in talking to her own American medical peers that despite  similar experiences in Afghanistan and Iraq, British soldiers on average report better mental health than US soldiers.

My sister pointed out to research study done by Kings College London way back around 2015 or so that analysed 34 studies produced over a 15-year period (up to 2015) and found that overall there has been no increase in mental health issues among British personnel - with the exception of high rates of alcohol abuse among soldiers. The study was in part inspired the “significant mental health morbidity” among U.S. soldiers and reports that factors such as age and the quality of mental health programs contribute to the difference between the two nation’s servicemen and women.

She pointed out that these same studies showed that post-traumatic stress disorder afflicts roughly 2 to 5% of non-combat U.K. soldiers returning from deployment, while 7% of combat troops report PTSD. According to a General Health Questionnaire, an estimated 16 to 20% of U.K. soldiers have reported symptoms of common mental disorders, similar to the rates of the general U.K. population. In comparison, studies around the same time in 2014 showed U.S. soldiers experience PTSD at rates of 21 to 29%. The U.S. Department of Veteran Affairs estimated PTSD afflicted 11% of veterans returning from Afghanistan and 20% returning from Iraq. Major depression was reported by 14% of major soldiers according to another study commissioned by RAND corporation; roughly 7% of the general U.S. population reports similar symptoms.

It’s always tough comparing rates between countries and is not a reflection of the quality of the fighting soldier. But one finding that consistently and stubbornly refuses to go away is that over the past 20 years reported mental health problems tend to be higher among service personnel and veterans of the USA compared with the UK, Canada, Germany and Denmark.

However my sister strongly cautioned against making hasty judgements. And there could be many variable factors at play. One explanation is that American soldiers are more likely than their British counterparts to be from the reserve forces. Empirical studies showed reservists from both America and British troops were more likely to experience mental illness post-deployment. It was also worth pointing out that American soldiers also tended to be younger - being younger and inexperienced as well as untested on the battlefield, service personnel would naturally run the risk of greater and be more vulnerable to mental illness.

In contrast, the elite forces of the British army, such as your brother’s Parachute Regiment or the Royal Marines, were found to be the least affected by mental illness. It was found that in spite of elite forces experiencing some of the toughest fighting conditions, they tended to enjoy better mental health than non-elite troops. The more elite a unit is or more professional then you find that troops tend to enjoy a very deep bonds of camaraderie. As such the social cohesion of these fighting forces provides a psychological protective buffer. Not for all, but for many.

More intriguing are new avenues of discovery that might go a long way to actually understanding one of the root causes of PTSD. According to my sister, recent research carried out in the US and Europe and published in such prestigious medical journals as the New England Journal of Medicine (US) and the Lancet (UK), seems to establish a causal link between concussive injury and PTSD. 

One recent study looked at US soldiers that concerned itself with the effects of concussive injuries upon troops after their return from active duty during the war in Iraq.

Of the majority of soldiers who suffered no combat injuries of any sort, 9.1 per cent exhibited symptoms consistent with PTSD. This allows a baseline for susceptibility of roughly 10% of the population. A slightly higher number (16.2%)  of those who were injured in some way, but suffered no concussion, also experienced symptoms. As soon as concussive injuries were involved, however, the rates of PTSD climbed dramatically.

Although only 4.9% of the troops suffered concussions that resulted in complete loss of consciousness, 43.9% of these soldiers noted on their questionnaires that they were experiencing a range of PTSD symptoms. Of the 10.3% of the unit who suffered concussion resulting in confusion but retained consciousness, more than a quarter (27.3%) suffered symptoms. This suggests a high correlation between head trauma and the occurrence of subsequent psychological problems. The authors of the study note that ‘concern has been emerging about the possible long term effect of mild traumatic brain injury or concussion...as a result of deployment related head injuries, particularly those resulting from proximity to blast explosions’

Although these results are preliminary, if confirmed they have profound implications for anyone trying to understand the nature of warfare in the ancient world, especially the Western world. 

So why does it matter?

In Roman warfare, wounds were most often inflicted by edged weapons. Romans did of course experience head trauma, but the incidence of concussive injuries would have been limited both by the types of weapons they faced and by the use of helmets. Indeed the efficacy and importance of headgear for example can be deduced from the death of the Epirrote general Pyrrhus from a roof tile during the sack of Argos. It is likely that the Romans designed their helmets with an eye to blunting the force of the blows they most often encountered. Connolly has argued that helmet design in the Republican period suggests a crouching fighting stance (see P. Connolly, ‘The Roman Fighting Technique Deduced from Armour and Weaponry’, Roman Frontier Studies (1989). However my own view is that the change in helmet design may signal instead a shift in the role of troops from performing assaults on towns and fortifications when the empire was expanding (and the blows would more often rain from above) to the defence and guarding of the frontiers.

While the evidence is clear that concussion is not the only risk factor for PTSD, it is so strongly correlated that it suggests that the incidence of PTSD may have risen sharply with the arrival of modern warfare and the technology of gunpowder, shells, and plastic explosives. Indeed, accounts of shell shock from the First World War are common, and it was in the wake of that war that those observing veterans suspected that neurological damage was being caused by exploding shells.

For soldiers of the Second World War and down to our modern day, an artillery barrage is like an invention of hell.

As one American put it in his memoirs of fighting the Japanese at Peleiu and Okinawa, “I developed a passionate hatred for shells. To be killed by a bullet seemed so clean and surgical but shells would not only tear and rip the body, they tortured one’s mind almost beyond the brink of sanity. After each shell I was wrung out, limp and exhausted. During prolonged shelling, I often had to restrain myself and fight back a wild inexorable urge to scream, to sob, and to cry. As Peleliu dragged on, I feared that if I ever lost control of myself under shell fire my mind would be shattered. To be under heavy shell fire was to me by far the most terrifying of combat experiences. Each time it left me feeling more forlorn and helpless, more fatalistic, and with less confidence that I could escape the dreadful law of averages that inexorably reduced our numbers. Fear is many-faceted and has many subtle nuances, but the terror and desperation endured under heavy shelling are by far the most unbearable” (see E.B. Sledge, With the Old Breed at Peleiu and Okinanwa, 2007).

The psychological effect of shelling seems to result from the combined effect of awaiting injury while at the same time having no power to combat it.

There is another aspect that I alluded to above which is the psychological and societal conditioning of the Roman soldier. In other words a Roman male’s social and cultural expectations of his place in the world. Feelings of helplessness and fatalism were probably a less alien experience for most Romans – even those in the upper classes. In general, the Romans inhabited a world that was significantly more brutal and uncertain than our own.

This another way of saying that the Roman and 21st century combat are very different in a variety of ways that subject the modern soldier to a good deal more stress than the legionary was ever likely to suffer. And the Roman’s societal preparation – his life before the battle – was far more robust than that we enjoy today.

Take infant mortality. In the modern developed world, our infant mortality rates are about ten per thousand. In Rome, it is estimated that this number was three hundred per thousand. Three-tenths of infants would die within the first year, and an additional fifth would not make it to the age of ten - 50% of children would not survive childhood. Anecdotal evidence supports these statistics: Cornelia, the mother of the Gracchi, gave birth to twelve children between 163 bc and 152 bc; all twelve survived their father’s death in 152 bc, but only three survived to adulthood. Marcus Aurelius and his wife, Faustina, had at least twelve children but only the future emperor Commodus survived. 


