#Henry really does love Catherine

[bethanydelleman]

"the General's unjust interference, so far from being really injurious to their felicity, was perhaps rather con- ducive to it, by improving their knowledge of each other, and adding strength to their attachment"

I was thinking about this quote. Did Jane Austen mean by "adding strength to their attachment" that Catherine and Henry's attachment was not a strong one before the Colonel's interference ?

Colonel seemed more involved in Henry's "courtship" of Cathy than Henry himself. And her feelings for him seemed more like infatuation or teenager crush than a real steady love. Add to that that line about Henry being interested in Catherine because she liked him. And the proposal seemed to me more due to him feeling guilty for leading her on and making fall in love with him and taking responsibility for his father's obvious hints about a wedding. You know the " honor bound " thing. I mean he did mean it and he liked Catherine well enough.

Do you think that Austen meant that their relationship became strong after the Colonel delayed their marriage ?

To understand the last paragraph of Northanger Abbey, you have to remember that this is a satire and Jane Austen is being a bit more blunt than usual in this last bit. I will highlight the jokes:

Henry and Catherine were married, the bells rang, and everybody smiled; and, as this took place within a twelvemonth from the first day of their meeting, it will not appear, after all the dreadful delays occasioned by the General’s cruelty, that they were essentially hurt by it. To begin perfect happiness at the respective ages of twenty-six and eighteen is to do pretty well; and professing myself moreover convinced that the General’s unjust interference, so far from being really injurious to their felicity, was perhaps rather conducive to it, by improving their knowledge of each other, and adding strength to their attachment, I leave it to be settled, by whomsoever it may concern, whether the tendency of this work be altogether to recommend parental tyranny, or reward filial disobedience.

Green: Austen jokes about this delay earlier, "The anxiety, which in this state of their attachment must be the portion of Henry and Catherine, and of all who loved either, as to its final event, can hardly extend, I fear, to the bosom of my readers, who will see in the tell-tale compression of the pages before them, that we are all hastening together to perfect felicity." So the joke is that we, as readers, know it will end happily and we know it will end happily soon, because there aren't that many pages left.

Blue: It is extremely common in fiction for the protagonists to be brought closer together by interference instead of being torn apart by it, so General Tilney, in opposing marriage, strengthens the probability of it happening. He plays his stock character part very well in this story. It's a meta joke because it is so inevitable in this sort of narrative that it makes his actions silly.

Purple: Novels in this era were supposed to have a moral, but Austen jokes that her moral may be interpreted as "disobey your parents" or "be a tyrant to your children" to come to the happy conclusion. Obviously, that's not the real moral of her story, but what a cursory reading may lead someone to think.

To understand Henry and Catherine's love story, you need to know that at the time, men were supposed to have feelings first and women second, developing them as gratitude for the man liking them. So the "proper" order is:

Man has feelings

Man expresses feelings

Woman develops feelings in gratitude

Now this is extremely silly, since it's not like a girl won't develop a crush on her own. Austen is mocking this particular order of events. She's not saying that Henry Tilney doesn't love Catherine, he does, she's saying that the love happened in a wrong and scandalous order.

She was assured of his affection; and that heart in return was solicited, which, perhaps, they pretty equally knew was already entirely his own; for, though Henry was now sincerely attached to her, though he felt and delighted in all the excellencies of her character and truly loved her society, I must confess that his affection originated in nothing better than gratitude, or, in other words, that a persuasion of her partiality for him had been the only cause of giving her a serious thought. It is a new circumstance in romance, I acknowledge, and dreadfully derogatory of an heroine’s dignity; but if it be as new in common life, the credit of a wild imagination will at least be all my own.

That is why it's harmful to Catherine's dignity, because she DARED to have a crush. And obviously, Austen knows this happens all the time, which is why she jokes about it.

I hope that answered everything.

