#And thus ends the discourse saga

[every-character-ever-poll]

If you want anybody to ever be able to safely view anything posted by this blog, you will need to remove the dangerous entries from the spreadsheet and never publish them on this blog, because anyone could be susceptible to some of these things.

(Prior ask)

Anon, I am going to be honest with you. I've been taking these asks in good faith, and treating you as someone who has spent too much time online in a small community feedback bubble and came out of it with some beliefs on how people should use the internet. I am always willing to talk with people if they have an issue with my blog and see what, if anything, can be done.

I do not think you are that person.

You're not telling me anything to actually fix your perceived issue, and instead are just repeating the same talking points without clarification. I am a real human person. I have a life. I have things to do. Respectfully, it is very much past midnight for me, and I have stuff going on very early tomorrow (this?) morning. I take people at face value a lot of the time, but really, if you keep sending me asks like this, I will block you. I'm also not going to publish any more of your asks.

I feel like I could handle this with more grace and dignity, but I am naught but a mortal man, and I am very tired, and there is only so much nonsense I can deal with at this time before I call it quits.

Have a good one.

[wealmostaneckbeard]

Leave The World Behind: My New Thoughts on it

I finished reading Rumaan Alam's novel Leave the World Behind and I think it's subtextual premise is this:

What if the the Christian Bible was as accurate in it's depiction of the End of Days as it was about the Beginning of Creation? Which is to say, right on a few details but wrong about everything else.

For example:

Rose the sinless daughter gets "raptured," but not really she just abandons the group to break into an unoccupied bomb shelter stocked with supplies where she binge watches dvds. That's basically heaven, in the short term. Archie the first born son dies, but not really he just gets Lyme disease and might die or maybe not. It depends if he can get medical treatment.

I believe this novel is meant to be a contrasting parody of the Christian apocalypse series, Left Behind, and it's lack of ambiguity. I've read enough summaries about that bloated saga of theocratic far-right propaganda to think I'm right.

Sam Esmail's cinematic adaptation of LTWB eschews the veiled critique of Christianity and instead targets another beloved fantasy of the far right: military invasion of the USA by a foreign nation.

In the original Red Dawn, it's explicitly stated that Mexican communist revolutionaries backed by the Russian military have invaded the southern border. They have seized control of numerous towns and cities and have forced residents into prison camps. Thus it's up to a plucky group of high schoolers to fight for Ronald Reagan's America.

In LTWB, there is no marauding red army destroying America, because there doesn't have to be. America is already teetering on the brink of collapse, our infrastructure is weak, our public discourse toxic. Anyone with sufficient resources, ranging from the Islamic Republic of Iran to aliens from outer space, could make the nation fall into chaos. It doesn't who the attackers are, economic and social policies implemented by conservative politicians have made our nation weak in order to fund tax cuts for wealthy elites who will abandon everyone when the end comes.

This terrifying indictment of America by Sam Esmail elevates his movie above it's source material, in my opinion. He's not afraid to make people afraid, something that Rumaan Alam was apparently reluctant to do lest he become like the fear mongerers he was parodying. Or at least that's what I imagine.

[chamerionwrites]

The Russian effort to meddle in the election began way back in 2014, long before anyone viewed Trump as a serious candidate for the presidency, much less a likely nominee. The goal was simply to create division and chaos by exploiting existing cleavages in American society—or as the indictment puts it, operators were instructed to create “political intensity through supporting radical groups, users dissatisfied with [the] social and economic situation and oppositional social movements.”

The work was coordinated through the Internet Research Agency, a group that came to widespread American attention in summer of 2015, when Adrian Chen wrote a long feature on it for The New York Times Magazine. The IRA is a private company, not a government agency, but as Chen laid out, it has close ties to the Kremlin. The indictment explains that the IRA in turn was controlled by Concord Management and Consulting and Concord Catering, “related Russian entities with various Russian government contracts.” Concord hired the IRA for “Project Lakhta,” a wide-ranging project that involved work in Russia and overseas.

The IRA and its officers began tracking U.S. social currents in 2014. That year, two of the defendants named in the indictment traveled to the United States for scouting purposes. The indictment describes measures that would seem cartoonish if not for what would follow. The travelers claimed they were visiting for personal reasons, but bought special equipment and discussed “evacuation scenarios” for the trip. In June, two of the defendants covered a great deal of ground, going to Nevada, California, New Mexico, Colorado, Illinois, Michigan, Louisiana, Texas, and New York. In November of 2014, a third defendant visited Atlanta.

When Chen reported on the IRA, many of the initiatives he uncovered were laughable—bizarre in concept, sloppy in execution, and without much sway in practice. Early on, Project Lakhta’s efforts seemed similar amateurish. Posing as Americans, they sought advice: “For example, starting in or around June 2016, Defendants and their co-conspirators, posing online as U.S. persons, communicated with a real U.S. person affiliated with a Texas-based grassroots organization. During the exchange, Defendants and their co-conspirators learned from the real U.S. person that they should focus their activities on ‘purple states like Colorado, Virginia & Florida.’”

Any casual American watcher of politics could have offered such a banal insight, but it was influential for the Russians: ���After that exchange, Defendants and their co-conspirators commonly referred to targeting ‘purple states’ in directing their efforts.”

The work soon started to bear fruit. “Specialists” at IRA began creating social-media pages devoted to hot-button issues, from restrictive immigration policy to Black Lives Matter to religious affinity (“United Muslims of America,” “Army of Jesus.”) “By 2016, the size of many ORGANIZATION-controlled groups had grown to hundreds of thousands of online followers,” the indictment states. One particular notorious example was a Twitter account using the handle @TEN_GOP, which purported to be the voice of the Tennessee Republican Party. “Over time, the @TEN_GOP account attracted more than 100,000 online followers,” the indictment states...

Even if the conspiracy did not set out to boost Trump, it jumped into the task with gusto once latching on to him. There was a distinctly pro-Trump bent in its social-media presence...The mercenary nature of the Russians’ affection for Trump manifested itself upon his victory. The goal of having elected him complete, IRA operators pivoted to create maximal discord in the new era. Operators worked to organize rallies both for and against Trump in New York on November 12, 2016. They also planned an anti-Trump rally in Charlotte, North Carolina, that month.

[ofbuttsandbombs]

Back in 2016, Friends was the first sitcom I ever watched. It was funny and distracting and I had just begun college and my course was regarded as one of the toughest and my daily commute was over three hours total and I was little more than a tittering ball of stress and nerves.

I started watching Friends because, well, everybody was, and I needed to something to do on the train, bus and taxi that I had I to take to reach my uni.

Thus began my foray into the world of television.

I tore through the 'classics'. How I Met Your Mother and The Office and Scrubs and Parks and Rec and Modern Family and Community (interspersed between the rare non-sitcom like Once Upon A Time and Game of Thrones and The Americans) and then the newer ones too, Superstore and The Good Place and Schitt's Creek and of course, Brooklyn Nine-Nine.

I loved all of them. I still do. Something about the format of sitcoms is so comforting and entertaining to me. I loved them all equally, and I tore through each like I was getting paid for it.

An innocuous remark made by my best friend in the beginning of 2018 changed the course of my life.

"You've watched Brooklyn Nine-Nine, right? Rosa's bachelorette was so cool. If I ever get married, you better do something like that for me."

I couldn't remember Rosa's bachelorette. Watching nearly 50 shows over the past 2 years will jumble some stuff up for you.

"I'll keep that in mind," I told her, and when I went home, I typed in Rosa Diaz Bachelorette into the YouTube search bar.

That, my friends, was the beginning of the end.

I laughed through the bachelorette clip on YouTube. I laughed through the various compilations I saw next, as YouTube did its job of sucking me into a never ending video watching hell hole, the kind that ends with you watching Find Out How Many Cockroach Legs Are in a Bar of Chocolate at 3 AM.(in my case, it was something like Jake and Amy Turning Each Other On for 8 Minutes)

And for the very first time in my life, I decided to rewatch a show.

I've never rewatched any show. Not before then, and not now. Only one show has recieved that honour, and it is B99. I don't know what happened on this first rewatch. Suddenly, Noice became a part of my vocabulary, Title of your Sex Tape jokes were sprinkled into every conversation and Jake and Amy decided to march their way into my clown heart and brain and never left.

This random show hit me with an obsession so hard I couldn't think of anything else. If someone calculated how many hours I've spent daydreaming about Jake and Amy, my mother would probably burst into tears for "wasting my time and putting my future in jeopardy."

The last three years are a blur of studying, stressing and Brooklyn Nine Nine. I was at an internet-less nature camp during the Great Cancellation Saga of 2018, and came back home to the news that b99 had been cancelled and picked up again. I thanked my lucky stars I had missed it. I would not have dealt well with the cancellation news.

In the end of 2018, when multiple rewatches of Johnny and Dora and HalloVeen couldn't satisfy my brain's constant yearning for a hit of Peraltiago, I turned to fanfiction.

I've never looked back.

And now, after three seasons of watching live, after too much discourse about many things, after three years of drooling over Andy, after a gazillion months of hiatus- here we are.

The end of the end.

Obviously, I am sad and scared and angry and miserable and in denial and excited and on the edge of my seat and upset. I'd rather wait 10 years for a new season than have to deal with the fact that I'll never get to see a new episode. I'm just gonna wallow in my misery today. Because, yeah, we'll still have 8 seasons to re-watch, and so many fics to re-read but also, the series finale is upon us, and Brooklyn Nine-Nine is finally coming to an end.

It's hard to come to terms with this fact even when we all knew this day would come. But here it is at last, and we cannot do anything, except be sad and hurt and excited and also celebrate this funny little show that introduced us to a whole new world, to new people, to new friends. And though this chapter is now closing, it's always gonna be a part of my story.

I am so grateful to the various blogs on here that I could always count on for my daily dose of b99. The HCs and ficlets have really kept me going.

I will be incapacitated for today and for the better part of next week, if not longer. Off to wallow some more,

-A.

[delusion-of-negation]

top 10 (ish) ridiculous or annoying FAQs:

(click at your own discretion)

1) "kids today rely on others to do everything"

ah yes, damn those participation trophies! if it wasn't for them my hands wouldn't be fucked, and I wouldn't need people to write for me. but seriously, stop reading boomer comics, and go outside to meet some actual young people.

2) "sus that a non-american says mom"

yeah, because it's clearly the superior version, and I'm not too patriotic to concede a defeat.

3) "sweaty, the victims of abuse by catholics are real people, stop appropriating their pain just because you want to hate catholics; plus teachers abuse people just as often anyway"

so firstly, I don't hate anybody. and secondly, regarding the fact that victims really do exist, [insert "of course I know him, he's me" meme here]; although I don't often talk much about the abuse I went through or what my religious beliefs are. but, more importantly, statements like "survivors are people" can be phrased like "some people are survivors", and when you're unable to act according to the latter (like when you don't even consider that somebody might be one) then you display a failure to recognise the former - you're projecting; a survivor can't be appropriating their own pain, but you can be appropriating it to silence one. and thirdly, teachers do abuse - the problem isn't and has never been purely religion, rather that abuse is often done by somebody in a position of trust, power, and familiarity; and that the lack of a global minimum enables totally legal abuse on top of the illegal stuff. people with access and respect have more opportunity to abuse than those without, and that goes for teachers too. but, once again, you can be appropriating the pain of survivors to deflect and silence people. please remember this before you say that shit.

4) "get help/therapy"

way ahead of you - years ahead of you. but it's not magic - people who say this often act as if you'll start behaving differently overnight. not only are some things simply beyond the ability of talking therapy to completely rectify, it also takes time and has to be selective. you've got to pick your priorities, and that's definitely not whatever ship or joke you're mad at me about today. therapy is a slow, arduous process that can't guarantee results - it isn't "anti-recovery" to recognise that, it's honesty. while I've been in therapy for a long time, it is not necessarily going to change whatever you don't like about me - whether that's because it can't, because my focus now is on more important or urgent things, or because I don't want to change that.

5a) "tell your family you ship incest, see how that goes; normal people find it disgusting"

actually, some know, and they're fine with it. in fact, one prefers sibling pairings in fiction to all other dynamics because, to paraphrase, "it's a deeper level of messed up co-dependence". so unfortunately for you, my remaining family (by which I mean those not dead or cut out of my life after abuse and so forth) actually are able to distinguish between fiction and reality. plus, my reasoning for caring if they find it gross or not pertains only to recommending books and such - their opinions do not dictate my tastes.

5b) "don't sexualise/appropriate incestuous abuse" and "I bet you enjoyed being raped" and other attempts to upset me over 5a

firstly, as I've already said here, survivors can't be appropriating ourselves. in addition, you're not owed people's history or trauma - it's not okay to require people's personal information, or else you'll send anon hate and accusations of appropriation. secondly, I'm not sexualising our abuse (not just because I write horror, and so a lot of my writing is intended to be creepy, not sexy); these stories aren't about us, they're not us at all. entire dynamics/people (fictional or otherwise) aren't all going to be applicable to us or identical to us, just because they have something in common with us; they're not us and they're not accountable to us. thirdly, the fact that people send this stuff (attempting to trigger people's trauma over ships) is so much more worrying to me than somebody making our communal imaginary friends kiss. you're trying to hurt people. and finally, to the "I bet you enjoyed it" crowd (if you're at all serious): do you think you'd enjoy being in a real zombie apocalypse, alone, afraid, and really at risk of being eaten alive? a fictional scenario does not feel remotely the same as a real one. this isn't rocket science - things that look like you aren't you; fiction isn't reality; don't send anon hate. (edit: comparable "just leave me alone, I'm not hurting anyone" sentiments for yandere stuff, and anything else you decide I'm naughty for.)

6) "you'll be sent off to do manual labour once your communist revolution happens"

while I don't know why people think that I'm a communist, a dictatorial regime probably isn't going to want me to do manual labour. they're more likely to just shoot me; I'm useless and a liability. call me crazy, but something tells me that "ah yes, we shall give ze deranged cripple ze power tools" isn't the communist position.

7a) "they/them can't be singular pronouns"

yes they can, and they're used as such in both shakespeare and the bible. but you don't have to say this - I'm also okay with he/him, so you could've just used those and chilled out. also, do I look like somebody who views the rules of grammar as fully immutable and imperative?

7b) "enbies/aros/pan/etc aren't valid"

do you really think that you're going to change any hearts or minds by putting that in my ask box or under my funny maymays? chill out, it's not worth the effort - you could be planning a party (in minecraft) and having fun instead. it isn't worth my time to rant at everybody who's saying something isn't valid, updating how I'm explaining it as my opinions grow and general discourse around it evolves; I'm just who I am, somebody else is who they are - why bicker in presumptuous ways about if that's enough? it ultimately is valid, in my opinion, but that isn't an invitation to keep demanding that I debate. (edit: old posts of mine probably don't phrase things incredibly, on this or anything... I tried.)