Then look at how that child grows up. The typical Roman child would be raised in a society that readily accepted ultra-violent arena entertainment, mob justice, frequent and bloody warfare as a fact of life. This was reinforced by religious and societal encouragement to see war as natural and beneficial, open butchering of food animals, a total lack of support structures for the poor and less able.

Compared to the legionary our modern soldier has been protected from such realities to a greater degree than at any other point in history, and will thus be far less well prepared for the horror of a warfare that contains far more stress factors than for a man who might fight a handful of battles in his military career, with long periods of relative calm in between, state of war notwithstanding. Modern special and elite forces training often emphasises the brutalisation and ‘rebuilding’ of the recruit in readiness for this step into darkness, but it seems likely that no such conditioning would have been needed two thousand years ago.

I would argue that we experience war very differently from the way the Romans did. Our modern identity is defined far more by our Western Christian heritage than our Western Classical roots. They are in fact world apart when it comes to ethics and morality. Consider the fact that when we talk of war and killing today we often do so through conflict between our civilian moral codes – which offer the strict injunction not to do violence to other human beings – and wartime, when men are commanded to violate such prohibitions. It is a terrible thing to try to navigate ‘Thou shalt not kill’ and the necessity of taking a life in combat.

It is sometimes the case that the qualities that make the best soldier do not make the best civilian, a point amply attested in Greek poetry by heroes such as Heracles and Odysseus.

The Romans, for their part, celebrated heroes such as Cincinnatus, who could command effectively and then leave behind the power he wielded to return to his humble plough. It is important, however, when evaluating combat and its effects in the ancient world, that we do not read our ambivalence about violence onto the Romans. They inhabited an empire whose prosperity was quite openly tied to conquest.

As M. Zimmerman writes in his academic article, “Violence in Late Antiquity Reconsidered’ (2007), “The pain of the other, seen on the distorted faces of public and private monuments, or heard in the screams of criminals in the amphitheatre, reassured Romans of their own place in the world. Violence was a pervasive presence in the public space; indeed, it was an important basis for its existence, pertaining as it did not only to victories over external enemies but also to the internal order of the state.”

Violence then was both the means and the expression of Roman power. The Roman soldier was its instrument. The Roman warrior then would have brought a different perspective to lethal violence, and would have had a far more restricted moral circle to his modern counterpart – his friends and family, clan, patron and clients, as opposed to millions of fellow citizens via the internet and social media.

Part II follows next post

[mediaevalmusereads]

A Duke, the Lady, and a Baby. By Vanessa Riley. New York: Zebra, 2020.

Rating: 2/5 stars

Genre: historical romance

Part of a Series? Yes, Rogues and Remarkable Women #1

Summary:   When headstrong West Indian heiress Patience Jordan questioned her English husband's mysterious suicide, she lost everything: her newborn son, Lionel, her fortune—and her freedom. Falsely imprisoned, she risks her life to be near her child—until The Widow's Grace gets her hired as her own son’s nanny. But working for his unsuspecting new guardian, Busick Strathmore, Duke of Repington, has perils of its own. Especially when Patience discovers his military strictness belies an ex-rake of unswerving honor—and unexpected passion . . . A wounded military hero, Busick is determined to resolve his dead cousin’s dangerous financial dealings for Lionel’s sake. But his investigation is a minor skirmish compared to dealing with the forthright, courageous, and alluring Patience. Somehow, she's breaking his rules, and sweeping past his defenses. Soon, between formidable enemies and obstacles, they form a fragile trust—but will it be enough to save the future they long to dare together?

***Full review under the cut.***

Content Warnings: racism, blood, violence, allusions to suicide, imprisonment, and non-voluntary institutionalization

Overview: I first learned of Vanessa Riley while reading an article about women of color and historical romance, so when I finished a rather confusing (and depressing?) read, I decided to see which of Riley’s books my library had on offer. This novel originally caught my eye because of the marketing: a multi-cultural regency romance? Seems like just the thing I’m looking for! Unfortunately, the writing style just didn’t gel with me, so for that reason, I can’t give this book more than 2 stars.

Writing: While I can respect the easy-to-digest prose style of most romances, Riley’s style didn’t work for me for a number of reasons. First, I found the use of the first person jarring. If you know me, then you’ll know that first person narration feels unnatural to me (unless the book is self-conscious about the way perspective is being used). But I also found the first person strange because Riley’s book alternates between Patience’s POV (which is in first person) and Busick’s POV (which is in third person). While the shift in POV was a nice delineation between the two characters’ perspectives, I ultimately had some trouble losing myself in the story because there was such a marked shift. I found myself preferring Busick’s chapters over Patience’s because I found it easier to let the prose just kind of wash over me.

Riley’s prose style is also a bit too reliant on dialogue and rhetorical questions for my taste. A large portion of this book involves characters talking to one another, which would be fine except I felt like Riley used dialogue in order to tell readers things rather than show them. The dialogue would repeat certain ideas or events over and over again, and the flow of the conversations didn’t feel natural, as topics would change abruptly or characters would speak in ways that didn’t feel genuine. I did like moments when Patience and Busick would have a little tit-for-tat; Riley is strongest when writing Patience's witty comebacks to Busick’s insistence on military order.

But because there was so much dialogue, there wasn’t much room for anything else, and I felt like Riley wasn’t quite sure of how to create suspense without dialogue. As a result, there are a lot of rhetorical questions; “Was she a spy?” “Did he have some secret in his past?” and the like. I feel like these types of questions popped up every other page, and part of the reason they were relied on so much may have been because Riley had a tendency to tell rather than show. Riley would point blank tell us what her characters were thinking or feeling, as well as what actions they were taking, and as a result, the narrative (and characters) felt flat.

Structurally, I also think the book could have used some tweaking. Early on, I felt like Riley was using a lot of expositional dialogue to dump a lot of info on the reader, and Patience’s internal monologue would make allusions to characters or events in ways that felt awkward and/or not relevant in the moment. I even had some trouble determining what exactly was going on at first because the book starts out with an exciting scene, and the circumstances that created that scene were unclear (unless you read the book summary first). To help with this, it would have been beneficial to get some kind of prologue, and if Riley didn’t want a prologue that depicts Patience being separated from her son or being victimized by the antagonist, then maybe we can see her escaping Bedlam or joining the Widow’s Grace - anything to give the book the space to establish a setting.

Plot: This book primarily follows our heroine, Patience Jordan, as she tries to regain custody of her son, Lionel. Following her husband, Colin’s, suicide, his uncle Markham seized control of their estate at Hamlin and claimed guardianship over Lionel. The reason? To gain access to Patience’s father’s money. To cover up the truth, Markham had Patience committed to Bedlam, so now, Patience must find evidence that Markham fabricated this insidious plot - evidence that she thinks is contained in some legal documents hidden within the family home.

However, Lionel’s legal guardian is not Markham, but Busick Strathmore, Colin’s cousin. Wanting to do right by his family, Busick seizes control of Hamlin and establishes himself as Lionel’s adoptive father. Not sure if Busick can be trusted, Patience gets herself hired as a wet nurse for Lionel, and uses her knowledge of the house to look for the legal documents that will prove Markham’s guilt, thus preventing her from being separated from Lionel again.

On paper, this plot looked really intriguing, but in practice, not a whole lot happened. Most of our time is spent reading the dialogue between Patience and various other characters, and we don’t actually get to see much of her snooping around, risking getting caught, and so on. Events didn’t seem to build on one another, so I mostly felt like I was getting character snapshots rather than an actual narrative.