[caterpillarinacave]

I’m sure I’ll be crucified for this, but way some people in fandoms like The Tudors talk about people like Catherine of Aragon, Anne Boylen and Jane Seymour a) is disappointing, b) gross, and c) reeks of internalized misogyny 

[fideidefenswhore]

Interestingly, she is not described at first by Chapuys as a meek obedient woman, and he continues, saying “is said to be rather proud and haughty”, which clashes somewhat with other assertions about her. There is evidence that Jane was ambitious, certainly as ambitious as Anne, but it was a quiet and determined ambition, carefully nurtured by her supporters. Her supporters, apart from her immediate family, included Sir Nicholas Carew, a cousin of Anne Boleyn’s who actively worked against her and mentored Jane in how to keep the King’s interest. Historian David Starkey has a similar view of Jane, and queries whether she was truly such a door mat as later described. Was it such a different situation from Anne supplanting Katherine? The answer, simply, is no. Jane found herself in the same position that Anne once enjoyed, and Anne experienced that terrible and dangerous position of an unwanted wife It cannot be denied that the Seymours actively worked against Anne, and plotted to replace her with Jane. One of the first examples of the strategies employed by the Seymours is the rather hasty change of their family crest. Originally the Seymour crest comprised of a Peacock’s head and neck, its wings in mid flight. As David Starkey points out, Peacocks traditionally represented pride – hardly something that the Seymours would not want affiliated with Jane, as the badge had to reflect the projected idea of Jane as meek and subservient. It was quickly remedied, with a few brushstrokes transforming the Peacock to a Phoenix – the symbol of self sacrifice.  The coup against Anne moved quickly, with Jane quickly stepping in to replace Anne, but Jane was not as well loved by the people as some historians have suggested. The people found it hard to believe that Henry had a convenient backup wife in the wings, while his present wife’s name was being dragged through the mud. Chapuys observed that “although everybody rejoices at the execution of the putain, there are some who murmur at the mode of procedure against her and the others, and people speak variously of the King.” Few can deny that the official portrait of Jane, with her weak chin and pallor, is bland, so bland in comparison with the striking portraits of Anne. But it is this blandness that has allowed historians to treat Jane as a blank canvas, projecting their own personal views of her [...] She is harshly judged for usurping Anne, and accused of having no sympathy or empathy for anyone around her. We cannot possibly know what she may or may not have felt, just as we don’t truly know if Anne felt any sympathy for Katherine when she replaced her.

Redefining the Myth

been thinking of paragraph four in particular, that’s sort of the most well-known contemporary quote that gives credence to that opinion, but there were more that support it...such as:

“I hear say the king is now married and to one of the same generation as evil as the other Queen was before. The devil is in him, for he is past grace; he will never amend in this world.”

Nicholas Heath [indictment of 1538, a late date for the indictment, but it’s a report of an earlier incident and it thus could have been about no other...]

[piratefalls]

once again a mix of oldies, goodies, and oldies but goodies, because apparently my brain decided to start treating fic the way i do books: collect them and forget to read them.

masterlist.

all we are is skin and bones by IndestructibleHeart

Alex didn't plan to push Henry Fox into oncoming traffic.

Amigos y Migas by floatingaway4

“Christ, how is this so good? It’s like magic and science and...and I don’t even know what else.” Henry moans as he swallows another bite. “How the fuck does he do this? And how does he do it in a truck the size of our walk-in freezer?” Pez leans back against the wall. “Are you eating that or getting turned on by it, Henners?” Henry rolls his eyes, even as he tries to glare at his head sommelier. “Can’t I do both?” The sauce drips down his wrist and he shamelessly licks it off.

silk and steel by teacupivy

Thanks to a welcome day off, Henry and Alex spend a lazy morning in bed. Soft, mid-morning cuddles escalate into semi-soft, mid-morning sex.

Never Truly Leave by clottedcreamfudge

"We found something in Arthur's things," Catherine says, without any preamble. "I've never really... gone through his personal effects properly, until now. It's been rather too difficult for me to face." Alex nods. ... "I found something for Henry, but it's... Well, it's actually for you." Alex blinks at her.