8) "what are your politics?"

my politics are informed first and foremost by the knowledge that I'm not cut out to be some kind of leader - I don't want to be the guy who tells everyone else what to do, I just offer what seem to me like valid criticisms of how we are doing things now, and general pointers on the values and ethics that I would prefer to move towards. things like individual freedom, taking the most pacifist route where possible, trying not to give excessive power to small groups of people (governments or corporations), helping those in need even when they're not palatable, and letting me suck loads of dicks. but please refrain from decreeing me something - there's not enough information in what I said, so you'll just be filling in the blanks with assumptions. (edit: workplace democracy seems cool to me; benefits are good; fair fines and taxes; and the "sperm makes you loopy" saga: 1, 2, 3, and 4.)

9) "you're a narcissist"

no, I don't meet the diagnostic criteria. joking on the internet that you're hot doesn't make a person a narcissist. the fact that I've chosen to keep my actual self-esteem issues to myself is not proof that they don't exist - you're just not entitled to that information about me. but it's also not narcissism to really like how you look. (edit: don't throw labels around carelessly too.)

10a) "kin list?"

the fabric of the universe, a zombie, dionysus, maned wolf/arctic fox hybrid, a comedian, big gay, big rock, ambiguously partial insincerity. (edit: kin list may or may not be incomplete.)

10b) "kin isn't valid/that's just being insane"

haven't we established that I'm deranged, and that sending stuff like this on anon is simply a waste of your precious time? besides, I do not care if it's invalid or insane - it's fun, I'm happy. (edit: see 7b for my opinion on sending me yet another ask with "that's invalid" in it; I'm not in the mood to discuss the nature of validity.)

bonus: "it gets better" and "trigger list?"

as I've said before, things just don't always get better for everyone - sometimes things can't be cured or even treated, sometimes they kill you; in some cases it could get better if not for a blockade or lack of time. the world is messy. it needs to be more normalised to reassure or comfort people without relying on saying that their issue will get better or be cured. it does suck to be this ill, but it also sucks to be made out to be a lazy pessimist, just because I have the audacity to not play along. and as for the trigger list, I don't like providing people with an easily accessed list of ways to hurt my feelings or harm me - upsetting me is supposed to be challenging, and thus rewarding. if you want a cheat sheet then you're out of luck, I'm afraid.

bonus #2: "FAQ stands for frequently asked questions, it doesn't need that s at the end!"

yeah, I know, I just enjoy chaos and disarray.

bonus #3 (edit): "what are your disabilities and how exactly are they incurable and/or deadly?"

again, I don't tell the internet everything about me, especially when it poses a risk, especially not as an easily accessible list for you to refer back to whenever you feel inclined to hurt my feelings. that is understandably a sore subject. (edit: that includes physical health issues btw.)

bonus #4 (edit): "so we shouldn't be critical?"

if it wasn't clear from my answer about politics or my post in general, you can have opinions about things, and you can voice that. it's just not realistic to exist at extremes: to think that you alone should dictate what exists in fiction, or to think that people shouldn't be expressing disdain or criticism of any calibur. say how you feel about things, that's fine, but it's also fine if people find that they don't value your input. plus we're all flawed, we can all be hypocritical from time to time, we all get bitchy, and we all make mistakes, or even knowingly fuck things up. that's important to keep in mind, whether we're talking about the one being criticised or the one doing the criticising - poor choices of words, imperfect tone, or contradictory ideas are inevitably going to happen occasionally.

congrats on reaching the end! if you have, at any point, said one of these to me, you owe a hug to your nearest loved one (once it's safe).

edit: might add more links/bonus points in the future when I think of things, but it's late now. (sorry for links where prior notes in the thread have my old url, that may get a tad confusing; also, not all links are my blog or my op, since it is to illustrate points/vibes, not to self-promo.)

[geekmedium]

S-rank Fanfiction Recommendations

Because fanfictions can be a valid source of good stories if you’re willing to look for them.

1.) Stucco Hearts - A Percy Jackson soulmate au, but instead of the characters just falling in love, it explores every stage of their relationship as they grow from essentially awkward roommates to devoted lovers. Also uses the soulmate premise for some thoughtful worldbuilding and discourse on love.

2.) Nobody Dies - A Neon Genesis Evangelion story where the premise is, as the title suggests, one where Shinji’s mom, Yui Ikari, doesn’t die. But it’s so much more than that. If NGE proper is a Lovecraft story about humans dealing with an alien threat they don’t understand, Nobody Dies is Lovecraft Lite. The aliens are still a legitimate threat, but they are now a source of awesomeness instead of nightmare fuel. The characters while still having problems are relatively more stable, and much more competent as a result. Except Rei, who is more awesome because she is so much more unstable than canon. Honestly if I had to compare it to anything, I would say it reminds me heavily of The Vorkosigan Saga. It’s not exactly a comedy, but it has tons of funny moments and the characters can go from enjoying a school dance to fighting zombies in a chapter. And it has plenty of relationship drama that leads to incredible heartwarming moments. Highly recommend, though I will say the quality drops off around chapter 72 and the author isn’t writing more chapters so it’s incomplete. Still, if just for the first 60 chapters alone, you should give it a try.

3.) Advice and Trust - Another NGE story, this one more canon based. It’s basic premise is what if the story had happened exactly as before, until episode 15 when THAT scene is changed to Asuka and Shinji successfully getting together. The consequences as it turns out become huge. It’s an engaging story on its own, but what makes it 10x better is if you want a much more optimistic NGE where the heroes have way more success. Believe me, however, when I say it isn’t at all a fluff piece. New problems show up as well and the young lovers must rely and trust each other as they work to prevent the end of the world. Would gladly recommend this to fellow NGE fans, especially fellow Shinji/Asuka shippers.

4.) Perpendicular - A great Spider-Man romance story. Taking place ostensibly in the Andrew Garfield Spider-Man movie verse, the story came out before the second one and follows the planned but unused Mary Jane, thus giving it a feel removed from the movies. We follow MJ as she grows use to a post-college life of applying for acting gigs, all the while her best friend Gwen lives with her, along with Gwen’s annoying boyfriend Peter. I think I especially love the emotional complexity of this. MJ must slowly come to terms with her growing feelings for Peter, all the while wondering if she should settle with billionaire Harry Osborn who takes a liking to her. I should mention that this Mary Jane Watson is not like the one from 616 continuity, but she is still incredibly human and engaging to read about.

5.) Spidey’s got a Girlfriend - A fun story in the Marvel Adventures Spider-Man universe. It is about Peter finally hooking up with MJ and her coming to the Avengers’ mansion. Chaos and comedy ensue. It isn’t a super emotional or serious story, but it has the feel of a classic Spidey misadventure ala “The Commuter Cometh.”

6.) Webslinger - It only lasted for two chapters, but this is a Spectacular Spider-Man story that truly fits the name. Since it is only the beginning of the story, not an awful lot happens, but you can tell the author was trying to make a continuation of the series that fit the tone and style. I especially love the descriptive action. It can be very hard for prose to convey the kinetic dynamism of comics and comic shows, but I loved the clear descriptions of webslinging and fighting. You understood what was happening and could clearly imagine what poor Pete was going through. Small warning that it is rated T for a reason. There is a little bit of cursing and suggestive language.

7.) Super Stories of Samuel Hawkins - A series of Superboy stories meant to invoke the silver age style. If you like a more old fashioned super story where Clark can lift planets and adventure with the Legion, this is for you.

8.) Partners in Crime - A  Batman/Catwoman story taking place in the DCAU. It goes over why these two love and want each other so much in a fairly quick read leading up to them establishing a new family. If you want a nicely paced story of how Selina goes from criminal to partner and co-leader of the batfamily, definitely recommend.

9.) Cat-Tales - Quite possibly the best Batman/Catwoman story I’ve ever read. I have a feeling whatever Tom King’s gonna try to do won’t even hold a candle to this. What I think sets it apart from other BatCat stories is it is less a sexy romp and more a character study of these very dysfunctional people, and shows how that dysfunction works to make a weirdly functional relationship. There’s no will they, won’t they plot and it tries to involve most of the Batman cast at some point, even giving them their own engaging subplots and relationship problems. But at its heart is a story that can make anyone a BatCat shipper.

10.) Endangered Species - Honestly my favorite story about the relationship between Black Canary and Green Arrow. It has them investigating an attack on Dinah’s mom that slowly reveals a much bigger scheme. It involves the two leads at their snarky, loving best. Equally devoted to and irritated by each other, you understand that under all the banter and annoyed glares is a special connection that makes them perfect for each other.

[amphtaminedreams]

The Eras of Lana Del Rey: Lookbook no.9

Hi to anyone reading,

Hope you’re okay! AND that you didn’t end up here because you searched the Lana Del Rey tag so you could see people ranting about her-you’re about to be very disappointed. Sorry. This is not about to be some Question for the Culture discourse because the world is bleak enough right now and the last thing we all need is to be reminded of that saga. 

Being a Lana Del Rey fan is easy, they said. She’s not a controversial artist, they said. And yet 2020 had to do what it does best and fuck everything up. 

Whether people like her or not, it’s made me so angry reading all the abuse she’s been getting about her appearance for the last couple of weeks, because I really thought that if we could agree on anything it was that attacking individuals for the way they look because you dislike something they’ve done (with the exception of shit like racist tattoos and blackfishing) is, you know, awful and judgemental as fuck? Like you do realise when you treat the word fat as a pejorative that the fat people you don’t have a problem with understood that you meant it as an insult too? I think what all those people tweeting about Lana’s weight, and that includes some of her fans, are forgetting is that she was in her early 20s when she was thrust into the limelight. As much as there’s this conspiracy that her dad bought her a career in the music industry, she’d made the decision to go it alone and had lived in a trailer park as a struggling musician for years. On top of that, we have the unreleased tracks with lyrics seemingly referencing an eating disorder in her younger years. OF COURSE her body is going to look different. Why is it that we treat weight gain as an inherently bad thing without any insight into the other factors that constitute a person’s “health”? It’s fucking insane that so many feel they have the right to comment on other’s bodies in the first place and it breaks my heart that she might be reading these comments. This wasn’t intended to necessarily be a rant about how much I love this woman but all the shit I’ve read about her on the internet these past few months have pushed me to it. You'll respect your queen of alternative music or I shall stan twice as hard on your behalf. You can thank me later when you come to your senses xoxo

I’d love to say it was intentional that I finally finished this post the week Violet Bent Backwards Over the Grass was released but that would imply I have my shit way more together than I actually do. If I’m being completely honest, I’ve only heard L.A Who am I to Love You so far 1). because I want to wait for the hard copy for the rest and that doesn’t turn up til September and 2). because I do not have my shit together, lol. That being said, there is no doubt in my mind that I am going to love it-one thing I have always loved about Lana’s lyrics is how well they paint a picture and this is something that poetry only more freely allows for the exploration of. That ability to create such a strong narrative voice and atmosphere is a talent that extends to her visuals and the production of her records too, and is something I really missed when it comes to the Norman Fucking Rockwell era. I’m just going to say it: a strong aesthetic is to NFR as memorable songs are to Lust for Life. Lacking. Am I allowed to say that as a fan? The collaborations don’t do it for me, okay, and as as NFR is concerned, aside from The Greatest/Fuck It I Love You video which went down the whole neon surfer girl route, it’s hard to identify a cohesive theme. It’s understandable that at this point, she would want to just focus purely on the music, and it goes without saying that NFR will stand the test of time in that regard but I don’t think we can deny that when people think of Lana in the future, it’s not gonna be a green windbreaker that comes into their heads.

^Illustration credit to Filip Kozak (https://filipkozaksart.tumblr.com/?fbclid=IwAR3vwLX2pNxoFNhTPD1ky14LllPqlLtL1GxGlD79xuHxdtzcHLw-6aNBZWo)

And here’s where this Filip Kozak illustration comes into it; after years of it sitting in my camera roll for years, it finally has a use. There’s really nothing better to illustrate how mundane life has become this year than the disproportionate level of excitement my photo-hoarding-self experienced realising it would fit perfectly into this post and is thus eligible for deletion. Up there with being able to fit a whole box of biscuits onto the shelf at work rather than having to individually take out as many as I can and then shove them on top of the existing box of biscuits one by one. Truly riveting content on this Tumblr page. Back to the point-by using this as my stimulus for the post rather than the Lana Del Rey albums as outfits tag that went round on Twitter, I can conveniently exclude NFR as an outfit inspiration category, and that saves me from having to buy a charity shop windbreaker with its price bumped up 150% by some upper middle class Depop e-girl or boy who uses the word peng as a descriptor like it’s a nervous tic. To make up for leaving out NFR, I’ve tried to branch out a bit and do the outfits not just based on the music videos or album covers but also from street style and stage looks and photoshoots from around the same period too. It was hard not to be influenced by the general “vibe” and sound of the albums either when I was planning outfits, whether it’s the grand, orchestral instrumentals of Born to Die or the 70s psychedelic rock inspired riffs of Ultraviolence and hopefully that’ll show as well! Enjoy:D

Born to Die (Release Date: 27th January 2012)

It’s been 8 years, and when you ask most people what they think of when they hear the name Lana Del Rey, they’ll probably dismiss her as the one who sings about being sad and doing coke and sleeping with older men. That’s the Born to Die impact. Say what you want but it’s one of only a handful of albums released by a female artist to have spent more than 300 weeks on the Billboard 200 chart and it really established the mythos of “Lana Del Rey” because before all this, before all the think pieces from other women claiming she’d set feminism back hundreds of years with her music, before she ousted grayscale Effy Stonem as the queen of angsty teen Tumblr (which as you can probably guess was a subsection of the internet I was very much engulfed by, lmao), she was just Lizzie Grant, a relatively normal aspiring singer songwriter in her early twenties. But as Lana Del Rey, she was someone else-some beautiful, mystical being that personified the sentiment of being born in the wrong era. Whilst every other singer’s record labels seemed to be trying desperately to thrust them into the future and keep them on top of all the musical and stylistic trends, it was refreshing to hear someone whose music and visuals captured all the most glamorous elements of the past. Part Priscilla Presley/Jackie O reincarnation (the National Anthem video really illustrated how Lana is just as much a storyteller as she is a musician), part high level mobster’s wayward wife à la Michelle Pfeiffer in Scarface, she was the good girl by day and the bad girl by night, and I think that’s a duality we can all relate to or would like to think we’re interesting enough to relate to deep down.