There’s also something of a side plot where a mysterious “ghost” causes some minor trouble around the house. Personally, I think this plot could have been more centralized; if Riley had gone full Gothic romance (I’m thinking Jane Eyre because Jane gets hired to care for a child and Thornfield is spooky), I think this book would have been a delight. But the existing tone is a little too light, so it didn’t quite achieve the desired effect.

I also think that the whole Widow’s Grace stuff removed a lot of agency from Patience. While I liked that Patience had friends - especially friends in high places that could wield social influence to help her - having an organized, underground band of women was a little much for me. I would have preferred to see Patience concoct plans and discover information on her own, rather than having the Widow’s Grace act as the architect.

Characters: Patience, our heroine, is fairly likeable in that she’s brave, determined, and fiercely loyal to the people she cares about. I really enjoyed following her as she tried to search for her legal papers, outsmart Busick, and bring her companions along for the ride. I also liked that she had a lot of complex emotions surrounding her husband’s death; while the marriage wasn’t happy (and she has a lot of feelings about being treated as an Other), she also feels guilty about potentially contributing to her husband’s depression and wonders what she is going to tell her son about his father. I liked seeing her try to work through all these emotions, all while remaining focused on her goals.

Busick, our hero, is also fairly complex, but my appreciation for his complexity is dampened by some of the cheesiness that surrounds his military outlook on life. Busick is a former soldier who is working through his feelings about being injured in battle. Two years before the story begins, Busick loses his leg and must either use a prosthetic or a wheelchair, and he has a lot of issues with the perceptions surrounding his disability. As a result, he tries to hide the fact that he’s missing a leg; he never uses his wheelchair (except when alone) and plays it off like his leg just isn’t healing right. This kind of internalized ableism could have been really interesting to read about, especially since there was an opportunity for Busick to learn more about his value as something other than a soldier. However, Busick’s desperate desire to be useful to the war effort came off as fairly ridiculous; not only does he bring soldiers into his home and conduct drills in his yard (wouldn’t that be done at a camp or base?) but he tries to put Lionel on a strict military-style schedule and requires people to witness him as he rides a horse around the lawn (to prove his strength?). His past as a notorious rake isn’t really utilized effectively either; while we get allusions to his amorous activities, I didn’t really see how it was relevant. Did the military give him more discipline and now he’s reformed? Does he find himself slipping back into his old ways now that he can no longer fight on the battlefield? How does this situation with Patience and Lionel challenge all that? I think I would have liked to see Busick grow a little more, maybe by having him use his guardianship of Hamlin and Lionel as a way to “prove” that he’s changed from rake to responsible, disciplined adult (and his disability threatens that by making him seem incapable, so he has to deal with that as well). And while there were some hints at those kinds of things, they really weren’t central to his story.

Side characters were fairly enjoyable in that they had sweet relationships with the heroine or hero. I particularly enjoyed the relationship Patience had with Jemina - her fellow inmate at Bedlam who suffers from amnesia. I appreciated that Riley didn’t make Jemina seem “crazy,” but instead, she was a capable woman who demonstrates genuine affection and concern for her friend. I also liked that Busick had a similar support in Gantry, a viscount who is helping Busick with Hamlin (and with self-acceptance?) while also struggling with his own family issues. Lady Shrewsbury, the head of the Widow’s Grace, was interesting for the role she played in using her social power to get Patience into Hamlin, but otherwise, I didn’t really like the idea of the Widow’s Grace (because it removes some agency that could have been given to Patience instead).

Markham, our antagonist, is barely present, so I don’t really have many thoughts on him. While his actions were sneaky and abhorrent, and I appreciated that Riley didn’t use him to showcase a bunch of on-page misery, I also thought he was underutilized.

Romance: I hate to say it, but I think Patience and Busick lacked chemistry. I couldn’t quite see how each character enriched each other’s emotional lives; Patience seemed to like Busick because he was fatherly towards Lionel and because he was kind, while Busick seemed to like Patience because she was pretty and defiant. I wish Riley had done a little more to make them feel made for one another; maybe Patience challenges Busick’s rigid outlook on life and shows him that he has value beyond just being a soldier. Maybe Busick shows Patience that she matters as a person - something that was lacking in her marriage to Colin - or that she doesn’t have to take on all her burdens herself. There were hints of some of these things, but because of the writing style, I thought we were told rather than shown that the two characters had feelings for one another.

I also think the romance lacked heat and longing. While not every romance has to be sexy and steamy, I do think that there should be some element of longing that plays out in how the characters interact physically. One place where Riley actually does this pretty well is when Patience discusses how well she works with Busick while taking care of Lionel at night - the two hand him over to one another and move around the room as if doing a “dance,” and they brush against one another and smell each other’s scent. But other than that, it felt like I was smacked in the face with statements like “I noticed his mouth and wondered what it would be like to kiss it” or “Didn’t you notice? He follows you with his eyes!” I personally like these physical moments to be a little more subtle and for them to build on one another without the author having to spell out what they mean for me.

TL;DR: A Duke, the Lady, and a Baby has an intriguing premise and good characters, but ultimately lacks a strong plot, gripping prose style, or steamy romantic chemistry. Most of what holds this book back is the overuse of dialogue and rhetorical questions to create suspense, as well as the tendency to tell not show. While I would love to rate this book higher, the prose just isn’t there.

[jadelotusflower]

April 2021 Roundup

Welp - a few days late on this, but I’ve had a busy week, including finding a blue-tongue lizard in my house. I have no idea how or why the poor thing got in or where it thought it was going, but it gave me quite the shock. After some trial and error I was able to herd it into a box and release it in the backyard, where I suspect it’s made a home in my compost bin.

Other than that, this month I was lucky enough to live see my first live musical in over a year - The Wedding Singer. I love the movie and have listened to songs from the Broadway cast album, but this is the first time a professional production has been staged here. It was enormously fun, with an exuberant cast and tongue firmly in cheek. It was so nice to be back in a theatre (with social distanced seating) after everything was cancelled last year.

Reading

David Copperfield (Charles Dickens) - I’ve never really read much Dickens outside of A Christmas Carol, but I enjoyed the Iannucci film so much last year I decided to go back to the source material. I was surprised at how much that adaptation retained from a novel so large, at least in terms of important plot points, but then there’s a great deal of characters sitting in rooms and talking about things only tangentially related to the plot. It was an enjoyable read and of course Dickens is a witty writer, even if I found some parts a bit tedious - anytime Mr Micawber or Mr Peggotty shows up my eyes tended to glaze over. But the novel is dense with so many intersecting characters and plots that  I can certainly see why it’s been well read and much studied. 

A Column of Fire (Ken Follett) - the last (chronologically) novel of the Kingsbridge series, this time set in the 16th Century amid the Catholic/Protestant conflicts in England and France, but also touching on Spain, Switzerland, the Netherlands - even the Caribbean. Follett’s favourite tropes are all here; lovers kept apart by circumstance, despicable villains with too much pov page time, rape as a plot device, the apathy/self serving nature of kings and queens. Ned Willard is a typical Follett male (self insert) hero, and as usual it’s the female characters who are far more interesting - Margery the devout but conflicted English Catholic, and Sylvie the enterprising and determined French Protestant. Both are the object of Ned’s affection, which I suppose is telling, and Follett desperately needs to learn how to write some other kind of romantic plot.

Of course it packs in the historical events for them to witness and/or participate in, from the end of Mary I’s reign all the way to the Gunpowder Plot - but it does feel that the latter is rushed in at the end and the novel probably could have ended at the Armada. While I did enjoy the broadened scope, a part of me missed the locality of Kingsbridge as a microcosm of England - this book was more concerned with the macro perspective where the other books (particularly Pillars) was effective in telling the story through Kingsbridge-as-a-character. On the other hand, I did enjoy the France side of the plot (mostly for Sylvie) that covered the machinations of the Guise family, the struggles of French Protestants, and events such as the St Bartholomew’s Day massacre (a rather harrowing section).