Date night (it's a tie) by TheAmberFox

“So here’s what’s going to happen, sweetheart. I want you to strip out of these clothes and get on the bed, so I can tie you to our headboard with both our stupidly boring ties and make you come until you can’t any more. Would you be amiable?”

religion's in your lips (even if it's a false god) by coffeecatsme

“You seriously never heard of Henry?” Alex feels defensive. “Should I have?” he asks, and the guy stares at him for another second before a laugh escapes his lips. “Well, rumor has it he’s turned multiple people here gay.” Or, 5 times Henry brings a guy home and 1 time he doesn't have to. Or, Henry is a rumored sex god, Alex is his roommate, and he's jealous of everyone Henry brings through the front door.

Race You to Forever by allmylovesatonce

Alex comes up with the perfect proposal idea: He and Henry should compete for it. Henry is less than enthused, but agrees anyway. Neither of them could predict the strange things that happen when they're competing for who gets to propose to the other.

a rich and complex tapestry by everwitch

When Alex first hooks up with Henry, he's expecting a fun one-night-stand and maybe the occasional booty call. He does not expect to get so completely pulled into Henry’s orbit that it forces him to reevaluate everything he thought he knew about his sexuality. And he's not sure if it makes it better, or way worse, that Henry is actually a professional at all this stuff — what are the odds that Alex would hook up with the one guy on campus who hosts his own radio show about sex? 'Sleeping With Henry' is about to gain one devoted listener.

I fall to pieces when I'm with you by viciouslyqueer

If once is an accident, and twice is a coincidence, when it happens a third time Henry really starts to think about it. — Three times Alex doesn't want Henry to touch him and one time he understands why.

I must tell you what you will not ask by lizzie_bennetdarcy

Henry's lower lip wobbles, and a fresh tear rolls down his cheek. Alex watches it track down to his chin, and wonders if Henry would mind him wiping it away. “I really was looking forward to seeing them.” Another tear escapes, and this time Alex can't help but lean forward and brush it away with his thumb. Henry's breath catches, and he looks at Alex, wearing an expression he can't quite parse. “Come home with me,” Alex blurts out. Henry's plans for Christmas fall through, so Alex invites him home for the holidays. They're best friends, strictly platonic roommates, so why does everyone think they're dating?

love me long, be my sunlight by weather_stained

“What is it, then?” Henry asks. Alex glances up at him, and there’s laughter in his big brown eyes. “It’s porn,” he says gleefully. “In your handwriting.” While unpacking their office together, Alex comes across some very explicit Star Wars fanfiction written by none other than HRH Prince Henry himself.

we might just get away with it by smc_27

Henry is the most gorgeous man Alex has ever seen. And Alex has seen a lot of gorgeous men. He’s a fucking model. “This is Henry Fox-Mountchristen,” Prada’s current PR lead says, and Alex smiles and pushes his hand out. “He’s a journalist covering the merger.” Alex doesn’t know what merger or what it would have to do with Paris Fashion Week. But he does know that Henry holding a glass of champagne as he shakes Alex’s hand is maybe the sexiest thing ever, and there is just no explanation for that. “Hi. I’m Alex.” Henry says, “I know,” and then does this weird, forced smile at Bianca and walks away. Alex doesn’t know how to like, not be completely obsessed with things he wants. OR, Alex is a model. Henry is a journalist, and a bit of an asshole. Alex wants him anyway, even when it doesn’t feel good.

Someone Special by bleedingballroomfloor

"That was Shaan," Henry explains as Alex snuggles closer to him, pressing his nose to his neck. "The blizzard hit early, apparently. Too risky to fly." "So Christmas here?" Alex says in that sleepy drawl of his that Henry will never get tired of. "Fuckin' sweet."