Her style from around this period was EVERYTHING. She had those grungy Tumblr girl elements, the camo jacket and the oversized pieces and the leather jackets, but she also heavily drew on the styles and silhouettes of the 50s and 60s with the beehives and the new look Dior inspired cinched waist dresses. Even now in 2020, I think this period is what most people would think if they were asked to describe Lana’s style. I made sure I got the grungy pieces in there with the chunky boots and the vinyl and the oversized leather but the foundation of her looks back then were usually these daintier throwback pieces like the white silk dress and the corset and the mint fur trimmed coat (House of Sunny’s Penny Pistachio coat).

Favourite lyrics from the album? “Now my life is sweet like cinnamon, like a fucking dream I'm living in” from Radio. Nobody asked but I’m gonna give it to you anyway.

Born to Die: The Paradise Edition (Release Date: 9th November 2012)

Lana’s Paradise EP contains probably my absolute favourite song of her’s, Ride, and with that, the beautiful opening monologue that will stay in my mind forever. This era was of course ushered in by Tropico, the short film that included the premiere of the songs Bel Air, Body Electric and Gods and Monsters, which established the ethereal tone of this period-it’s in the name, after all. Both the album and the videos were other-worldly and leaned heavily on religious symbolism which I’m sure pissed off many a middle-aged bible basher at the time. Most prominent in her lyrics were reflections on the freedom of the open road which corresponded with visuals of biker gangs and desert dwellers and modern interpretations of the Wild West, as was an attempt to capture the nature of the so-called “American spirit” which as Lana portrayed it shared more qualities with a kind of celestial, transient being than any kind of solid concept or identity. She played an emotionally detached stripper and a haunted saloon-style-bar singer (almost looking like a runaway bride) and Eve the “first woman” all in the same album and honestly, if that’s not iconic, I don’t know what is. We saw SO many incredible red carpet looks in this period too which built upon this idea of her as the fallen angel tempted by original sin that Tropico established; I feel like this era was all about laying bare the soul of the character she played, this broken, delicate but ultimately liberated being that was so dangerous to the idea of the strong, stable modern feminist ideal. She went about it in COMPLETELY the wrong way in a post that betrayed the ignorance of the privilege she has as a white female performer, but I think this is what she was getting at in it and Ultraviolence only went on to bolster her critics.

In response to the criticism she still receives about the choice to wear a Native American war bonnet in her Ride music video, I’d like to say that it really seems like she’s learnt from that-actions speak louder than words and so though it’s not my place to say whether this makes up for that error, the work she’s done with Native American reparations-focussed foundations since and the money she’s donated to the cause says a lot about her intentions. Again, I want to stress that it’s not my place to say! But it’s a detail that is often overlooked so I thought I’d mention it here. 

“I was a singer, not a very popular one. I once had dreams of becoming a beautiful poet. But upon an unfortunate series of events saw those dreams dashed and divided like a million stars in the night sky, that I wished on over and over again, sparkling and broken. But I didn’t really mind because I knew that it takes getting everything you ever wanted and then losing it to know what true freedom is.”

Ultraviolence (Release Date: 13th June 2014)

AH, Ultraviolence. My favourite of Lana’s albums and imo, a masterpiece. ONE skip. ONE. Sorry Guns and Roses. I got stoned in my back garden and listened to this (for research purposes ofc, heh) and ended up deciding that this is what I want to listen to when I die (also whilst stoned). It sounds dramatic but listening to this album in that state of mind is such a heavenly experience that I’d be too zen to notice myself slipping away into nothingness on the basis that if I didn’t as long as I could stay in that bubble of awe, nothingness forever wouldn’t be so scary after all. I know, I know, that sentence has big Jaden Smith’s old tweets energy. But if an album is what helps me get over an existential crisis, I beg you allow me the nonsensical ramblings about how I felt like I was ascending into the stars.

Though in terms of the lyrical content the public perception is probably correct, I think the reputation Ultraviolence has as Lana’s darkest, most gothic album (which is something I’ve in incorporated into the outfits I put together) is mistaken; instrumentally and visually it drew more on 70s psychedelic rock and the bohemian counter culture of the period than anything, and her stage looks are a clear reflection of that, and also the outfits I was most excited to channel. It seems counter-intuitive to the moody atmosphere I associate the tracklist with but it’s my go-to summer album; it’s raw (probably her most stripped back work along with NFR, lots of the songs are barely edited) and it’s gloomy but let’s be real, hot as fuck-don’t bother making a sex playlist, just put Ultraviolence on shuffle, and you’re good to go. This was the album where Lana debuted some of her most criticised lyrics and where the notion that she glamourises abuse comes from, one of the points she also seemed to be getting at in the Instagram post, but imo it’s fair to say that she sang truthfully about the initial allure of a dangerous relationship and the nature of the mindset that facilitates staying with somebody poisonous where you do feel like you’re nothing without them. Turning horrific experiences into romantic tragedies is how Lana has always made her music and yeah, out of context there are some fucked up lyrics on the album, but policing how a woman expresses her trauma and complaining that she glorifies weakness because she wrote honestly about the reality of a complicated partnership is hardly any more “feminist” than the lyrics themselves. I can only guess that the reason Lana felt the need to bring up this criticism in 2020 is because these darker themes are going to be revisited in her upcoming album and that in spite of the issues with the way she expressed herself, this time critics will be more accepting of how she chooses to address these themes. 

On a lighter note “yeah my boyfriend's pretty cool, but he's not as cool as me” will always be a great line. Simple but effective. If my boyfriend ever is cooler than me it’ll be doing Lana a disservice.

Honeymoon (Release Date: 18th September 2015)

Considering that a lot of other Lana fans are of the opinion that this is her best album, I find it weird that I really don’t remember all that much about this period, other than High by the Beach being released and then hearing Salvatore and Freak for the first time. I guess because she didn’t do a Honeymoon specific tour and didn’t make that many public appearances in this period? It was definitely harder for me to find visual reference points beyond the HbtB music video and the cover art, so I mostly drew on the general vibe of the album, a cinematic accompaniment to a summer in Italy or the South of France, filled with exotic instrumentals and the sense of impending romantic doom that Lana does so well. I suppose if I associate the visuals of this era with anything it’s idyllic florals and warm tones, bygone country club pool days, a rich American’s vacation in Southern Europe, long walks on the beach (and as our Lord and Saviour Jujubee once said, big dicks and fried chicken). Apparently inspired by Lana’s relationship with Francesco Carrozini, it’s a hazy story of some ultra-feminine, submissive archetype becoming unhealthily enchanted by a mysterious “foreign man” who’s ultimately not all that good for her, which as the story goes turned out to be quite prophetic. Going against the grain, it’s my least favourite of her albums after Lust for Life, but in spite of that, I will always remember how obsessed I was with the sax riffs (I think? I don’t know my instruments all that well so forgive me, lol) on Freak and I definitely understand why it’s a firm favourite for so many.

“You could be a bad motherfucker, but that don’t make you a man.” was truly a cultural reset of a line.

-on an unrelated note, OMG, I never realised how I have my mouth open in literally every fucking photo I take, somebody tell me how to pose, please and thank you-

Lust for Life (Release Date: 21 July 2017)

Lust for Life is a controversial one. On the one hand, I appreciate that this album was the victory cry of a happier, more independent, politically-aware Lana in spite of it apparently being a far more optimistic sounding album than the one she wanted to release, but on the other there were way too many collaborations for me and this meant that the album lacked a sense of cohesion and the characteristic narrative thread that usually runs throughout her tracklist. Aside from Love, Cherry, Get Free and Tomorrow Never Came, most of the songs on the album aren’t hugely memorable and it’s a crying shame that a collaboration with STEVIE FUCKING NICKS of all people left so much to be desired. Coming from two witchy icons, I expected something absolutely magical so maybe I was setting myself up for failure, but come on. We could’ve had a real anthem there.

Aesthetically speaking however, this is one of my favourite eras for Lana, which is unsurprising when you consider the tracklist contains references to both Woodstock and Coachella. I’m not gonna lie, I think seeing Coachella fashion in my early teens was my style awakening-I remember seeing Vanessa Hudgens’ outfits and being like, wow, I want to be her (oh, what a fall from grace)-so the late 60s/early 70s flower power groupie style Lana adopted in this period really spoke to me. It was all long hair and dreamy pastels, and this era included some of the most head-to-toe coordinated looks we’ve ever seen from her. Of course I couldn’t completely abandon the grungy touches that I love, that I tend to associate with the early Lana street style days and the Paradise and Ultraviolence music videos rather than with this album, but I’m never gonna pass up an opportunity to whack out a good floral two piece and putting together Lust for Life inspired looks is the perfect excuse to do that.

So, that marks the end of this post! If you made it to the end, thank you so much for reading! I have a Yesstyle lookbook and review to edit but now that I’ve finished that, I’m trying to go down more of a style inspiration focussed  route with my lookbooks rather than just putting together outfits from clothes I’ve just bought (though I might still do one every so often to bring in a new season-let’s just ignore the fact that they’re all blending into one bc climate change for now, one catastrophe at a time please universe). I find that if you have a specific idea in mind of what you want, it’s super easy to find something similar on Depop and Ebay and that way you avoid buying new things and also take old things off a person’s hands that might otherwise end up being thrown out by a charity shop and then dumped into a landfill from there. Something I’d LOVE to do before this year is out is put together a lookbook based on the most stylish TV shows of the last decade, but that probably won’t be for a while-even so, if you have any recommendations of series to watch which could fit into this category, let me know! 

To finish, I need to go a little bit off-topic so forgive me, but I truly don’t know why this even needs to be said: WEAR A FUCKING MASK. IT IS NOT A POLITICAL ISSUE. IT IS A BASIC HYGIENIC PRACTICE THAT HELPS SPREAD THE STOP OF A HIGHLY CONTAGIOUS DISEASE! RUDIMENTAL SCIENCE! NOT A CHANCE TO PROVE HOW “EDGY” YOU ARE! SERIOUSLY, STOP MAKING A FUCKING PANDEMIC ABOUT YOURSELF! NOBODY ENJOYS WEARING THEM BUT THEY HELP PROTECT OTHERS! SO UNLESS YOU HAVE A VALID MEDICAL REASON NOT TO BE WEARING ONE, DON’T BE A SELFISH PRICK! 

Sorry to sign off on a rant-y note with something that has nothing to do with Lana, lol, but all the stupidity has been grinding me gears lately and I had to let it out on behalf of all retail workers: if we can wear a mask for 9 hours at a time, YOU can tolerate the mild discomfort of wearing one for 10 minutes. I know this doesn’t apply to the majority of people but there’s always a couple of arseholes, isn’t there!?

Stay safe,

Lauren x

[red-applesith]

The Skywalker saga is coming to an end and I spent virtually four years hiding in the shadows to avoid the discourse (™). Well, to that I say no more! Rey isn’t a Skywalker! Finn is important even if he’s not a Jedi and Ben Solo is going to redeem himself! 

And to rest my case below is a long thread about the Skywalker Lightsaber, the place of each character in the sequel trilogy and their narrative function. Buckle up!

First, let me postulate that--in-universe--the Skywalker lightsaber, throughout the trilogies, is the mythical sword of power, the Excalibur of a galaxy far far away. Some characters are meant to care for it for a short period of time while others are meant to wield it.

On a meta-level, we can advance that the Lightsaber stands for the Skywalker saga itself. This is why salty fans complain that toys packaging read “Rey's lightsaber” instead of “the lightsaber that once belonged to Anakin then lost by Luke.”

It bothers them that A GIRL  inherited/took the lead of Star Wars. 

Without further ado, let’s jump into the meta and explore the symbolic function of the Skywalker Lightsaber in The Force Awakens and The Last Jedi. 

In TFA, Maz Kanata is our Lady of the Lake, and perhaps it’s not a coincidence she lives by a body of water in a quasi-medieval setting. Like Obi Wan before her, she’s the custodian of the Lightsaber and her function is to bestow the magic laser sword to the protagonist.

The how or why she’s gotten the sword isn’t important in the grand scheme of things. The important thing is she’s here to kickstart the adventure.

But where Luke was simply handed the sword by birthright in the OT, Rey actually receives “a calling” as well as a Force vision of things past and things to come. Through Maz’s words, the audience understands that Rey is our protagonist. 

Unlike Luke, Rey freaks out and runs away thus refusing the call to adventure, one of many steps on her Campbellian monomyth journey. Paradoxically, running away is how Rey is definitely sucked into the story since it’s in the forest that she meets Kylo Ren.

Ultimately--in-universe--her latent Force powers awaken thanks to this fateful encounter, and Kylo becomes--from a narrative standpoint--the reason why Rey joins the fight/the story. There is no hero without a villain but we’ll come back to that later.

Meanwhile, Maz is pulling the same kind of trick with Finn. I don’t know if you remember but before TFA Finn was marketed as the one wielding the lightsaber and people were lead to believe he would be Force sensitive.

In the following sequences though, Maz isn’t bestowing the lightsaber to Finn, she’s giving him the task to deliver it to Rey. This is how Maz lays out to the audience that Finn is our Deuteragonist. This is also how she prevents him from running away.

In the OT, it’s Han who was the deuteragonist, and the next few scenes where Finn is given the opportunity to wield the Legacy lightsaber, inform us on his own heroic journey.

Although he demonstrates great bravery during his fight against “Nine”, Finn is bested and almost immediately relieved of the sword. It’s only after the Resistance saves the day that he picks it up, alongside a weapon he’s more comfortable with, a blaster. 

We are to understand that Finn’s destiny isn’t to become a Jedi or follow Rey on her path to becoming one, instead, he’s destined to become “a big deal in the Resistance”. 

After that, we don’t actually see the Lightsaber before the end of the movie. But before we dive into the symbolism of the epic fight on Starkiller base, we need to discuss the role of our third main character: Kylo Ren.

Kylo Ren, formerly known as Ben Solo is the only son of Han and Leia, nephew of Luke and grand-kid to Anakin thus making him the heir to the Star Wars legacy. He’s also obsessed with Darth Vader, which makes him the most meta character of the trilogy.

His function in the ST is...complicated. On one hand, he’s the antagonist, the character who opposes and causes trouble for the protagonist but if we analyze his relationship to the Legacy Lightsaber, we quickly   that the lines are blurred.

Because the movies are told from Rey’s POV, in TFA all we are given to see are his actions, but not his motivations--although J.J. gives the audience plenty of hints, but I digress--The first time Kylo lays his eyes on the Legacy Lightsaber, his reaction is visceral.

Some called it entitlement, and in a way it is. But at the same time, it is not--the Lightsaber/Star Wars does indeed belong to his family. In this scene, it is the first time that Ben Solo actually embraces his Skywalker heritage!

It’s important because the first time we saw him, he sliced Lor San Tekka for implying he’s a Skywalker, then we witnessed him murdering his father in a desperate bid for embracing the dark side for good (which he failed). 