Watching

Shadow and Bone (season 1) - I went into this show completely cold (other than the trailer and general excitement on my dash), and really enjoyed it. Alina was a bit generic spunky heroine at first, but she grew on me by the end although I can’t say I really cared much about any of the romantic plots (and want to stay faaaaar away from the discourse). It was the Crows were the real draw for me, and while I was aware that their material came from later books, for me (not knowing any better) their integration into the Grisha plot was seamless. 

While I was impressed by the worldbuilding I could have done with a bit more exposition - I still don’t know who the Shu and Suli are, where Fjerda is in relation to Ravka and what the basis of the conflict between them is. On the other hand, I can appreciate they resisted the urge to do too much “as you know”-ing and assume the rest of the world will be revealed as it becomes relevant. Still, I think if shows can learn one thing from Game of Thrones, it’s the value of finding some way of presenting a map to the audience to give some geographic perspective - a few times I did find myself needing to think about which side of the Fold the characters were on at any given time, and have no idea where Nina and Matthias were meant to be at the end. But then I’m the person who constantly flips to consult the map at the front of a book while reading - I need to see it.

I’ll add my disappointment to the RH fans at the chance of seeing Lucy Griffiths again, only for her role as Luda to be a brief flashback that saw her promptly stabbed to death (her entire demo reel could be made up of death scenes at this point). It’s a real shame, because she is perfect for a series like this (in a role like Genya perhaps), and it seems like such a waste.

Mighty Ducks: Game Changers (episodes 1-6) - The new strategy for family entertainment: taking a property that was popular with young Gen X-ers and/or Elder Millennials in their childhoods, and rebooting/reviving it as a show they can now watch with their own kids. The premise is simple enough - the Ducks are now a corporate juggernaut of the live long enough to see yourself become the villain variety, cue a new rag tag underdog hockey team, training at the run down ice rink owned by a disillusioned Gordon Bombay.

It’s mildly entertaining, the child actors are all very good and I’m always here for Emilio Estevez, although I can do without the inevitable romance with Lauren Graham (the team’s coach and mother of one of the kids). But the most recent episode, where a bunch of the og Ducks (sans Charlie) appear, coupled with liberal use of the Ducks Theme, hit me right in the childhood. They got me! They got me with the nostalgia! Because I am a sucker.

The Handmaid’s Tale (season 4, episodes 1-3) - I was very frustrated with this show last season, because it seemed more concerned with endless extreme close ups of Elizabeth Moss emoting rather than telling a coherent story. June is a character with the thickest plot armour I’ve ever seen, while almost every person she comes into contact with meets a bitter end. Rather than the slow domino effect to topple the regime depicted in the original novel and its sequel The Testaments, the show is moving at a breakneck pace, while somehow little actually happens except rinse repeat torture/endurance porn.

More interesting is the Canada side of the story with Moira and Emily (the excellent Samira Wiley and Alexis Bledel), and the difficulties for refugees adapting to life outside of Gilead, which wasn’t explored in either novel and could use more focus in the show. Ann Dowd is absolutely compelling as Aunt Lydia, and a far more interesting villain than the Waterfords (whose scenes have become interminable) yet funnily enough doesn’t get the devoted close-ups, long speeches, or writer interest they do. I’m still watching, if only to see if the show follows her story in The Testaments or not. 

Writing

Not a very productive month on the writing front at all, I can’t even bring myself to look at the meagre word counts, so I’m going to let them roll over into May.

[redisaid]

Red’s big gay Sylvaina fic rec post

Okay fine. I’ll do it. We’ll leave Valadrin and other pairings off for now. This will just be for Sylvaina as the main pairing. Maybe I’ll do another list later, but so few people write Valadrin that you can pretty much just go into the tag on Ao3 and use that as your rec list.

GIANT DISCLAIMER NOTE TIME: The fics listed below are just my personal favorites. Beauty exists in the eye of the beholder. Preference does not equal quality, and my preferences may not align with yours. If you don’t see your fic or your favorite fic here, it’s not because of some deep thing. I either just haven’t read it, or it just wasn’t my favorite for reasons that are mine and mine only. I highly encourage anyone who wants to see other works represented in a rec post to make their own. Everyone’s preferences and enjoyment deserve the same amount of love and attention. Also, remember that some of you literally asked for this.

Also, most of these recs are NSFW. You have been warned. Just pretty much assume they all are some degree of smutty.

Also, also, I feel like I’m forgetting a lot of older fics and I’m sorry about that. I tried to go through to remind myself, but hey, it’s been two years, and there is so much in the tag now.

We’re gonna sort this by moods/content/moods about the content, rather than anything logical. Because let’s be honest with ourselves, that’s the best way to decide what you feel like reading.

Canon is wrong and bad and I hate it:

Lacrymosa by UninspiredPoet: Complete. This is the ultimate fixit fic for Sylvaina, and goes sorely unappreciated sometimes. Emotionally devastating, yet ultimately redeeming. If you hate how canon has gone, you'll love this. Has a sequel and tons of side fics, if you enjoy the universe and want more!

Timeless by JE_Talveran: Currently ongoing. An interesting take on a non-Shadowlands end to BFA, with Light versus Void themes. And great world building and magic nerdery. And somehow, it's a Beauty and the Beast AU??? Also, this fic was the OG baby undead bat friend fic.

Windrunner by UninspiredPoet: Complete. Let's just forget everything that happened from like, halfway through the Third War and start over. Blood elf Sylvanas? Yes please. All Windrunners alive? Super yes. Lord Regent Lireesa? lkjasdfld.

you search the mountain by QuickYorke: Complete. Drust Jaina! Do you want some spooky deer shit mixed in with historical military fiction? Because that's what you just ordered. Want to see Sylvanas get freaked out because something is too spooky for her even? Oh, well, it happens more than once.

Coaxed Not Forced by Kalimdor: Complete. This, at its heart, is an in-universe Tinder AU with Soulmate vibes. Don't ask me why it works, but it does and is incredibly sweet. I am also incredibly weak of Soulmate bullshit, and will pretty much love anything with it.

Slap me with some good old Political Marraige AU:

Ink and Honor by BurgerBurgerBurger: Currently ongoing. More WLW relationships than you can count. A relatively newer fic that has taken the most interesting tidbits that came from this fad and transformed them into a very well-thought out scenario. Special points here for the way we can see the Sylvaina political marriage changing the whole world of Azeroth, and all of those that are wrapped up in making it happen.

Okay, but what about some pre-Third War or no Third War stuff?:

Increments of Longing by QuickYorke: Complete. This is my comfort fic. I re-read it on at least a monthly basis. Do you want to see a perfect depiction of baby mage Jaina in a cool, in-universe AU? Check. Do you like excellent world building? Check. Do you like some mutual pining? Check. This one has it all.

Envelopes of Suspect Origin by vice_vereesa: Currently ongoing. Letter fic!!! Sylvanas being too good Jaina being an indecisive mess that starts trouble for herself. Typical pre-Third War baby idiocy, but I love it. Also plenty of side character fun with lore-relevant folks from this time period.

The Girl Who Escaped Hell. by Katzenjammers: Currently ongoing. I hope this author is okay, because I was loving this fic and hope to see more of it. Jaina gets to single-handedly save Silvermoon during the Third War, but now has to explain how she knew what to do...

Get me away from Azeroth and into some total AUs:

Dive by UninspiredPoet: Currently ongoing. Oof. The feels. Lawyer Jaina/Bartender Sylvanas. This is a cheating fic, but one that analyzes the painful mistakes and decisions that lead the characters there.

Montevallo by UninpsiredPoet: Complete. Southern (US) AU. A deep dive into putting character parallels into an otherwise pretty unexpected environment. It works surprisingly well. Also, Liadrin in cowboy boots...unf.

Table For Two by katofthenorth: Complete. Asshole chef Sylvanas and restaurant manager Jaina. Do you want Sylvanas doing the idiot sandwich meme? Because you're gonna get pretty close to it here. Great use of underloved lore characters in the background. Also, it ends up being sweet and cute.

I'm sad and want some smut:

Reasons by UninspiredPoet: Complete. If you didn't get enough pre-Third War relationship that comes back together after Sylvanas' death, here is some more, now with smutty flashbacks.

I'm not as sad and want some smut:

Quid Pro Quo by UninspiredPoet: Complete. This is technically PM AU too, but I put it here because, well, it's PM AU smut. Some good wives doing wifely things for sure, with very good understanding and sex positivity feels. It also has a follow up fic that's a threesome with a dark ranger, which is fun.

Compromises by JE_Talveran: Complete. The only second person fic ever allowed. Barely smut, but it still belongs here. Some good cracking the ice of the Banshee Queen's heart feels here.

[homdec]

From Functional to Fabulous: Transforming Bunk Beds into Room Focal Points

In an increasingly crowded world with a growing population, living spaces are shrinking. Bunk beds offer a practical solution for those residing in cramped environments where space is at a premium. These beds are ingeniously stacked on top of each other, allowing multiple individuals to share a room without sacrificing comfort. What's more, bunk beds are surprisingly straightforward to assemble, and you don't need to be a DIY expert to set them up. 

What is a bunk bed? 

Bunk beds are a specific type of bed design characterized by two or more beds stacked vertically, effectively creating a compact sleeping arrangement. These beds typically rely on four corner posts for support and are connected by side rails or equipped with a ladder for easy access to the upper bunk. Bunk beds find common use in shared living spaces like dormitories, hostels, and summer camps, where the need arises for multiple individuals to share a single room. Additionally, they are a popular choice in children's bedrooms, offering an enjoyable and practical sleeping solution for siblings or friends.

These beds are typically crafted from either wood or metal and are available in a range of sizes and styles to cater to different requirements and aesthetic preferences. Some bunk beds come with built-in storage options, such as drawers or shelves, helping to make the most of the limited space in smaller rooms. Others adopt a twin-over-full configuration, with a larger bed at the bottom and a smaller one on top, offering versatility in accommodating different sleepers. While bunk beds offer a practical and space-saving solution for shared sleeping areas, it is crucial to use them safely and adhere to the manufacturer's assembly and usage guidelines.

Unique transformation from functionality to interior design 

The journey of bunk beds from mere functional sleeping solutions to integral components of interior design is a captivating transformation that has unfolded over time. 

Historical Functionality: Bunk beds were initially designed with a clear focus on functionality. They were born out of the necessity to maximize the use of available space, especially in settings like military barracks, ships, and tight sleeping quarters. Their primary purpose was to provide a practical way for multiple individuals to sleep efficiently in a confined area.

The Shift Towards Versatility: As time went on, designers and manufacturers began to recognize the potential of bunk beds beyond their utilitarian roots. They realized that these space-saving structures could be adapted to accommodate various design preferences and aesthetics. This shift marked the beginning of the transformation from functional to fashionable.

Aesthetic Diversity: The modern marketplace now offers a wide range of bunk bed designs. You can find options to suit virtually any interior design style, whether it's minimalist, rustic, contemporary, or anything in between. Bunk beds have become an exciting canvas for design innovation. They come in diverse materials, such as wood and metal, and can incorporate elements like decorative headboards and footboards, creating opportunities for personalization and style expression.

Space Maximization and Multifunctionality: Bunk beds continue to excel at maximizing space, making them particularly relevant in today's world, where living spaces are becoming increasingly compact. Moreover, many bunk beds now come equipped with built-in storage solutions, such as drawers, shelves, and even desks, further enhancing their multifunctionality. This aspect is crucial for those seeking to optimize their living spaces.

Safety and Durability: Alongside the shift towards design, there has been a simultaneous focus on safety and durability. Modern bunk beds are engineered to meet stringent safety standards, ensuring that they are not only stylish but also secure for use in various settings.

Customization and Personalization: Bunk beds are no longer one-size-fits-all solutions. They can be tailored to meet individual needs and preferences. This personalization aspect has become a driving force behind their inclusion in interior design. Homeowners can select the size, color, and additional features that align with their vision for a particular room.

Enhancing the Room's Focal Point: Bunk beds are no longer tucked away in the corner of a room but are strategically positioned to draw attention. They can become the focal point around which the rest of the room's design is built. Lighting, decor, and accessories are often used to highlight bunk beds and make them an integral part of the room's aesthetics.

Tips for interior design with bunk beds 

Here are some valuable tips for interior design with bunk beds to help you make the most of these versatile furniture pieces:

Choose the right style: Select bunk beds that align with the overall style of the room. Whether you prefer a modern, rustic, industrial, or classic look, there are bunk bed designs to match your aesthetic.

Consider the Room's Layout: The placement of bunk beds in the room is crucial. Opt for a location that maximizes space and allows for easy movement. Consider the placement of windows, doors, and other furniture when deciding where to position the bunk beds.

Opt for Neutral Colors: If you want your bunk beds to blend seamlessly with the room's decor, choose neutral colors for the bed frames and bedding. Neutrals provide a versatile backdrop, allowing you to add pops of color and accessories as desired.

High-Quality Bedding: Invest in high-quality bedding, including comfortable mattresses and stylish linens. This not only enhances the comfort of the beds but also adds a touch of luxury to the design.

Personalize with Accessories: Use pillows, throws, and cushions to add personality to the bunk beds. These accessories can introduce patterns, textures, and colors that complement the room's theme.

Accent Lighting: Consider installing wall-mounted sconces, pendant lights, or LED strips around the bunk beds to create a cozy and inviting atmosphere. This can also serve a functional purpose for reading or other activities.

Storage Solutions: If space is limited, opt for bunk beds with built-in storage features. Some bunk beds come with drawers, shelves, or even a trundle bed that can be pulled out when needed, offering extra storage space.

Decorate the Ladder or Stairs: If your bunk bed includes a ladder or stairs for access to the upper bunk, use these as an opportunity to enhance the design. Paint them in a complementary color, add decals, or incorporate them into the room's theme.

Create a Cozy Nook: Add curtains or canopies to the bunk beds to create a sense of privacy and coziness. This is particularly appealing for children's rooms, creating a fun and playful sleeping space.

Safety First: Always ensure the bunk beds are assembled and used safely. Follow the manufacturer's instructions for proper setup and regularly inspect the beds to ensure they remain secure. Safety rails are essential, especially for upper bunks.

Flexibility for Growth: In children's rooms, consider bunk beds with a flexible design that can adapt as the children grow. Some bunk beds can be separated into two single beds, offering long-term usability.

Artwork and Decor: Adorn the walls around the bunk beds with artwork and decor that complements the design. This can tie the entire room together and create a cohesive look.