Moreover, the Skywalker lightsaber isn’t a relic of Darth Vader, it is Anakin’s sword, a sword of light he lost when he committed to the Dark Side of the Force. In this context, it shouldn’t be something Kylo Ren is seeking. Yet...

Anyway, Finn--who for dramatic effect kept the lightsaber instead of giving it to Rey when they met in the corridor--readies himself to face Kylo Ren, whom we know he’s terrified of, in spite of his previous failure with that weapon.

By allowing Finn to wield the lightsaber a second time, the writers allow us to witness another step in his character progression. But once again, Finn is not destined to win this fight, and the lightsaber lands into the snow.

This is another exciting Excalibur moment--Like the fabled blade in the stone, the Legacy saber starts vibrating until it chooses its champion, flying past Kylo into the hand of Rey. 

Follows a beautifully choreographed fight in the snow, chock-full of raw emotion and symbolism that culminates when Rey slashes Kylo’s face and--for a split second--considers ending his life. But the force and the directors have other plans.

The movie ends on a sort of bittersweet note for me as we see Rey embarking on her journey to Ahch-To. On one hand, she receives the blessing of Leia, the “other Skywalker twin” who places her faith in her.

Yet, on the other hand, we also see her afraid as she reaches Luke and presents the Lightsaber to him as if she was a mere messenger and not the hero of the story.

Thankfully, our Lord and savior Rian Johnson (I’m not being sarcastic- turn around right now if you hate him and TLJ) picks up the story right there to assuage that fear.

Allow me to digress before I dive into TLJ. Imagine J.J. Abrams, wearing Jedi Robes handing over the Skywalker Lightsaber to Rian. “Here. Star Wars is yours now. Go play with it.” (or see alternative image below)

The first thing that Rian does is to take his toolbox and take the lightsaber apart: What is it made of? What part goes where? Do I need all the parts for it to work? How can I make my own lightsaber?

TLJ is a very meta Star Wars movie, even more so than TFA. It’s also a character-driven story,

and presumably, that’s why so many people didn’t “get it”. They either expected the characters to stay static or they wanted a completely different story.

However, as we’ve seen, Rey was destined to become a Jedi, Finn was destined to be a part of the Resistance, and Kylo was destined to not be a mustache-twirling villain.

In the second installment of a series, you need to shake things up, push the characters further down their path. And that’s exactly what Rian does. Rey hands the Skywalker lightsaber to Luke, who simply throws it away.

The Last Jedi is a movie about self-realization, that gesture leads Rey to question her place in the narrative. Until now she convinced herself that her mission was to bring Luke back to the Resistance so he can defeat Kylo Ren and magically fix the galaxy. 

She picks up the lightsaber and tries to convince Luke to come back or to train her because she’s afraid and doesn’t know what to do. She can’t go back to Jakku and has nowhere to go on top of being magically linked to a guy who killed his dad.

The next scene with the Lightsaber occurs after the second Force Bond. Between Luke’s stubbornness and her conflicted feelings towards Ren, she decides to work out her frustration. First, with her staff, then--as her confidence in her abilities grows-- with the Lightsaber. 

It’s a way to show that Rey is slowly starting to understand that she needs to take her destiny into her own hands, and the response won’t come from outside of her. That realization though isn’t made to happen further down the line.

Before that, there are two more times where Rey is trying to hand out the Legacy Lightsaber to a Skywalker before taking it for herself and embracing her destiny.

1 - Right after her fight with Luke. Now that she understands that Ben Solo’s turn to the dark side stems from a big misunderstanding she gives one last chance to Luke to be the savior of the galaxy everyone expects him to be. But Luke has his own demons to fight before being ready (we’ll come back to it)

2. When she ships herself to Ben. Symbolically she’s reiterating that he’s the Skywalker of the trilogy and that his place isn’t by the villain’s side. She wants him to be good (and to climb him like a tree)--But Ben also has his demons to slay before being ready.

The next thing, they’re standing in front of Snoke. Immediately, the raisin-faced villain takes the Skywalker lightsaber away from Rey and tries to manipulate the narrative, in an effort to render both Rey (and Kylo) powerless. 

First, he coldly explains that he laid out a trap to both Rey and his apprentice, and that he’s going to discard Rey because she doesn't have a drop of Skywalker blood in her veins and thus isn’t relevant to the story. 

Whether he lies about the Force bond doesn’t matter because--in the end--Snoke’s obsession with the Skywalkers is his downfall. 

It’s no coincidence Kylo kills Snoke with his grandfather’s weapon, a light side weapon. In that moment it’s not about power, it’s about saving someone he cares for, like Vader saved Luke. 

And the weapon he so desperately wanted to keep for himself in the last movie? He floats it right back to her, proving once and for all he wants her to live and be a part of the story.

Ensues the battle with the praetorian guards where our protagonist and our antagonist fight back to back for dear life. For the second time Ben Solo saves himself thanks to the Skywalker lightsaber that Rey throws back at him.

But then…as he looks down on Snoke’s corpse, Ben/Ren pockets silently the lightsaber.

The thing is, we’re at a crossroads in the story. This is the second episode of a trilogy and both Rey and Kylo have made tremendous progress in their self-realization journey. But they’re not there yet.

In this moment we understand that Kylo has bigger demons to fight before being ready, whilst Rey needs to fully embrace her role in the story. 

Her heart breaks as she listens to Ren’s plea to join his side “because nobody else believes she’s worth it because she’s not a Skywalker”. He wants her to be bad (and marry him)--she wants to save everybody.

She reaches out and calls the Skywalker lightsaber to her but this time, the weapon “hesitates” and Rey and Kylo end up locked into a game of Force tug of war.

Eventually the Lightsaber breaks. In this moment are we to believe that Rey isn’t worthy? Or that Ren/Ben is maybe not so unworthy, and there’s still hope for him?

Fast forward to Crait, where Luke appears to face the First Order alone armed with a laser sword. Many wondered why he’s using the blue Skywalker lightsaber instead of his own green lightsaber.

Well, one answer of many is that not knowing what went down on the Supremacy, Luke appears to the FO--and the audience--as if he’d listened to Rey’s plea on Ahch-To and took the lightsaber she was presenting him.

On a meta level the battle against his nephew is Luke’s climactic moment, and we’re here to witness his last and most daring heroic moment in the saga, where he accepts to embody the galaxy’s “last hope” once more.

Not unlike Obi Wan’s before him, Luke’s sacrifice ensures that Rey becomes “the new hope”.

Some found Luke’s death cheap and tacky, but I found it very moving and thematically relevant to the concept of birth, death and rebirth evoked on Ahch-To. By becoming one with the Force like his mentor before him Luke became more powerful than before. 

With that in mind, is it a coincidence that the title of the next movie is The Rise of Skywalker? I think not. Now we need to discuss the last shot where the Skywalker Lightsaber appears. Rey holding the two shattered pieces in her hands while Leia delivers words of hope.

That’s some powerful imagery here because Rian spent a whole movie shaking up Star Wars and he knows it. That’s why he shows the shattered lightsaber. It is “broken” but not beyond repair. You just need to reassemble it. 

At the same time, it is no longer the “Skywalker lightsaber”, it’s about to become something new, something else, something I’m very much looking forward to discovering in December.

[jackoshadows]

Often times the characters who make up the houses in ASoIaF are not a monolith and the individual characters of each house do not in many ways embody the house themselves. Ned Stark for example was very different from the Starks of yore and the Old Kings of Winter, like Brandon ‘Ice Eyes’ Stark who hung the entrails of slavers from the branches of heart trees, as an offering to the Old Gods.

The TV show and certain fans have created this weird nationalistic like fervor surrounding the discourse around the  various Houses. For example House Stark (The North is the best!, Northern independence! The Story is only about the Starks! The Starks are the main characters) and the North is glorified as some kind of ideal paradise where the best people live. Other characters/houses are expected to help the North and serve the North for free. There’s a special set of rules for the North and the Starks. 

There’s more compassion for the ordeals that the Starks go through and less for the sufferings of Tyrion Lannister or Daenerys Targaryen.  War is wrong except for when the Starks wage it. Only the Starks have the right to fight for their home.  Concessions are made because the Starks are children, but Dany is given no such pass for being a sexually and physically abused 13 year old at the start of the books. There’s an ‘othering’ of characters that don’t belong to fan favorite houses.

Yes, at the heart of the books are the wars and conflicts between the different houses and so it’s natural that we take sides, but let’s recall that GRRM is primarily telling the stories of specific characters and not houses.

Five central characters will make it through all three volumes, however, growing from children to adults and changing the world and themselves in the process. In a sense, my trilogy is almost a generational saga, telling the life stories of these five characters, three men and two women. The five key players are Tyrion Lannister, Daenerys Targaryen, and three of the children of Winterfell, Arya, Bran, and the bastard Jon Snow.

https://www.insider.com/game-of-thrones-original-story-2017-8

And again:

I’ve always had a soft spot for the outsider, for the underdog. ‘Cripples, Bastards, and Broken Things’, as the title of one of the (TV series) episodes goes. The angst that they have in life makes for more conflict, makes for more drama, and there’s something very attractive about that. My Game of Thrones is told by outsiders of both types. None of them fit comfortably into the society into which they’ve been born, and they’re all struggling to find a place for themselves in which they’re valued and loved and respected, despite what their society considers their deficiencies. And out of that, I think, comes good stories. - GRRM

https://www.buzzfeed.com/danieldalton/purple-socks#221x6x5

There are many underdogs and outcasts in the books - exiled characters, disabled characters, non-conformist characters, characters of low birth, ugly characters, abused characters etc.  These characters belong to different houses.

If we look at house Stark, again, the way Sansa is written is because he thought all the House Stark members were getting along and he wanted conflict and infighting among them as well - just like he had for House Lannister and House Targaryen and house Baratheon etc. Name one house where all their members got along?

Arya was one of the first characters created. Sansa came about as a total opposite b/c too many of the Stark family members were getting along and familes aren't like that. Thus, Sansa was created; he ended by saying they have deep issues to work out

https://www.westeros.org/Citadel/SSM/Entry/1259

Something that we can see in the original outline as well:

Each of the contending families will learn it has a member of dubious loyalty in its midst. Sansa Stark, wed to Joffrey Baratheon, will bear him a son, the heir to the throne, and when the crunch comes she will choose her husband and child over her parents and siblings, a choice she will later bitterly rue.

Sure, Sansa did not marry Joffrey and have children in the books, but she still betrays her father and sibling to marry Joffrey and become queen. Something that GRRM has referred to in other SSMs.

Sansa was the least sympathetic of the Starks in the first book; she has become more sympathetic, partly because she comes to accept responsibility for her part in her father's death.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/feature.html?tag=westeros-21&ie=UTF8&docId=49161

So house Stark is not some special exception where everyone gets along and hold hands and sing kumbaya. As of the last book, different factions are pushing for the different Starks to control the North, Sansa and Jon have never got along, Sansa and Arya have deep issues to work out, Robb’s will legitimizes  resurrected Zombie!Jon as Jon Stark while Bran and Rickon are still alive etc. Their reunions, if it happens, is not going to be all hugs and kisses. Even in the original outline there was conflict between Jon and Bran.

Just like the other houses, we also have Stark family members looking out for their own self interests. Just like other houses, individual Starks also seek power and leadership. There is no Stark exceptionalism.

Arya wants to help the powerless and deliver justice like Dany does. Jon wants to reclaim his home like Dany wants to reclaim hers. Bran wants to overcome his disability and be valued like Tyrion wants to be valued. They all want a family and to be loved despite belonging to different houses.  Isn’t that the underlying theme of the books? That these characters should put aside their differences and the houses should unite against a common threat because underneath it they are all the same?

[mytwitterisdogtoast1]

Dragonball GT is the worst series of all the Dragonball series.