Conclusion 

Bunk beds have transformed from practical space-savers to stylish room focal points. When incorporating them into your interior design, consider these tips: choose the right style, optimize room layout, use neutral colors for a versatile backdrop, personalize with accessories and lighting, maximize storage, customize ladders or stairs, add curtains or canopies for a cozy nook, prioritize safety, and select flexible designs for children's rooms.

[spacenoise]

Essential Steven Universe Episodes

Hello everyone! 

Looking to watch Steven Universe, but not drag yourself through all the episodes? Never fear! I’ve made a list of what I believe to be the most essential episodes of Steven Universe with unnecessary ones labelled as such (and my reasons why). Now here’s some things to keep in mind before looking at the list:

When I say “essential” I mean ones that introduce important elements to the story. New important characters, new powers, episodes that develop the character and plot-relevant episodes fit this category. 

Episodes that develop certain characters will be labeled as “unnecessary” if they don’t contribute enough to the plot or their growth.

There may be some personal bias since I found one or two filler episodes to be enjoyable despite their uselessness to the overall plot but I’ll label them as well so you know.

 Avoid reading ahead. The labels for unnecessary ones may contain SPOILERS so if you care about that kind of stuff: you’ve been warned.

On to the list!

Season 1

1. Gem Glow

2. Laser Light Cannon

3. Cheeseburger Backpack: Steven’s first mission

a. Together Breakfast: shows off gem rooms and a monster but that’s really it.

b. Frybo: introduces PeeDee but he doesn’t ever really do anything so...?

4. Cat Fingers

5. Bubble Buddies

6. Serious Steven

a. Tiger Millionaire: while there is some character development, there isn’t really enough to make it worth watching since most of the episode is focused on wrestling.

7. Steven’s Lion

8. Arcade Mania

9. Giant Woman

10. So Many Birthdays: a peek at how dark this show can get

11. Lars and the Cool Kids

a. Onion Trade: mainly about Onion; if you like his character, feel free to watch but if not I’d avoid it since it ultimately doesn’t mean much.

12. Steven the Sword Fighter

13. Lion 2: The Movie

a. Beach Party: Gems piss off the family that runs the town’s pizza shop and try to make it up to them by inviting them to hang out. Shenanigan ensue, but has no lasting impact on the story.

14. Rose’s Room

15. Coach Steven

a. Joking Victim: develops Sadie and Lars’ relationship; skip if you don’t really care about either

16. Steven and the Stevens

17. Monster Buddies

18. An Indirect Kiss

19. Mirror Gem & Ocean Gem 

a. House Guest: shows why Steven has trouble with his powers, but nothing too important happens other than that; watch if you wanna see more Pearl & Greg interactions

20. Space Race: shows Pearl’s fondness of space; develops her character and background but not necessary; skip if you want

a. Secret Team: if you don’t like episodes about characters making temporary truces I’d avoid this one; not enough character development to make it worthwhile.

b. Island Adventure: another Sadie and Lars episode; Lars opens about his feelings but not much else happens.

21. Keep Beach City Weird: relevant for SU: Future reasons, but if you don’t like Ronaldo skip

22. Fusion Cuisine

a. Garnet’s Universe: contributes nothing, but is a kinda cute episode.

b. Watermelon Steven: introduces a character(s) that is only used a total of three (maybe four?) times; also introduces a power that is rarely ever used when it matters.

23. Lion 3: Straight to Video

24. Alone Together

25. Warp Tour

a. The Test: some good character discussions, but not important overall.

26. Future Vision

27. On the Run

a. Horror Club: if you don’t care for Ronaldo, Sadie or Lars: skip. Even if you care about Lars, skip this one since you kinda get the gist of his character at this point.

b. Winter Forecast: a few nice moments, but ultimately a big “what-if” episode

28. Maximum Capacity

29. Marble Madness

30. Rose’s Scabbard

a. Open Book: a Steven and Connie episode; fun if you like them, but skippable

b. Shirt Club: focuses on one of the Cool Kids but ultimately means nothing

c. Say Uncle: Uncle Grandpa Crossover; some funny moments from the Gems but if you don’t like UG avoid this one.

31. Story for Steven

32. The Message

a. Political Power: addresses certain concerns the Gems have, but nothing important crosses over into the next episode; most about Mayor Dewey anyway

33. The Return

34. Jailbreak

-------------------

Season 2

1. Full Disclosure

a. Joy Ride: Steven messes around with the Cool Kids; there’s a bit here briefly referenced in SU: Future I think, but other than nothing really happens; skip it if you want

b. Love Letters: properly introduces Jamie and shows his character, but he never does anything for the plot. All you need to know if him and Steven are friends.

c. Reformed: introduces Amethyst's new form and shows more of her insecurities but that’s all this episode is really good for.

2. Sworn to the Sword

a. Rising Tides, Crashing Skies: a Ronaldo episode; need I say more?

3. Keeping It Together

4. We Need To Talk

5. Chille Tid

6. Cry for Help

7. Keystone Motel

a. Onion Friend: another Onion episode; addresses how Amethyst feels regarding the current situation, but other than that nothing worthwhile.

b. Historical Friction: Jamie puts on a play and some gem stuff is involved; no action, but tells us about the Gems’ history

8. Friend Ship

a. Nightmare Hospital: mostly about Connie and her mom; some cool scary bits, but skippable.

b. Sadie’s Song: entirely about Sadie and how her mom makes her feel; skip if you don’t care much for Sadie.

9. Catch and Release

10. When It Rains

11. Back to the Barn

a. Too Far: develops Peridot and Amethyst’s relationship, and develops Peridot’s character, but not enough to make this episode necessary

12. The Answer

a. Steven’s Birthday: fun episode, but ultimately contributes nothing

13. It Could’ve Been Great

14. Message Received

a. Log Date 7 15 2: shows how Peridot got to where she is (as a character) and fills in some holes between Catch and Release and Message Received; fun and worth watching but skippable regardless

-------------------

Season 3

1. Super Watermelon Island

2. Gem Drill

3. Same Old World

4. Barn Mates

5. Hit the Diamond

a. Steven Floats: introduces new power but not much else

b. Drop Beat Dad: Explains where Greg gets his money, and I guess if you’re a Sour Cream fan watch this one? Skip if you’re not. 

6. Mr. Greg

7. Too Short To Ride

a. The New Lars: focuses on Lars mostly, but Sadie also shows up at one point; skip if you don’t care about them.

b. Beach City Drift: watch if you like Stevonnie; skip if you don’t really care.

c. Restaurant Wars: pointless fight between the pizza shop family and the fry stand family. I guess if you like food watch this one, but you can skip this one.

d. Kiki’s Pizza Delivery Service: focuses on certain member’s of the pizza family. Skippable, but watch if you like pizza I guess.

8. Monster Reunion

9. Alone at Sea

a. Greg the Babysitter: a “stories of the past” episode where Rose shows up; nothing important really happens though

b. Gem Hunt: a certain character makes a return, but not until the end of the episode; skippable

10. Crack the Whip

a. Steven vs. Amethyst: develops their relationship but skippable overall

11. Bismuth

12. Beta 

13. Earthlings

14. Back to the Moon

15. Bubbled

-------------------

Season 4

a. Kindergarten Kid: Looney Tunes-esque episode; fun but skippable

b. Know Your Fusion: certain fusions return but still skippable

c. Buddy’s Book: shows off more of the Gems’ history and has Rose in it; still skippable despite all this since none of it is super important.

2. Mindful Education

a. Future Boy Zoltron: skippable since it focuses on Mr. Smiley and a former colleague; watch if you want to see some fun interactions.

b. Last One Out of Beach City: fun episode and shows some of Pearl’s development, but still skippable.

c. Onion Gang: it’s an Onion episode so: skippable.

d. Gem Harvest: Thanksgiving episode; reveals Steven’s real last name but nothing else important.

3. Three Gems and a Baby

4. Steven’s Dream

5. Adventures in Light Distortion

6. Gem Heist

7. The Zoo

8. That Will Be All

a. The New Crystal Gems: shows us what Connie, Lapis and Peridot did while Steven was in space. Nothing really happens so just skip this one.

9. Storm in the Room

a. Rocknaldo: features Ronaldo once again and is arguably one of the worst episodes. Thankfully, it’s skippable.

b. Tiger Philanthropist: callback to an older episode; doesn’t contribute anything to the current plot

10. Room for Ruby

a. Lion 4: Alternate Ending: goes no where and contributes nothing; reveals possible name for Steven if he was a girl though so...cool I guess? Skip it.

11. Doug Out

a. The Good Lars: develops Lars’ character a little, but not much else

12. Are You My Dad

13. I Am My Mom

-------------------

Season 5

a. Stuck Together: Steven and Lars’ relationship develops further along with Lars’ character; some dramatic moments make it an overall a good episode, but you can skip it if you want.

1. The Trial

2. Off Colors

3. Lars’ Head

a. Dewey Wins: Steven realizes why Connie’s upset with him; saved you from watching Mayor Dewey for almost eleven minutes.

b. Gemcation: another good episode, but skippable regardless.

4. Raising the Barn

a. Back to the Kindergarten: shows how Peridot feels after a certain event, but nothing else really happens.

b. Sadie Killer: Sadie starts a band and that’s it. Skip if you don’t care much for Sadie.

c. Kevin Party: watch for character drama and one resolution, but skip if you can’t stand Kevin.

5. Lars of the Stars

6. Jungle Moon

7. Your Mother and Mine

a. The Big Show: a Sadie’s band episode; skippable

b. Pool Hopping: shows off Garnet’s fears and insecurities but is still skippable

c. Letters to Lars: basically amounts to Dewey finding his place in town after losing his job; nothing else so just skip this one.

8. Can’t Go Back

9. A Single Pale Rose

10. Now We’re Only Falling Apart

a. What’s Your Problem: develops Steven and Amethyst’s relationship further; skip if you want, but it’s a good episode to watch.

11. The Question

12. Made of Honor

13. Reunited

14. Legs From Here To Homeworld

15. Together Alone

a. Escapism: shows how Steven contacts the B-team but overall just feels kind of out of place? Skip if you want.

16. Change Your Mind (four parts; almost an hour long btw)

  -------------------

Watch Steven Universe: The Movie if you plan on watching Steven Universe: Future

 -------------------

Steven Universe: Future

1. Little Homeschool

a. Guidance: skippable since nothing in this episode is mentioned ever again. Smoky Quartz is in it though so watch if you like her.

2. Rose Buds

3. Volleyball

a. Bluebird: introduces Greg’s new look and a new fusion that’s never brought up again.

b. A Very Special Episode: fun episode but contributes nothing to the overall story.

4. Snow Day

a.  Why So Blue: shows other Lapis Lazulis and shows us how far Lapis has really come; watch if you’re a Lapis fan, but skip if you want.

b. Little Graduation: skip if you never really cared too much about any of the human characters since this is mostly about them.

c. Prickly Pair: downer of an episode; no one ever mentions anything that’s said in this episode, but check it out if you wanna see Steven more of Steven’s plant powers!

6. In Dreams

7. Bismuth Casual

8. Together Forever

9. Growing Pains

a. Mr. Universe: Greg’s history is revealed but doesn’t contribute much so skip if you don’t really care about that too much.

10. Fragments

11. Homeworld Bound

12. Everything’s Fine

13. I Am My Monster

14. The Future

And that’s it! I guess let me know if this list was helpful or not, but other than that: I hope you enjoy Steven Universe!

[growing-yet-into-magic]

Introduction to African Religion by John S. Mbiti

I really liked this book! It was a really excellent primer on African religion and spirituality that covers a lot of ground, creating a really fascinating view of how intertwined African daily life and cultural spirituality really is.

Notice how the book is not on African religions, just religion. The focus is more on the overall themes, practices, and shared cultural nuances across the continent instead of honing on in specific cultures’ religions. The underlying characteristics of worship- who, when, where, why, and how, take center stage, as this is meant to serve as an introduction in a university 101 class. The expectation is that you will use the relevant bits in related research on more concrete topics.

It is not recently published. I would not call it outdated, but this version was last updated in the 1991. Its original version is from the seventies. It holds up really well, and the themes are general/universal enough that not much has changed since it was updated, but keep in mind that it focuses more on historical aspects of religion in Africa, and not necessarily how it manifests today.

Either way, this book is easy to read, really informative, and an enjoyable way to break into a new research topic. This book is a great way to begin looking into the topic of African or African-Diasporic religions, as it focuses on the foundations that both are built from. It was a great pick from the library, and I really recommend it.

Blessings! ✨

[rwby-redux]

Deconstruction

Worldbuilding: History

In hindsight, I probably should have called this topic political sciences, or social studies, or the humanities. Literally any of those would’ve been more accurate than simply calling it history. Sort of shot myself in the foot with that one. Oh, well. I guess we’ll just have to make do.

History (as it’s defined by the Redux) is an umbrella term for human geography, economics, legal systems, global affairs, anthropology, civil rights, technology, and resources. Its primary concern is analyzing how all of these studies shaped the actions of people in the past, and the ripple effects that carried those societies into the present. Being an interdisciplinary topic, it’s nearly impossible to talk about any of these studies in isolation without accidentally overlooking crucial details. Anyone who’s ever opened a history textbook knows that with that complexity comes controversy, and RWBY isn’t exempt from that trend. As we’re told by Salem in the show’s debut, modern-day Remnant was forged by that forgotten past, by the omission of the gods and monsters that set things in motion.

It’s often said that history is written by the victors. And if history is indeed a book, then you’ll quickly find that RWBY’s has pages missing.

Let’s start by laying our cards on the table and talking about what facts we do have. RWBY’s canon can be roughly divided into three vague time periods: the era of Humanity v1.0, prior to the gods’ exodus; the era where Salem and Ozma’s first host briefly ruled together, several million years after Humanity v2.0 evolved; and the era characterized by the aftermath of the Great War, about several thousand years after the collapse of Salem’s and Ozma’s apotheotic kingdom. Anything in-between is obfuscated by the show, either accidentally (due to a lack of worldbuilding) or intentionally (as an attempt to make the series “mysterious”).

My first instinct is to start calling bullshit left and right. There is no justification for spoon-feeding your audience crucial lore through a spin-off series, and then waving your hand and saying that the show doesn’t have the time for worldbuilding. If I had to start pointing fingers, I’d lay the blame on the writers for prioritizing animating bloated fight scenes that ate up the episodes’ already-stunted runtime. I say this knowing that some people will balk at the accusation, because there exists a demographic of viewers that does prefer watching the fight sequences with their brains turned off. And I’m not above that. (I could spend an hour raving about the choreography of the fight between Cinder and Neo, or about the coordination of the Ace Operatives in their takedown of the Cryo Gigas. Believe me, I’m not knocking the absurd enjoyment of spectacle fighting.)

My problem is that RWBY’s premise is so deeply-entrenched in rule of cool that it left its worldbuilding malnourished by comparison.