I recently watched a video created by Totally Not Mark about which series is better out of GT and Super when it came to the franchise in general and part of me remembered my huge dislike towards the series so I figured I’d get on my keyboard and do that good ol’ fashioned “post an opinion” onto Tumblr because that is what the site is mostly for. So Instead of posting about how I think super is better I’m going to just post why the hell GT is a horrible show to me and the things it gets right and why in general the show is horrible. Now before I get into that context I am in no way a super fan or the type of person who says that subs are better than dubs because we all love anime and shouldn’t restrict others from liking their thing because we fill we are superior to each other based on our willingness to read or because we think “that the voice actors in Japan are so much better and you lose the feeling you get when you watch Americans try and fail at it”. Look as a filthy casual who usually never gets angry or upset at most things my reasons for disliking GT aren’t going to be what most people would see as a bad thing or even say the reasons I like GT are the exact same reasons and if you can come to appreciate the reasons I give that’s cool and if you disagree that is fine as well as long as it leads to civil discourse because again, it’s anime and no one is superior in their likes to another just because of some arbitrary reasons. In the end, it’s all just cartoons. So before I get into why i dislike GT at every turn I see it show up I have to praise it for what it does right to me. That is the visuals of the how the characters looks. See I get that it’s like 10 years into the future or something like that and some people now look way too old like Krillin or just don’t show up ever unless it doesn’t matter but with who we got they look great and I would never take away how good they look. Also the villains as much as I will get into them are actually kinda cool in their own right and aren’t the worst ideas just implemented in such a poor manner that any real good they do is kinda mitigated by the fact that they are almost identical to some other villain in the end. So now with that out of the way I’m going to get into why GT is one of the worst anime of all time. At least to me.  So what makes Dragonball so great is it is a comedy genre even near the final seasons. They either had shitty reasons to amass an army or in general did silly things like make a holiday after themselves when they finally succeeded in ruling the world but in the end the genre of action anime is pretty much parodied with how it is a child who goes in and defeats these muscle men. We have a child who was never really raised by a normal adult trying to fit into a world outside of his normal views and fights these villains who against normal people would lose but in the end they all end up losing to a little boy. It’s a nice adventure with laughs and enough action to really get people to enjoy it. As much as I like Dragonball I never really liked it as much as Z. Yes I do know that it is mostly just Z over here in the west but I don’t see them really being the same manga with the shift in tone that the two had and the styles of adventure they ended up having in Z is so vastly different in comparison that to me they are totally different series when compared to each other. Also I was growing up when Z first came over to America so I didn’t see Dragonball until after it made its first debut on Toonami. So again, totally different series to me.  As for Z? Well Z is my favorite anime of all time. It’s by far not the best anime ever but I do believe it is the best action anime of all time for a couple of reasons. 1: I love how in the end they just fight better versions of the previous final boss. Vegeta? That’s just stronger Raditz who can transform. Frieza? That’s just stronger Vegeta who can transform multiple times. Cell? Thats just stronger Frieza who can transform multiple times, Regenerate, Use everyones powers, and also absorb people. You get the picture by now. Everyone else who comes after is just a “better version” of the last and that tickles my fancy. 2: It helped make certain parts of the genre of shonen manga via the introduction of tropes. Transformations weren’t really a thing before Z came along and pretty much every action anime since then has used tropes that Z has introduced. 3: It still holds up today in being a good anime and manga and in general the popularity of it was so big that even now when I’m a 30 something year old that it got a new series to continue even after GT finished it off in Super. These are the reason I think it’s the best action anime of all time but again, feel free to disagree if you want to.  As for why GT is such a shit show to me it all comes down to the fact that it introduces absolutely nothing new when it comes to itself that even the villains and the characters are a little in general copies of other characters. That and no one matters compared to Goku. If we start it off sure we have people like Trunks and Pan and even “insert comedy character who is only here because plot that could just be ignored and even removed” A.K.A. Giru. See the series starts off pretty generic in that Goku is training Uub up in the look out. He just disappeared and is finishing his time in what I assume was a 10 year training session. We are introduced to our first “villains” in Pilaf and his crew. They are finding out about not only gods look out but they also find a new set of dragonballs. Convenient plot details that are either confusing or just there to set up the series. Firstly before I get into that why was this never said before, Why did Bulma never pick up on these dragonballs, Why did pilaf just now find them if he’d been searching his entire life after dragonball? So many questions in general but still. Not the point. The point is this, they don’t have a real reason except to introduce our first main villains. Pilaf and his gang. A little weird when you look at it cause Pilaf has been bested so many times that him succeeding now seems like a stupid thing to happen. Thankfully his success is only to again, push the story. Goku and his gang have to now search for the dragonballs. Which is exactly what happened in Dragonball. This time, it’s across the universe. This is where my ability to really in general compare the shows ends. That is until in general I get to the final stretch. See there are very few things I can equate to Dragonball besides the adventure of the day aspect. You have the obvious nod towards Oolong with Zoonama who both want to marry a girl and end up falling for a boy in drag. You have the fact of Goku with a tech savvy Briefs person as well as a spunky fighter. Goku is a kid. Maybe a couple other things if I looked it up and compared but the main thing is that first section of GT is based heavily on Dragonball in general. The final stretch part begins with the “Red Ribbon Army” copy in the General Rildo part with Dr Myuu who is just also a copy of Android 20. So after this part finishes it kicks into the saiyan saga of DBZ. Baby is by far a complete knock off of 3 villains in DBZ being comprised of Vegeta, Frieza, and Garlic Jr. Why is this so? let’s face it, If you compare those 3 with him its basically a one for one beat on what he does with someone else. Firstly he’s in the body of Vegeta and even when he starts losing he goes and just becomes a great ape. Pretty much what Vegeta does in the first saga of Z. As for Frieza they can both survive in space, Has multiple different forms and lastly he hates saiyans. Now sure the reason is different but the disdain for them is pretty much comparing blue to a lighter shade of blue that looks just like blue. We could even mention that Baby is like Cell in that they are both made by science but the comparisons end there. As for Garlic Jr Baby does the same thing in taking control of people and making them the same as with the black water mist. These are what make Baby pretty much a whole of 3 separate people. Next comes the Androids and cell. Super 17 is pretty much just perfect cell. You have past villains returning to take out Goku. Those of which are Frieza and Cell. Which funny enough Frieza comes back but dies by trunks who warns of 2 androids coming to fight against Goku and kill him. Which comes in the forms of Dr Myuu and Dr Gero. Both of which, are you know, not the main androids being talked about. In fact it’s actually 17 and hell 17. Both of which are going to fuse and make one super android who changes forms into basically cell in that he can absorb energy and also has infinite energy as well. These are basically the main parts except that the end takes multiple people to fight off and kill Super 17. To which they then wish back people with the dragonballs because one of the Z fighters died and they want to bring them back. Seems that it would be fine except for the small little detail of its an evil dark dragon who when after granting the 7th wish he creates these evil dragons. Before I get into those dragons lemme question this. If Kami and Piccolo fused and the dragonballs stopped existing for a bit and it took Dende a new person to create new dragonballs wouldn’t he know of the evil dragons as well as also in general start a new chain thus stopping 7 evil dragons from existing? Oh well, at least we get 7 different dragons for Specifically only Goku to fight against. I can see people saying how can you compare the evil dragons to Buu which it’s a lot easier than you would think. How many different forms of Buu are there? would you guess about maybe 7? Cause there are 7 different forms of Buu. 6 of which are different forms when he absorbs other people. So lets take it this way. Omega Shenron also absorbs 6 different “people” in the 6 different dragonballs that aren’t his. Sure, he only gets one more form in that he has now been transformed into Omega from Syn Shenron but still. Transformations are a check. So what are the 7 different forms of Buu? 1:Kid Buu 2: Buff Buu which is when he absorbs the southern Supreme Kai. 3: Fat Buu which he gets from absorbing the Supreme Kai. 4: Evil old Buu. 5: Super buu. 6: Super buu with Gotenks absorbed. 7: Super Buu with Piccolo absorbed. 8: Piccolo with Gohan absorbed. Now some of you might be saying “that’s 8 different forms of Buu and not 7″ But in the end Syn and Omega are both different “forms” thus making 8 different forms of dragons as well. The main part that gets annoying though is how they defeat Shenron. Firstly they use fusion and then don’t win even though they could have in the end. Why? Arbitrary reasons. See in Z it was because Vegito wanted to be fused to save the others. In GT it’s cause they needed to defeat him with the spirit bomb. Just like they did with Buu. Both spirit bombs are also involving a larger amount of people than normal. In Z it was all of earth. Every person. In GT it was the whole universe. That’s not even the final part of how it’s the same. At the end of Z Goku says goodbye to his friends and fucks off. GT does the exact same thing. The show is honestly pretty much a beat for beat of Dragonball and Z. It adds nothing to the universe and what it does add  is half assed. Things like Vegeta having an epiphany that Goku is better than him twice at the final end villain or having Goku lose a tournament as a child or stuff like that fill in the cracks of the shit cake that is GT with more shit that doesn’t help or make it better. GT even fails to make what it had that was great good. The use of a new level of SSJ to defeat Baby was also used in the same ways of how Kaioken wasn’t enough to beat Frieza and then SSJ was also attained then. Everything is on a bigger scale while being comparable to the smaller scale before it. The reason I don’t compare this with Super as that even when it takes from earlier seasons of DBZ or anything else it is fresh in comparison. Goku and Vegeta doing their rivalry? not beat for beat. Older characters? They have use. Repeat villains? Frieza is almost a completely new person with his arc in that he now knows he needs to train and actually does and also does some good and even respects Goku. That’s why I don’t compare the two because they are incomparable. GT? It’s pretty much a shitty version of what came before it.

[joons]

The one demographic I wonder about TROS are the kids now who will have grown up with it, who view it as always having been part of SW. Like I wonder if the SW fandom 10-15 years from now will be full of TROS defenders who argue it’s soo profound and meaningful and just accept Rey Palpatine because it’s part of accepted canon to them, like the Luke-Leia sibling reveal is to many fans. I hope insular fandom websites like LJ are popular again by then, if this happens, so I can avoid all of it.

I prefer to think, if anything, we’ll get people like “um, why did Ben die” because they don’t have to deal with anti discourse denying that his character is human when he was played by the most talented actor and given a sympathetic edit. 

But I see a difference between prequel and sequel retconning that I hope won’t lead to TROS’ rehabilitation. You can complain about midichlorians and politics dimming the sense of wonder of the original movies and how Anakin is rewritten as a tragedy. But if you think about it a second further, it’s clear that shows us that the Jedi were fallen and were rebuilt through compassion in the originals, and the contrast gives us new angles to think about the whole saga. TROS reintroduces Palpatine and his desire to live through his granddaughter, thus forcing us to reframe the way we see ROTJ. Why are we being asked to think about it from a new angle? Is it showing us something new about the nature of generational trauma, or of the problems with thinking the Jedi can do no wrong? Is it going to show us an even more powerful form of love and connection that will stand against this ancient power? NO, ALL IT DOES IS MAKE POINTLESS THE SACRIFICES OF EVERY OTHER CHARACTER. And their sacrifices aren’t even like ... well-meaning but wrong. We’re not really reflecting on how they made the best decisions they could and ended up accidentally making things worse. Palpatine lived because JJ wanted him to, not because the original characters didn’t kill him hard enough. They didn’t make a MISTAKE of allowing him to live or something that has unforeseen consequences thirty years later. That’s why Luke thinking about killing Kylo has an impact, because it reframes how easy it is to make a mistake that has a lasting effect. Like, Luke is trying to say “Maybe it’s better if I don’t rush off to help my friends like in ESB because I only make things worse.” Palpatine coming back offers no questions like that. It’s just like ... happening for some reason. It doesn’t expand the world except to keep characters dead while others get to come back to life. 

[clairen45]

About that Dark Visions comic...

I think it’s fair to say that when Marvel’s Dark Visions miniseries about Vader as seen from a different perspective was announced, everybody was excited. We have been hammered on the head since ROTS that “there are heroes on both sides” , and with the expectations concerning the end of the saga as a massive redemption and hope plot, you were bound to be curious about what they would come up with. TBH, I was not expecting to see a softer side to Vader. It would be wrong to expect anything like that, and it would somehow diminish from what happens to him in the OT. He is supposed to be more machine than man. So, no, I definitely did not expect him, or wished him to be the kind of guy operating as the Death Star Secret Santa, knitting socks for the poor and needy, or rescuing people’s pets. It was not my understanding that he was much loved by his Imperial “colleagues” either. When we first see him in ANH; he is derided and dismissed both by a colleague (sorry, forgot the name but you all know whose faithless person I am thinking of) and Leia. Respected for sure, because of the fear he instills in people. So if awe is obviously the right word to use, in the most etymological sense of the term, that is to say “ a feeling of reverential respect mixed with fear or wonder”, how many people found Vader awesome? Besides the audience. There had to be. And as a concept, it was pretty cool.

That being said, if you think of the title for the series, there were already many ways of interpreting it. Dark Visions... Visions of the power of the Dark Side? The way some people saw Vader? The way Vader thought people saw him? Did the stories happen for real or are they just what the title imply they are: visions. Images. Fantasies. Daydreams or nightmares? Possibly just the imagination of some deranged mind. There is something there that implies that we are not dealing with something too objective. But rather something unhinged and disturbing.

Now, I intend to keep this in mind about the issue that has been raising so much concern: “Tall, Dark, and Handsome”. I think malaise is really the word we should settle for. This issue is problematic in many ways.

For those who haven’t read it or just heard about it through social media and people complaining about it (possibly people on the other side of the spectrum fanning about it), this is how you can sum it up: this is the first person narrative of an unnamed nurse, working on the Death Star for Vader’s personal doctor. The nurse has developed an obsessive infatuation for Vader that has her snoop around him and collect bits and pieces about him (mostly gorish remains of his time at the medical bay) that she hides in her room. She keeps on daydreaming about him and the connection she thinks they have, until one day she musters up her courage and goes to talk to him in his private quarters in order to let him know of her love for him. He cuts her off in all the meanings of the word, both interrupting her speech of eternal devotion and undying love, and piercing her through with his saber. Last moment we see her is lying dead on the floor while he moves away and asking for the sanitation to rid him of the “garbage”.

Ok, that’s a tall order. Here are points that I find entirely problematic.

1.The Question of Agency:

The authors decided to give a voice, a narrative agency to a character that is presented as inconsequential to the story. She is an anonymous nurse, a dot, in  the bigger picture of the Empire. Much, let’s say, like our current ST heroes: Rey, Finn, and Rose, who started as “nobody”, even more so in the case of Finn and Rey who have literally been deprived of their identities. You could think it’s cool to thus give a voice to this nurse. Even more so when you consider that throughout the comic, she is presented as downtrodden, poor, pushed over, abused physically and verbally, dismissed, and despised. Her employer disrespects her constantly, calling her “fool”, “idiot”, or “stupid”. He shoves her around, and also diminishes her job, calling it “not a real job” or insinuating that she does not do her job correctly. Cases in point:

And what do we get in this story? A female nobody who starts asserting herself. Wow.

She tells her own story. First person narrative. She becomes an agent.

Look at the evolution of her daydream fantasies. She starts from damsel in distress who needs a man to protect her from her daily abuser

From nurse whose job means something, to a solid professional, and equal partner to her fantasy Lord:

And finally a powerful woman in her own rights, even overshadowing her partner, and who is able to defend herself.

Which then matures into her mustering up the courage to speak for herself, and tell her feelings to the (unwilling) object of her affection.

Except that.... well...she is just presented as a massive psycho. And, ok, it’s fair, we all know that there are female stalkers, and that her obsession for Vader is totally crazy because she doesn’t know anything about him, and she actually fell for someone who was treating her as poorly as the others. But there is the malaise there... The mix of female empowerment and batshit craziness. That’s what put a lot of people ill-at-ease. I wouldn’t even call that subversion, because, dudes, what are we subverting there exactly. It’s not like women are not daily abused and treated poorly at work and in their relationships on a daily basis... And are we supposed to take that as a cautionary tale about fangirl craziness? Because, there again, why did they need to have that girl get such a shitty treatment all through the comic. It is like the comic says that she deserved it. In the end it’s not just Vader calling her trash. It’s also the doctor calling her trash for most of the comic, and even have her literally waddle in a trash compactor. Cause this was supposed to be subtle?

Like, fine, if it were only Vader calling her garbage because the man is just dead inside, which, fairly, is represented in the comic. But it’s just not Vader, it is the way the character is presented through the eyes of the doctor AND even through the eyes of a cartoonist who keeps on representing her with the stupidest darned faces.

And there is no other viewpoint. Family, friends, other nurses or colleagues who could give us another idea about her. Or explain why she is like that. Nope. Basically, this woman is given a voice just so she can be cut off mid-sentence and made... fun of... I guess? Was that the author’s goal? Is it what we are supposed to feel? About this pathetic character and her pathetic life, dreams, goals, feelings, and eventual demise?

The “Subversion” of Female Romantic Tropes

Like ... LOL... How is that “subverted” anyways? But, ok, let’s go through them. It has all the classic elements of female literature.

The Cinderella story: nobody falls for high lord and expects to be swooped off her feet. Complete with ball scene, because, yes, why not? I give them a point, though, for the cool reflection on the ground which has her in her regular scrubs... BTW, Beauty and the Beast in the mix as well.

the nurse complex! Otherwise known as the Florence Nightingale effect. You know, woman is going to take care of the guy... They even made her a real nurse! Again, so subtle. Couldn’t make her any other profession and still be victim of this complex.

the reference to so-called “trashy” female lit, think bodice ripping, Harlequin, and their infamous covers. Even the title of the comic: “Tall, Dark, and Handsome”

The effing Phantom of the Opera!

and of course all the female discourse about love, because, yep, trashy: “kindred spirits” etc...

And again, how are we supposed to interpret it? Well, hang on, this woman, remember, is a bat-shit crazy deluded psycho, who has delusions about life and love. Oh, and the doctor says she is trash. And he throws all her stupid gory, disgusting trickets in the trash. Oh and also Vader says she is garbage. Well. Ok. So, I guess all of that which mattered to her, all her ideas, all that she loved, was just that. Trash. Garbage. Well, take that, you female reader!

But wait, it gets even better...

Star Wars is just trash!

Yep, because on closer look, most of the fantasies this woman has are very Star-Warsy. I am floored that they are actually trashing these:

Anakin and Padmé’s Naboo scenery, green, lush, terrace, nightgowns...

The scene when Anakin learns about Padmé’s death:

and of course, the one that you were not expecting... Reylo... “You are not alone”

Again, why is this problematic? In itself, it is fine and fair to be making fun of trashy female literature and campy romance novels, it is also fine to make fun of crazy stalkers, and it is also fine to be making fun of Star Wars. So why does it feel so icky in this comic somehow?

You can’t help but feel disgusted when you consider how poorly this woman is represented. There is not one aspect of her life that is not ridiculed. And again, this is about a woman who has NOTHING. They could have the girl fall in love with Vader and being killed by him because he is a cold-hearted machine. He killed his wife, the love of his life, so yea, of course he will feel not a pang of remorse or hesitation at killing this nobody who thinks she is in love with him. But they did not need to make fun of the very little she had in her life: her dreams. Her effing dreams. Plus the crazy stalker psycho. And the crazy face. And the fact that again we are talking about a woman, who had NOTHING. No family, no connection, no friends, no respect at work, not many possessions except her sad little Vader treasure chest.

And again, context. Here we are, reading a Star Wars comic where a lot of fanboys have been using the EXACT same terms to ridicule women in the fandom. Especially in the Reylo context. Trash. Garbage. Crazy bitches. Ridiculing theories about ... well, well, ain’t it a sweet surprise... Phantom of the Opera, or Beauty and the Beast parallels with Reylo. I’ll be damned. It feels crazy awkward, if you ask me. I mean, again, it’s all fair, but you don’t do that when you are in the midst of a toxic fandom war.

So why do I give zero F...  about it in the end?

If some antis in the fandom saw that as validation, well, let them have their moment of happiness. It won’t last. We can give them that.

One, I don’t think for one second that it means anything about what will happen in the ST as far as Reylo is concerned. Again, they are even making fun of Anidala in the comic, and dude, that thing happened. As my good friends from @lordsofthesithpodcast would tell you after their glorious SWCC panel : Romance, these ships belong in Star Wars.

Two, as I highlighted in the introduction, this belongs in the Dark Visions series. It is meant, in my own opinion, to be disturbing and unhinged. Not sugar coated. So maybe the whole point was shock value. Mission accomplished. It was poor taste again given the context and the awful treatment THEY (and not just Vader) give their female character, but yea, dark visions. Not Star Wars Adventures. You have to look at the target audience and everything.

Three, if it were not for the in-your-face references to female tropes, I actually took most of it as a critique of fandom in general. The problem is not that she is a fangirl. There are some crazy obsessive fangirls, mind you. The problem is that they are making fun of all things female on top of that. But, remove the romantic aspects. Couldn’t that apply to fanboys as well? I could totally picture a cadet, or some other young imperial, developing the same crazed obsession over Vader. And it was just as toxic. And, tbh, it could very well be. Collecting trinkets is not just a girl thing, and after seeing with my own eyes the tons of merch purchased by fanboys at the recent SWCC convention, or the obsessive way some guy could talk to you about Vader and the minute trivial details in his life, or that they are the only ones understanding the guy, well yea... it works...

I’ll even go a step further. I wondered for a sec if the whole thing was not even a critical meta about the franchise as a whole. Let me explain. Some fanboys have complained about the femininization of the franchise, that is “polluting” the shades of Pemberley, I mean Star Wars. Claiming that what is happening right now is utter garbage. Also also, I have another possible reading which has the nurse representing the current state of the fandom and how crazy obsessed they can be over a franchise that some currently view as tired and dead inside (especially since it has fallen into the fold of Disney). Representing the unhealthy relationship between the two. And guess what, it doesn’t end well for the fandom. Who will never get what they want.

I will finally quote this from Chuck Wendig who was fired from the project and came up with that particular comment on Twitter, and which actually seems to go with how I tried to read it myself:

Apropos of absolutely nothing, my issue three of SHADOW OF VADER was about a toxic fanboy (a morgue attendant on the Death Star) who became obsessed with Vader. (And it didn’t end well for him. Er, obviously.) I thought it was good and I’m sorry you won’t see it! Onward we go. 

I think they kept some of the original idea from Wendig, but it took a turn for the worse. It would be great if the authors cared to explain about their intent for this piece if any. I am not saying they should. I actually totally respect and support full freedom of speech and authorial choices. It is our choice, then, as a reader to read or not the material we don’t care about. I am just curious to know their opinion I guess, and I was not able to find any comment online. If anyone has a reference, I am interested...

In any event, I think everyone should read the comic for themselves if they are curious about it. Better to make your own opinion about it.

[roxannepolice]

Long asks anon again, here to offer my opinion on the current wank. Rey as a character is rather blatantly breaking sw story rules and nothing is going to get SFF fans hackles up like rule breakage. This is root of both the MarySue accusations and current wank. Rey has a tragic backstory thats doubling as the only failure she can call her own. But its a) damn near entirely offscreen and b) serves as convenient justification for why shes competent at near everything that comes up.

Reys instantly good at the force because of a convenient force download that to the best of my knowledge only occured in the noncanon KOTOR II and quite frankly cant blame most of the general audience for not getting because without prior knowledge or the novelizations why would they? She has darkness in her but as so far used and touched it consequence free and its almost entirely symbolically externalized on the Kylo (and in SW symbolism is Real in a way it isnt in other narratives) Shes strong in the force because Light rises to meet Dark but to quote the current crop of movies ‘thats not how the force works) or at least thats never how it worked before. Shes the first SW protagonist to go behind enemy lines and come out with both hands in the second movie. For ppl wondering how come Luke and Ani never get labeled MarySues, this is why, they got thier asses handed to them, Rey hasnt. There /is/ something /off/ in Reys story, and ppl pick up on it. if you can make a post (w/ over 1k notes!) about how great it is that a character meant to prop up 7hrs worth of movies has little to no character development to go through, somethings off. If multiple ppl can make posts about how its neat Rey can tap into the darkside (still characterized as evil in ST) consequence free (with some quite frankly stupid justifications, 'shes disciplined’ really? jedi lacked a lot of things thats not one of them) somethings off and again, if the only failure your main heroine has is /entirely retroactive something’s off/. If the story were getting with the is the story most ppl think we are, a 'female empowerment’ (i dont feel particularly empowered by being told I have an equal chance at being a deus ex machina but ok) than well, her story is over and theres no need for IX (hell it could have been over in TFA, most ppl assumed she had accepted her place as the future jedi in that one) and no need for reylo The ST was always gonna deconstruct all that came before it purely by virtue of being a sequel. The tragedy of anakin skywalker is now a farce, the happy ot ending now a tragedy, and the mythopoetic structure shot to shit in the name of serialization and perpetual warfare. this stand true for all the sequel characters including rey and ben. the only question is are we going to get anything out of it? I compare it to home renovation. You can knock out a wall and the walls gone, but new opportunities arise. With Benlo, I’m reasonably confident that there will be at least some attempt to take advantage of the new space. With rey and the resistance kids? not so much. it just feels like they knocked down a blue wall to rebuild it as pink one and at the point it just feels like a waste of time because ive seen this before. Ive seen pure cinnamon roll desert orphan reform jedi order If this was all youre going to do that the fuck was the point? which circles around to my problem with team good guy this go around and That Scene. JJ twisted the story into a pretzel to justify the winners of the last round being the underdogs again and then rian twisted so much further the storys head may as well be up its own ass. And then at the very end he shoots it all to shit and rushes to reassure us its all gonna be okay. He removes the entire point of the underdog trope /the tension that comes from the fact that they might lose/. I mean there wasnt a whole lot of that to begin with already but really? So theres no tension that Reys gonna win so her journey feels frictionless, and theres no question where shes gonna end up so full offense why give a shit? Thats where the whole 'can rey lose a fight?’ thing comes from. Ppl want conflict in her arc to justify its existence and give us a reason why this her story to begin with. if the only character going through growth for all three movies is ben, if the only characters whos fate is up in the air is ben, and if all the tension in the reylo relationship comes from ben, then why is this /reys story/? why not just make it about the character actually driving all the drama and thus, the story?   As a final thought, im going to add that having Kylo be aware and insecure that hes never gonna be as Iconic as Vader was a great story choice, regardless of where ends up. Current Rebels, on the other hand, seems to have not gotten the memo that they are never gonna be as iconic as Original Rebels, and the story itself seems to being trying to sell them to me as being better. Rey is Luke but better, Poe/Finn are Han wo the smuggler grit, and id be lying if i said it didnt piss me off.

&

Long asks anon to kick down ur door again, AND ANOTHER THING. SW is a lotta things. Subtle aint one of them, and St hasnt changed in that regard. If you have to debate it chances are either a) ur arguing counter to the text in which case mor power to you but not really helpful for predictions or intended meaning or b) /it aint there. A bunch of ppl didnt like anidala, but nobody doubted we were supposed to think they were in love by the end of AOTC, bunch of ppl didnt like poes arc, but no one doubts he fucked up by not listening to holdo was the intended take away. Which brings to rey and flaws or lack there of. Were told rey has flaws but she has yet to suffer any real consequences from them with the exception of The Damn Parentage Wank, which again, pulls the double duty of making her hyper competent at everything. Because rey has no consequences for her flaws, from a story function pov there aren’t any. If rey did have a flaw to overcome, we would all agree what it was

Now won’t you all just look at this beautiful, spot on rant which has been lagging in my askbox since the last time Rey’s flaws or lack thereof were the discourse’s focus (November, I believe?) and suddenly became a thing again, courtesy of Tweetgate. I think you really summed up the crux of this debate wonderfully, anon.

I particularly agree with the part about Rey not getting narratively punished for whatever flaws we’d like her to have (great point about returning from behind the enemy lines with both arms still in place), when SW don’t stay away from allowing characters to get “punished” even for otherwise applaudable features - vide Padmé, whose idealism is what Palps manipulates into gaining more power (this is why Padmé will never come off as a Mary Sue or too perfect, btw). But I’ll say even more - Rey doesn’t even get called out on her flaws, except for by Ben, who’s mostly dismissed as a baddie like Palpatine saying Luke was foolish to rely on his friends. Let’s just consider one thing - both Anakin and Luke get called out on their flaws by Yoda (Anakin repeatedly and by lots of other people for that matter) whereas with Rey, the same grumpy-yet-jolly senex pops up from the afterlife to further inform us what a great jedi material she is.

TBH, I have a very cynical theory as to why Rey is being pushed as the main character while it’s difficult to deny that it’s Kylo Ben who does all the plot heavy lifting. I’m pretty sure Ben’s arc was the first one DLF thought out (and the big question is, was it the only one they thought out) and only later on decided to make Rey the main character, which also involved much less spontaneous writing. Mind you, it’s not as if benepemption didn’t have a manufactured subtaste to it, but with Rey’s heroine’s journey stiff structure occasionally substitutes any in-world explanations of her actions (this is why I have to hope renperor has some narrative purpose rather than happening because lovers need to be separated and anti-hero needs to achieve what he wanted in 2nd act). I feel as if whatever potential her character had (and hopefully still has, pending IX) got smothered by layer upon layer of making her likable by everyone, which largely relied on negative characterization: she’s not helpless, she’s not too naive, not cynical, not too emotional, not too emotionless, not morally corruptible, not anything you’ve ever complained about regarding any SW character, not falling for the bad boy, not not not - and in the end it’s kinda difficult to say what Rey is like and while the goal of making her widely likable was achieved, it also made it almost impossible to view her as loveably flawed/annoying like the classic characters. And on top of all this is the matter of making her a nobody just like you!, as DLF appears to say with uncle Sam’s gesture (which also kinda assumes the existence of a Star Wars fan as some uniform entity? because if you identify with her, good for you, I just don’t understand why the franchise assumes I’ll identify with her by the grace of being a SW fan alone), because, as you excellently put it, the message here is that everyone can be chosen by God - which again, it’s not as if the saga ever contradicted this, so why the hell make a case of it? I can’t agree that it’s made into Rey’s flaw, though, imo her low birth only serves to further frame her as an oppressed virtue. And I definitely agree regarding too much of her growth being left off-screen, or before the story ever begins. The problem here isn’t even that it is left off-screen (it’s not as if we had huge insight into any of the pt or ot characters) but rather that her characterizations is left off-screen while being depicted as at least untypical (unique to put it bluntly) for her situation (same goes for Finn). A hopeful, kind person growing up on her on her own in slavery under a nicer name is a rarity and DLF makes a case for it being a rarity - and this sparks up curiosity in her past, as if market pandering to Re/sky wasn’t enough. So from this pov her un-reveal being frustrating isn’t just a case of not wanting to love her or her self only a potentially deeper psychological question getting answered with well, light.

I should add, Ben’s arc feels like the most spontaneous one (though Finn’s may yet be a masterpiece) and he’s the one to admit his fear of not living up to Vader’s legacy, because I think he’s the character serving as the creators’ vessel, more or less like Luke was Lucas’ avatar in ot. In his fear regarding Vader’s legacy one can feel Disney’s fear due to having bought popculture’s holy grail and not being entirely sure what to do with it. On this background, Rey (a literal scavenger of OT’s pieces) and rebels 2.0 repeatedly blessed by Leia come off as what DLF would want to be. And the result is that the character which was supposed to be Vader 2.0 proves the most original and surprising one, whereas “breaths of fresh air” come off as room aromatizers with “fresh” written on them.

And as far as the plot being bended into a pretzel and then disappearing up it’s own ass, well, a part of me is still hoping that taking virtually the same villains as before is a mythological-psychoanalitical metaphor of a nigredo repeating itself until the unconscious gets accepted by the conscious…. but, tbh, as the leaks flow this hope is withering.

[cassatine]

About saying Star Wars is Buddhist or Taoist -- I don't believe SW has been created by practicing Buddhists, and the appropriation has absolutely been problematic (there can be white and non-Asian Buddhists because it *is* a proselytized religion, but I don't know of many on the creative team). However, a twitter thread I saw about the subject was written by a South Asian Buddhist who *wanted* more recognition of Buddhist themes. I've also seen Buddhist websites write about TLJ.