But fine. Let’s, for the moment, give RWBY the benefit of the doubt. What in-world reasons would the series have for its history being believably underdeveloped? (And no, we’re not talking about the erasure of the Maidens and magic. We know that information was deliberately expunged from the annals of history. We’re focusing on the parts of Remnant’s history that deal with ancient cultures, defunct countries, and influential past events.)

The immediate solution that comes to mind is the Creatures of Grimm. As we’re told by numerous sources, the Grimm not only prioritize attacking humans and Faunus, but they discriminately destroy any of their creations. [1]

“With every alternative form of communication that was proposed, there seemed to be the perfect obstacle. The destructive nature of the creatures of Grimm severely limited the reliability of ground-based technologies.” | Source: World of Remnant, Volume 3, Episode 3: “Cross Continental Transmit System.”

This leads to the conclusion that Remnant’s past was physically destroyed, and any traces of it were removed by the Grimm. This would include archeological records—artwork, architecture, books, clothing, jewelry, burial sites, tools, ecofacts, and so on.

The issue I have with this explanation is that it’s not consistent. Throughout the show we see ample evidence of immediate-past and distant-past societies. The remains of Mountain Glenn and Oniyuri still stand, despite the high presence of Grimm at the former (and the presumed presence of Grimm at the latter). Brunswick Farms is relatively intact and provisioned with food and fuel, even though the Apathy are quite literally hanging out under the floorboards. The Emerald Forest even has the derelict ruins of an ancient temple that Ozpin incorporated into the Beacon initiation.

Petroglyphs (parietal stone-carving artwork) of early hominids fighting a Death Stalker. | Source: Volume 1, Episode 7: “The Emerald Forest - Part 2.”

If the Grimm are RWBY’s get-out-of-jail-free card, then they’re certainly not being used to their full effect. The examples I provided tell us in no uncertain terms that Remnant does have an accessible history in the form of archeological artifacts. For fuck’s sake, Oobleck is literally an anthropologist. He teaches history classes at Beacon Academy and has a PhD on the subject.

Similarly, if we assume the format of World of Remnant (a classroom lecture given by Qrow) to be applicable in-world, then that means the history of the last few centuries pertaining to the kingdoms is common knowledge. [2] The existence of this information tells us that Remnant has a flourishing history, and yet we see little of it represented in the show.

I chalk up the lack of history to a nasty habit of the writers. You see, CRWBY has this infuriating tendency to treat RWBY like “it’s like our world but…” It’s like our world but with magic; it’s like our world but with Dust; it’s like our world but with bloodthirsty monsters. You get the idea. As I said back in the Worldbuilding: Overview, if you make your fictional world a one-to-one analog of your own, you end up either ignoring, underdeveloping, or erasing the history exclusive to that setting. And RWBY is largely bereft of any historical identity that it could call its own. Here, let me pitch a few examples of what I’m talking about:

If slavery was only outlawed less than eighty years ago, why don’t we see Mistral creating legal loopholes to retain the system, like through indentured servitude or penal labor? An empire built on human rights violations doesn’t lose that disregard overnight. While we see plenty of poverty-stricken neighborhoods in Mistral, [3] and we’re told about its infamous criminal underworld, [4] these aspects of Mistrali culture seem rather disconnected from the recent history of the country, and ultimately have no impact on the main characters or the plot.

The Faunus Rights Revolution was a three-year conflict that (presumably) took place across all four kingdoms, and involved countermanding the reparations made to the Faunus after the Great War. From a chronological perspective, this was extremely recent. I know Rooster Teeth has a track record of poorly handling systemic racism. Usually this manifests in characters doing tokenly racist things, like using slurs or refusing to serve Faunus customers. But here’s the thing: a discrimination-based conflict this recent should have more bearing on current events. We should see examples of things like police profiling, higher incarceration rates, a lack of representation in media, social pressure to conceal Faunus traits or assimilate into human culture, fetishization, inadequate healthcare, forced sterilization, a lack of clothing retailers which stock apparel that accommodates Faunus traits, and so on. To put it bluntly: Faunus are an underprivileged minority, and immediate history should be influencing how that plays out in the show.

To reiterate: the Great War was eighty years ago. Meaning that there are likely still people alive that fought during it. How have their attitudes and beliefs shaped the world in the last few decades? Did they pass on any lingering hostilities or biases to their family members or community? What about in the present-day? Do people from Vale that migrate to Mistral ever deal with bigotry? Do people in Atlas harbor any lingering ideologies from that time? Is authentic pre-war artwork from Mantle considered priceless because most artwork was destroyed during Mantle’s suppression of creative expression? Did immigrants from the other kingdoms help rebuild Atlas’ cultural identity by supplying it with the values that they brought with them? What about shifts in culture? Did kingdoms have to ration resources like sugar or cream? Did this result in cultural paradigms, where nowadays drinking black coffee is more prevalent as a result of adapting to scarcity?

Because Vacuo’s natural resources were heavily depleted by invading countries decades before the Great War, did this have a major bearing on technology? Does modern Vacuo have wind farms or solar arrays to compensate for a lack of Dust? How does this affect their relationship with other kingdoms? Mistral loves to pride itself on its respect for nature. [5] Does this attitude ever anger Vacuites from the perspective of, “Yeah, I can really see how much you ‘respect’ nature. You respected it so much that you invaded our country and destroyed our oases.”

As you can see, history can’t be idly ignored. It has long-lasting impacts on the people who lived through it, and it continues to inform the attitudes, beliefs, and actions of people to come. What we get instead are traditions that only exist within the relevance of the immediate past, like the color-naming trend that emerged in response to artistic censorship. Anything which predates it, though? Remnant might as well have sprung into existence a hundred years ago with how little its history exists beyond that context.

It’s frustrating and disheartening. We know precious little about Remnant because its history either exists separately from the story (and is delivered supplementarily through transmedia worldbuilding), or it wasn’t developed in the first place. This doesn’t even take into consideration how much the writers deliberately withhold for the sake of artificially creating suspense. (A suspense, I might add, that frequently lacks payoff, either because it gets forgotten by the writers, or the characters never bother to seek out knowledge from available sources, like Ozma. Seriously, why do these kids never ask any fucking questions? They did this throughout all of Volume 5—Ruby in particular, who I badly wanted to strangle when she said “I have no more questions” back in V5:E10: “True Colors.”)

RWBY didn’t even bother to give us a calendar era, like the BCE/CE one used today. Hell, if the writers wanted to buck the system, they could’ve gone with something similar to Steven Universe or The Elder Scrolls, where eras are divided by significant historical events.

Sorry. I swear, I’m done dredging up examples. I’ve already made my point. As we talk about the other topics in their respective posts, we’ll be able to analyze these problems in greater detail.

Trust me. We’ve only just scratched the surface.

-

[1] Volume 1, Episode 1: “Ruby Rose.” Salem: “An inevitable darkness—creatures of destruction—the creatures of Grimm—set their sights on man and all of his creations.”

[2] World of Remnant, Volume 2, Episode 2: “Kingdoms.” Salem: “In the countless years that humanity has roamed the planet, civilizations have grown and fallen. But four have withstood the test of time: Atlas, Mistral, Vacuo, Vale.”

[3] Volume 5, Episode 6: “Known by Its Song.”

[4] Volume 5, Episode 1: “Welcome to Haven.”

[5] World of Remnant, Volume 4, Episode 2: “Mistral.” Qrow: “There's one common thread that links all these people together, though, and that's their respect for nature. Particularly the sea and the sky.”