Also, lj-writes insisting that SW is about moral dualism while being one of the strongest condemners of TLJ for rejecting moral dualism, doesn’t really add up. IDK their faith but their post ends with “Christianity is good enough!”. TLJ has surface symbols of Buddhism and Taoism AND themes of anti-classism, non-dualism, action returning to the actor, the Middle Way, skillful means, etc. And they see it as a deeply wrong entry in the saga. So it feels like this is lowkey “keep SW Christian”?

Long, long, disgressive answer under cut

About saying Star Wars is Buddhist or Taoist – I don’t believe SW has been created by practicing Buddhists, and the appropriation has absolutely been problematic (there can be white and non-Asian Buddhists because it *is* a proselytized religion, but I don’t know of many on the creative team).

As you said Buddhism is open to all as a religion – and I think it’s also important to note that someone can be interested in the ideas and philosophy without active religious practice, and that’s there nothing wrong with that. I’d actually say it’s good to be interested in other cultures and religions, that it helps to confront the fact that one’s values are not universal (and not ~better or ~superior)

But I also think there is a difference to be drawn between Buddhism, the real thing, and the watered down (for Westerners) new age version of Buddhism

With this established – Star Wars wasn’t created by Buddhists, though among the creatives involved some had a certain appreciation for it: I don’t know about current members of LF and its creatives, but Irvin Kershner studied Zen Buddhism and had an appreciation for the philosophy; Gary Kurtz, who was more involved than most in helping Lucas with the firsts SW drafts, was interested in comparative religion, and Buddhism especially – I think he actually converted. According to himself, Gary Kurtz helped Lucas defining the Force (among other things); but they had a, hum, falling out and it seems Lucas dropped much of what Kurtz had been pushing for afterward (for example, according to Kurtz, he convinced Lucas to drop the Chosen One element in the ANH drafts, but as we know it would be reintroduced).

But then there’s Lucas himself, and we’re gonna enter actually problematic territory. First, Lucas does call himself a Buddhist – well, he calls himself a ~Buddhist Methodist (Methodism being the religion he was brought up in), with such justifications as "that’s what my daughter said when the school asked" (paraphrased) and “I was raised Methodist. Now let’s say I’m spiritual. It’s Marin County. We’re all Buddhists up here” (quoted verbatim). Honestly the Marin County thing I find… The Bay Area and Marin County being a place where so-called “alternative religions” flourish and where new age spiritualism established itself strongly starting in the 60s really doesn’t make everyone there “Buddhist”, thank you very much, and pretending so at the very least betrays a lack of understanding of what Buddhism actually is.

Still, I must note being flippant about the reasons behind one’s religious beliefs is nothing bad in itself! Lucas is under no obligation to disclose these reasons if he doesn’t want to, no more than anyone else. 

But looking at Lucas’ understanding of Buddhism, or lack thereof – well, to do that we need to look at Lucas’ views on religions in general, views deeply influenced by Campbell, who was a shitty scholar of comparative religion, and pretty explicit about both having an agenda (the salvation of a modern, Western man alienated by his own modernity), and the fact that he was an adept of the “pick and choose what fits my ideas and ignore the rest”. In fact, as early as his first book, he was anticipating and deflecting methodological criticism in the introduction: 

“Perhaps it will be objected that in bringing out the correspondences I have overlooked the differences between the various Oriental and Occidental, modem, ancient, and primitive traditions. The same objection might be brought, however, against any textbook or chart of anatomy, where the physiological variations of race are disregarded in the interest of a basic general understanding of the human physique. There are of course differences between the numerous mythologies and religions of mankind, but this is a book about the similarities; and once these are understood the differences will be found to be much less great than is popularly (and politically) supposed. (Introduction to The Hero With a Thousand Faces, Joseph Campbell)

There’d be a lot to say about this passage – it’s not how you answer criticism or justify your methodology. Campbell shows here he’s perfectly aware that his focus on “correspondences” is in itself grounds for criticism. The thing is, in itself focusing on similarities is not “wrong, don’t do that ever” – but in conjunction with the overlooking of differences, it’s a choice that should be explained and justified as an approach for the concerned study. Campbell’s preference for exploring similarities is not inherently bad; it’s the fact (and this is the Cliff notes version) that it’s done in conjunction with a complete disregard for differences, as well as by relying on an ethnocentric framework of interpretation, among other things. Like not justifying his approach – “Once these [similarities] are understood the differences will be found to be much less great blah blah blah” is not a justification, it’s a polite way of saying everyone who doesn’t agree just doesn’t get it.

(And I disgress but like. This book was published in 1949. So when he’s comparing his lack of focus on differences to the lack of focus on “physiological variations of race” in anatomy texts, there is no fucking way he didn’t know what he was referencing, ie the terribad, rooted-in-prejudice physical anthropology of the 19th and early 20th century, and he wrote that after fucking WWII. “There’s no scientific racism in textbooks” is the way he defends giving the flying bird to methodology. I don’t even know what to do with that. Did Campbell thought textbooks should get into “physiological variations of race”? He’s not exactly framing that absence as a good thing, and he’s decontextualizing it, making it sound like an oversight rather than “we tried to take the racism out of the textbooks.” Is he, along with the “it’s political” hint subtly accusing his anticipated detractors of racism, equating the rooted-in-prejudice focus on “physiological variations of race” that was already considered non-scientific when he was writing, to saying differences in myths should be taken into account? In any case it’s a false equivalency. A stunningly bad one.)

Thing is, whether comparative should emphasize similarities or differences is something about which there’s been discourse for years. Nowadays we lean more towards particularism, ie. emphasizing differences. Of course, both approaches have their own pitfalls – the same main pitfall, in truth, which is that focusing exclusively on similarities or on differences erases the true complexity of a phenomenon. But it should be said the current leaning towards particularism has much to do with the uncomfortable admission that much of the thinking behind the emphasizing of similarities was rooted in prejudice:

The problem of the same and the different has become a crucial issue within the field of comparative mythology and for the self-definitions of postmodernism. […] we must acknowledge that the emphasis on likeness, often epitomized by its critics in the same metaphor that James Tate uses to defend it (the metaphor of not seeing in the dark), has done great harm in the history of the study of other peoples’ cultures. Occasionally the metaphor is used to make a positive statement about sameness; thus Francis Bacon, in his essay “The Unity of Religions,” argued positively for the mutual resemblance of religions: “All colors agree in the dark.” Almost always, however, it is pejorative. […] Even without the metaphor of cats or cows in the dark, the assumption that all members of a class are alike has been used in many cultures to demean the sexual or racial Other. (I capitalize Other in the anthropological rather than theological sense, designating people regarded as nonhuman because of their ethnic difference, rather than the deity that is other because of its metaphysical difference.) After all, the essence of prejudice has been defined as the assumption that an unknown individual has all the characteristics of the group to which he or she belongs. “People like you,” or “They’re all alike” is always an offensive phrase. Racism and sexism are alike in their practice of clouding the judgment so that the Other is beneath contempt, or at least beneath recognition; they dehumanize, deindividualize, the racially and sexually Other. […] We speak of racial discrimination, but the myths teach us that the real problem is racial indiscrimination—the unwillingness to discriminate between two different members of another race, the tendency to regard them all as doubles of one another. […] It is this perverse use of the doctrine of sameness, applied to both texts and people, that the comparatist must overcome in order to argue for the very different humanistic uses of the same doctrine. (The Implied Spider, Wendy Doniger)

I may sound harsh on Campbell, but the methodology issue does matter, especially because it comes with an agenda, and because of Campbell’s own influences (and personal politics, however much he liked to pretend being apolitical):

For there is no doubt that the three mythologists [Jung, Eliade, and Campbell] here under consideration have intellectual roots in the same spiritual climate as that in which early fascism and sometimes antiSemitism flourished: Nietzsche, Sorel, Ortega y Gasset, Spengler, Frobenius, Heidegger, the lesser Romanian nationalists and German “volkish” writers and, before his courageous rejection of Nazism and exile, Thomas Mann. Most of these just named were not fullblown partisans of their respective national fascist parties; some, such as Nietzsche, would have condemned political fascism as utterly contrary to the heroic individualism for which they stood. So also, by their own later testimony, did the three mythologists. Yet there is in that climate and the three mythologists an unmistakable common intellectual tone: antimodernism and antirationalism tinged with romanticism and existentialism. This subset of modern thought is deeply suspicious of the larger modern world, as that world was created fundamentally by the Enlightenment (despite, as we shall see, their embracing of some themes, like nationalism and the purifying revolution idea, carried over from the Age of Reason’s turbulent finale). Above all, the romantic antimoderns decried modernity’s exaltation of reason, “materialistic” science, “decadent” democracy dependent on the rootless “mass man” its leveling fosters.

In contrast, they lauded traditional “rooted” peasant culture, including its articulation in myths that came not from writers but from “the people,” and they no less praised the charismatic heroes ancient and modern who allegedly personified that culture’s supreme values. Above all, one felt in these writers a distinctive mood of worldweariness, a sense that all has gone gray—and, just beneath the surface, surging, impatient eagerness for change: for some tremendous spasm, emotional far more than intellectual, based far more on existential choice than on reason, that would recharge the world with color and the blood with vitality. Perhaps a new elite, or a new leader capable of making “great decisions” in the heroic mold of old, would be at the helm. (Ellwood))

(It’s no surprise Campbell loved Star Wars when he finally got to watch it – hero’s journey or not, the resonance with his own ideas is much deeper: the yearning for a lost golden age (the remembered pseudo-democratic Republic) full of culture heroes (the Jedi) now replaced by technological oppression (the Empire); even the ~primitive had their role to play in overcoming that oppressive system, if literally rather than through myths, etc, etc.)

I’ve said before the influence of Campbell’s Hero Journey on SW, especially ANH, has been much overblown, and it has – in part because early on, the early history of SW(/ANH) was itself heavily mythologized as a way to legitimize it as a product of an intellectual approach, a product of high culture rather than low (popular, see Bourdieu) culture. It didn’t come from Lucas at first, but rather from critics trying to explain the success of a movie so deeply steeped in popular tropes and themes – hence the idea that the resonance of the movies, their popular appeal, have been carefully engineered, mapping a pseudo-universal narrative pattern. 

So why do Campbell’s views even matter? Because Campbell is a major influence: Lucas rarely mentions anyone that’s not Campbell when he’s talking about his views of religion or mythology. I’ve found Jung here and there (and of course much “[X social science] says…”), and it’s very possible I missed names – there’s a lot of interviews and talks and what-have-you out there. Nonetheless, Campbell is clearly Lucas’ main reference; more than that, he’s a mentor figure. Lucas’ Yoda, as he himself says, and in a sense the man who initiated him. He’s also a ‘precursor’ – the mythicized forefather, the man of erudition whose invocation automatically lends legitimacy to Lucas’ own words on mythology and religion. 

For Lucas, all religions relay the same moral values, the same understanding of good and evil. If they don’t seem to (and really they don’t; “good” and “evil” are not universal concepts. They don’t have a one-size-fits-all definition. Different cultures conceptualize and define those terms differently, and not only do those concepts and definitions change with time, but “a culture” is not a monolithic entity in which all members agree on everything either. For terms as loaded as “good” and “evil” -or “bad”, because arguably, not all cultures have a concept of “evil”-, there are a lot of competing definitions with more or less in common), it’s because the observers stop at surface details, missing the underlying truth – meaning anyone who disagrees on this view of religion just doesn’t get it, which is the kind of mindset that leads you to explain to people they don’t understand their own religion. But you, the educated, liberal Westerner (I mean Lucas, who has a high opinion of himself as being, well, an educated liberal dude frequently misunderstood by people less intelligent and less talented than him, and absolutely presents himself an authority on religion, myth, and anthropology, which he is not), you do. It’s a somewhat circular reasoning:

I believe in (x) god/values and that this belief is universal (people may say differently but really, they believe the same things I do, how could they not? They’re good things. The best things!)

Studying other beliefs (by focusing only on similarities and presuming it’s all about my beliefs under the surface) reveals, amazingly enough, that my beliefs are universal. What a surprise amirite. 

I have the beliefs I have because they are universal, and since they are universal, they cannot be questioned.

To go back to the specific Buddhism issue, that’s how Lucas approaches it. He doesn’t give a whit about what Buddhism actually is, its values and its philosophy. He doesn’t need to: he already knows that, like every other religion, those values, that philosophy, correspond to his own beliefs. Opinions not needed, because that verisimilarity is only seen by the enlightened. 

(Which comes down to erasing people’s actual beliefs across time and space to defend the notion that, conveniently enough, everyone the world over shares Lucas’ christian moral values (or is getting there because it’s the natural end of the processus – which would deserve a few paragraphs in itself because that’s related to the concept of linear cultural progress, another thing rooted in prejudice and shitty, outdated anthropological notions.))

All that to say that Lucas is just about as Buddhist as me (I am not), and that fuck yes we’re in problematic territory, way more problematic than is usually acknowledged. I probably didn’t need to write so much about it (well there’d be more to say, in fact, but that’s quite a bit already); it’s not quite what you asked for but there it is nonetheless. 

However, a twitter thread I saw about the subject was written by a South Asian Buddhist who *wanted* more recognition of Buddhist themes. I’ve also seen Buddhist websites write about TLJ.

I think the discussion over Buddhist/Taoist themes in the OT and PT is a different one than the one about these same themes in the ST, simply because it’s not a Lucas product. I absolutely understand wanting more recognition of these themes when they are present, and I think Buddhist themes introduced in the current trilogy can bring about a new interpretation of the… spiritual elements in the story and the universe (arguably already happened), changing how we receive the full saga (I’d even argue that it’s part of what makes SW a modern myth: myths do not care for their author; they spread and grow and change through both social and individual forces. Myths change through their tellers and their audience; it’s how they endure and remain relevant and meaningful. A myth is never just one story – it’s literal and symbolic and full of shadowy spaces that leave room for new, unprecedented readings.)

But that doesn’t change how much Buddhism did or didn’t influence Lucas when he was making his own movies, conceptualizing the universe and its spiritual tenets. 

I’d also argue (and that’s something I feel strongly about) that it’s very much possible to apply a Buddhist lens to the text in any case, because doing so doesn’t require for the text to intentionally feature those themes. The author is after all, mostly dead. But I do think there is a difference between “this text can be read through a Buddhist lens, and here’s how” and “this text is Buddhist”. 

Also, lj-writes insisting that SW is about moral dualism while being one of the strongest condemners of TLJ for rejecting moral dualism, doesn’t really add up. IDK their faith but their post ends with “Christianity is good enough!”. TLJ has surface symbols of Buddhism and Taoism AND themes of anti-classism, non-dualism, action returning to the actor, the Middle Way, skillful means, etc. And they see it as a deeply wrong entry in the saga. So it feels like this is lowkey “keep SW Christian”?

I found the post I reblogged while doing research for a meta/essay (which I will probably never post) and I only gave a cursory look to the blog, so I don’t quite know OP’s position on TLJ – nor can I speak for them on the way they articulate it all. I understand that you wouldn’t want to ask them directly, but I can’t talk for them either

The way I personally read “Christianity is good enough” (which, for the record, has nothing to do with my own religious beliefs because I’m hardcore atheist) was more of a “there’s no need to pretend SW is stepped in Buddhist/Taoist thought rather than Christian – because there’s really nothing wrong with that in itself”. And really there isn’t. A Christian inspired mythos is just as fine.

(The thing is that often enough, the idea that SW is better for being steeped in Buddhist or Taoist rather than Christian values is not fully unrelated to what I’d call the “Magical Oriental Religion” trope, and I find any attempt to hierarchize religious beliefs deeply dubious and reductive, and also, you know, kind of offensive.)

To conclude – SW is about moral dualism, and it’s not like Lucas never literally said so, have an example: 

“The Force evolved out of various developments of character and plot. I wanted a concept of religion based on the premise that there is a God and there is good and evil. I began to distill the essence of all religions into what I thought was a basic idea common to all religions and common to primitive thinking. I wanted to develop something that was nondenominational but still had a kind of religious reality. I believe in God and I believe in right and wrong.” (Lucas, quoted in The Phantom Menace Scrapbook, Ryder Windham, emphasis mine.)

But! We don’t have to read SW as dualist, and most importantly it doesn’t have to keep being written this way (see: TLJ), but that’s not gonna change that it *is* how Lucas conceived it, and that it can hardly be retconned without rejecting Lucas’ definition of the ever-famous balance:

The core of the Force–I mean, you got the dark side, the light side, one is selfless, one is selfish, and you wanna keep them in balance. What happens when you go to the dark side is it goes out of balance and you get really selfish and you forget about everybody…(Clone Wars Writers’ Meeting, 2010, transcription from here (x), emphasis mine)

(This is way too long already, but send me another ask and I’ll get into early ANH drafts and Force Jesus and his apostles, selflessness as sacrifice and the recompense thereof in the afterlife, the rejection of bodily things and pleasure and a bunch of things that make it hard to not see SW (or I guess Lucas’ SW) as deeply steeped in Christian thought)

[fighterfortheforgotten]

PINOF Through the Ages

ah, November, that special time of year between halloween and christmas where i can buy “fun sized” (read “thumb sized”) chocolate bars and tinsel in the same aisle at walmart…

it’s also that time of year where members of the phandom, young and old, come together and collectively binge watch all the PINOF videos in preparation for the newest installment, as we wait with bated breath for what fresh hell we’re gonna be hit with this year.

today, i would like to share with you my observations of PINOF Through The Years, as we embark on the fucking trip that is sure to be PINOF 9…

Phil is not on fire (25 October 2009)

- can you IMAGINE what the hell Phil’s parents and/or brother must’ve thought when they were filming that/saw it for the first time?! Phil brings home this random kid he found in a train station and they start giggling like actual 12 year olds and wandering round the house talking about The Shining, using the exercise equipment Phil has probably never stepped foot on in his life, and drawing on their faces in sharpie? i can fucking HEAR Kath saying “Phil…honey…are you on the drugs?” and Martyn cackling like a lunatic in the background at his brother and his weird friend….

- Dan is trying so. damn. hard. not to laugh throughout the entire video.

- Speaking of Dan, even back then he was a sassy, cocky lil shit… “every animal makes that noise with you…” “wow Phil, i bet they’re all so glad they can see the diagram…” “no, okay, Phil has really crappy GHDs that don’t even work…they don’t even work…they are Poundland GHDs.”

- everyone always talks about The Tackle™ at the end of the video, but not NEARLY enough people talk about the lil smirk Phil gives the camera just before it…like, seriously?! that’s a “haha, here goes nothing!” kinda smirk. thats a “lol watch this!” kinda smirk. thats a “give the people what they want” kinda smirk…im just sayin’…

Phil is not on fire 2 (29 May 2010)

- okay, first of all, Dan…sweetheart…did you borrow that cardigan from your mum?

- Dan: “if you could choose which surname you had, what would be your decision?” Phil: “…umm…” *almost imperceptible but still definitely there jumpcut* Phil: “Striker!”….yeah, yeah, yeah, alright, everyone knows that Phil really said “yours” in an incredibly sheepish and embarrassed voice to Dan that made him go “awwww!….you’re cutting that out…”, but lets appreciate the editing skills it took to make the cut so completely (almost) seamless….

- oh. my. GOD! there is an ENTIRE post JUST about the microwave moment, but i have to reiterate it again for those who have recently entered this hellscape: imagine you are Phil Lester, a 23 year old adult with an ENGLISH LANGUAGE DEGREE, and in comes this adorable 18 year old twink trying to tell you that “microwave” is a fucking onomatopoeia! if i was Phil, THIS would be the moment i’d never let Dan live down. fuck “hello internet”, if he ever pissed me off i’d just be like “yeah, well, at least i know microwave isn’t a fucking onomatopoeia…” and walk away. argument done, you win every time.

- and that being said, again, lets appreciate how much we can learn from the facial expressions of Philip Michael Lester. in that moment, the look he gives Dan is pure “are you fucking serious…?” it is incredulity in a nutshell. it is shock and fondness and “oh my god you are such a twat…”. if there were a dictionary of facial expressions, Phil’s face at the moment Dan says fucking microwave is his favourite onomatopoeia would be the one next to the definition of “wtf?”

Phil is not on fire 3 (1 November 2011)

- 2011 was, by far, the WORST year for Dan and Phil’s hair. tragic. absolutely tragic…

- wow, Dan was right, every animal DOES make the same noise to Phil, including horrific genetic hybrids of land and sea mammals…

- Dan’s ability to almost unhinge his jaw is terrifying…and i’m sure has played a part in lots of phanfic that i’m definitely not going to look for ever…

- okay, seriously guys?! the word is vagina. say it with me: vagina. come on! all together now! it’s not a *awkward silence and weird hand gesture*, it’s not a “birth area", it’s just a vagina…for someone who knows so much about placenta, it strikes me as odd that Dan can’t say the word vagina out loud…

- i’ve never heard anyone giggle as much as Dan does in this video…

Phil is not on fire 4 (12 September 2012)

- the hair is better this year…slightly…

- whoever decided that those face mask things were a good idea needs to be buried alive…the way they look when they move is so horrifying, it gives me nightmares.

- the “gu-hoy!” noise Dan makes in this video (ts 3:21 if you’re at all interested) is my text alert on my phone and it makes me panic every time i watch it because im like “wtf is someone texting me for at 11:53 pm?!” but then i realize it’s just the video and that i’m actually still very alone and have no friends…

- (bloopers bonus!) petition to have 2012 be known in the phandom as, ‘The Year Dan Was Finally Comfortable With The Word Vagina’. that’s all it was guys! he learned a new word and just wanted to show how broad his vocabulary had become!

Phil is not on fire 5 (22 November 2013)

- and right off the bat we’re affronted again by the fact that Dan and Phil have zero concept of how female anatomy works….

- this is probably the most uneventful pinof in the entire series.

Phil is not on fire 6 (6 November 2014)

- to return to the hair discourse, i firmly maintain that 2014 was the best year for their haircuts/styles.

- Phil has no concept of what a sassy face is…

- #StopPhil201X needs to just be a recurring thing every year…

- that poor, poor snake…

- petition for Dan to sing the national anthem at every tour stop in 2018

- the idea of Dan trying to carry on the legacy of Phil Is Not On Fire after Phil’s death is so damn heartbreaking to me…i need a minute

- my lil demon soul is convinced that Phil was doing *something* to Dan’s neck when they both tried to fit through that sweater…i mean, look at his face when he laughs and says “stop". seriously?!

- something about Dan with his fringe swapped, on the wrong side of the bed, and wearing Phil’s shirt makes me feel almost uncomfortable, but in a way that i’m not entirely sure how to process…

- (bloopers bonus!) to reiterate! every animal does, in fact, make the same noise to Phil. this has now been confirmed 3 times.

- (bloopers bonus!) the amount of pleasure Phil is able to derive from any mention of Hello Internet warms the deepest recesses of my soul like the light of the sun after a 1000 year winter.

Phil is not on fire 7 (29 November 2015)

- uh, excuse me? do not drag my country in such a way. Canada is indeed real. it’s where maple syrup comes from. as someone who enjoys the simplicity of a good pancake, i expected better from you Mr. Philip.

- i feel so bad for their neighbours during the stress mushroom tug of war…like, can you imagine what those poor people must’ve thought of them? i’d love to interview their neighbours one day…better yet, their neighbours should write a book: “I Lived Next To YouTubers For 5 Years: The Adventure" and just have it be a chronicle of every weird thing they ever witnessed/encountered.

- with every passing year, Dan’s knowledge of fanfiction tropes and writing styles becomes increasingly disturbing…hide the smut everyone Daniel Howell is coming for it.

- Phil! with the puns! honestly Dan, how do you put up with this man?

- (bloopers bonus!) the way dans voice changes when he grabs Phils underwear and is just ENTHRALLED with the fact that he’s colour coordinates his boxers to his bedsheets is probably the single most disgusting thing i have ever witnessed in my entire life…i mean, i love it, but why are you SO EXTRA?!

Phil is not on fire 8 (29 November 2016)

- NOTHING in the animal or cutlery kingdoms should be born or created in the way Phil describes the birthing process of a spork!

- okay. OKAY! i love the fringes, i really do. i’m a fringe fan from way back, but the hair pushed back thing they get going on sometimes? i can get on board with that.

- aaaannd at 1:57 into pinof 8, the little game i like to play called “Phan or Viktuuri" had all of its lines blurred so far beyond recognition i’m not even sure which universe i’m living in anymore.

- the PSA for “staying hydrated"…such a harmless, and beautiful message about health and self care that the phandom managed to turn into a sex meme…but no one is surprised by that now, are they?

- i need to know why that stock photo exists in the first place…also, why the hell was Phil wearing sandals in November?

- (bloopers bonus!) Phil: “phil is not on fire 8! this time its…what the tagline?” the phandom: “…gayer than ever?” Dan: “full of regrets.” the phandom: “…i mean I GUESS!!!”

- (bloopers bonus!) everything about this blooper reel just confirms even more solidly that Dan is the biggest Phil fan in the world. i’m not gonna wax poetic about the compliments or the comparisons to sunshine or anything else, because at this point is it really necessary? no. i thought not.

and there we have it. just in time for PINOF 9 to be released, a full (and much more in depth than intended) recap of the saga thus far…wake me up when Gamingmas starts, cuz after this video comes out, i’m gonna need a solid week of sleep

[jamesginortonblog]

At the beginning of the unfortunately titled “McMafia,” a saga about global crime kingpins, one of the most important and dangerous of the players is set up for a devastating hit—an action carried out with such silken aplomb it’s clear we’re about to enter high-level thriller territory. As in fact we do in this eight-episode series brimming with wildly suspenseful chases, stalkings in dark places, and assassins posing as charming new friends prepared to carry out a hit as soon as the text message ordering it arrives. There could, on the other hand, be a last-minute cancellation just before the trigger is pulled—we get to see one of those here, and it’s a remarkable scene.

All that’s in addition to a narrative that takes us hopscotching around to gorgeous seaside resorts and gleaming capitals where, it’s suggested, much of the world’s money-laundering, heroin-smuggling arrangements and similar lawless deals are plotted. It’s an impoverished neighborhood in India, though, that’s the setting for one of the most electrifying sequences—a sustained, fevered battle to hack into a computer and thus enable the theft of a huge shipment of smuggled cargo.

It’s a testament to this series (created by Hossein Amini and James Watkins, and inspired by Misha Glenny’s book of the same name) that its seductions succeed as well as they do in overcoming its flaws. Among which we can count a pervasive tendency to moralizing babble bearing small resemblance to human discourse. The first whiff of this comes when the story’s ostensible hero, Alex Godman ( James Norton ), a hedge-fund manager in financial trouble not of his making, is lectured by his girlfriend and expected fiancée. Rebecca ( Juliet Rylance ) seethes with rage over Alex’s decision to seek investment from a questionable source. She’s shattered by what she sees as Alex’s abandonment of the high principles the two supposedly held dear.

There’s no more telling symbol of the price of abandoned principles than the instrument used to kill a member of Alex’s family. The Godmans, exiles from Russia with a tangled history of unsavory financial enterprises, had arrived in London led by Alex’s father, Dmitri ( Aleksey Serebryakov ), a man determined to leave that past behind and start a new, upstanding life. It was the reason Alex had been sent to an expensive public school from which he emerged a young English gentleman, and then to Harvard Business School. But there remained one family member willing to continue his highly profitable connections with Russian criminal elements, all of which ended with his well-planned murder in the midst of an otherwise convivial lunch featuring bottomless supplies of Beluga. The murder instrument—a caviar knife. A more obvious, appropriate punishment for the corrupt rich is hard to imagine.

The murder is a signal that the Godman family is far from safe in London—old ties with a long reach remain in Russia. They’re enemies with a grudge, the most lethal of whom is Vadim Kalyagin (a subtle and haunting portrayal Merab Ninidze )—a former KGB officer, now head of a large criminal enterprise, who has protectors in the Russian state. Unappeasable in his fury at anyone he thinks has crossed him, he has become the Godman family’s most implacable enemy. His family life isn’t as complicated as that of the Godmans, a stew involving adultery, family head Dmitri in a steady alcoholic stupor, and son Alex—much like Michael, ambitious college-student scion of the Corleone family—confronting the fact that his wish to avoid the slightest entanglement in family business involving crime is less and less possible.

A widower, Vadim’s strongest emotional connection is with a beloved daughter, Natasha, who in one memorable if slightly hilarious scene watches her father—athletic, shirtless, commandingly swinging his ax as he chops logs for firewood. No one will miss the unmistakable image of Vladimir Putin, merged here with Vadim.

There’s otherwise little levity in any scene involving the lethal Vadim, the most interesting and complex character in “McMafia.” Runners up include a corrupt member of the Israeli Knesset, the cultivated Semiyon Kleiman, a highly improbable character whose criminal activities include brutal kidnapping of young Russian women to serve as charming company when Semiyon entertains important business associates in Israel—no sex required. All credit to David Strathairn for informing this strained creation with humanity and depth. Joseph, Semiyon’s bodyguard, who ends up coming to London to work for Alex, is portrayed by Oshri Cohen, who steals every scene he’s in without uttering a word.