Because I'm A Scoundrel by inexplicablymine

Alex Claremont-Diaz has exactly thirty minutes to make himself look as slutty as possible for this Halloween Gala. At this very moment he looks a little bit like a sexed up pirate, but with the addition of his small black vest - rest in peace to the Patagonia packers and finance brethren- and a low slung belt with a “blaster,” a very sex-on-legs Han Solo is looking back at him. Henry Fox, who is both a double scull rower with enough Olympic medals it would make anyone other than Alex sweat, and the definitive arch nemesis of Alex - is wearing a white sylvette Princess Leia costume, hugging his curves in all the right ways, the clingy fabric draping to the floor. When you and your arch nemesis show up to the most important gala of the year in a couples costume you either play it up or shut it down. Alex has a decision to make, but the way that dress is hugging Henry’s ass isn’t making that decision any easier.

the super sick(s) by cricketnationrise

Super Six snowed in at the brownstone.

two is better than one by rizcriz

Henry swallows. “You were going to propose to me tonight?” Alex nods. “I still am,” He says, throwing his hands out at his sides. “If I can find the damn ring.” “Right. But,” Henry reaches into his pocket and pulls the ring out of his pocket that he’d quite literally just picked up from the jeweler. “I was going to propose to you tonight.” He holds the ring box up between them. -- Or, Alex and Henry both want to propose.

every tale condemns me for a villain by tintagel

Alex Diaz is one of the worst villains to have come out of reality TV in a while. Just Henry's luck that he's doing a signing for his new autobiography at the bookshop. But it's tough to hate someone when you only see what's been edited together.

Oxidation by Thee_Maxwell

“Well, Alex–” and yep. Yeah. Yeah. His name sounds as nice in Henry’s mouth as he hoped it would. His vowels are open, wide, but he doesn’t hesitate when saying it. It comes out like he knows Alex, like he’s known Alex. He goes a little warmer at the thought, and if he were doing anything other than flirting with a very pretty boy, Alex would blame it solely on the alcohol. “–I’ve got to ask. Is there more to the getup?” That catches him off-guard, and he’s not entirely sure what Henry means, so he tilts his head like a dog watching something that interests him. Henry huffs out a laugh, but clarifies, “Perhaps I’m mistaken. The uh, the hanky. Cowboy, yeah?”

blushing ears and bleeding hearts by kill8a

The man is gorgeous. Like, objectively. Long legs and wide shoulders and wavy blonde hair, cheekbones sculpted from marble, black pressed slacks and a robin egg blue button down, expensive loafers on his feet and a nametag pinned on his shirt… Alex doesn’t understand how someone can walk out of the house and just look like that. or, alex meets henry while studying in the library and is immediately interested

when you know, you know by vibrantsaturn

With shaky hands, Henry pulls out the ring from the box, looking at Alex with tearful eyes that he adores so much. Asks, "Alex, darling, will you marry me?" Alex lets out a watery laugh, swiping an arm across his face to get rid of the rapidly falling tears. He kneels down to cup Henry's face and brushes his thumbs across his cheekbones softly. "Baby. Don't you remember?" Alex whispers, leaning their foreheads together. "We're already married."  or, Alex "marries" his best friend when he's six-years-old. It just takes some time for them to fall in love, but they get there.

if you take a life, do you know what you'll give? by anincompletelist

It would have been one thing had Alexander’s job description been simply to stay in his hotel room and operate the funds covertly, an exceedingly safe distance away from Henry and any of Le Chiffre’s men. As it is, they’d instructed Alex to play the part of Henry’s date for the night, subsequently granting him the access he’d need to the private cardroom within the casino in order to report back to headquarters the funds needed in the precise moment Henry would need them. It's too dangerous, and he knows it. Henry's had a lot of blood on his hands in this life, but he refuses to have Alex's as well.

Got a will to win and a Cheshire grin by @kiwiana-writes

Please find attached the list of collective bargaining agreement breaches reported by the Sports and Recreation Floor in December. As the designated union representative, it is my responsibility to ensure that the rights and interests of our members are protected and upheld, even (or maybe especially) during our busiest time of year. In accordance with the grievance procedure outlined in our collective bargaining agreement, we request that Santa’s Workshop takes immediate corrective action to remedy these breaches. Please set up a meeting at your earliest convenience to discuss these issues further and explore appropriate resolutions. Thank you for your immediate attention to this matter.

You're the Perfect Gift for Me by chamel

“Twenty-one-year-old Scotch,” the man says with a low whistle, looking more impressed than anything else. “Special occasion or just expensive taste?” Alex can’t stop his grimace. “Came up here to propose,” he says, even though this random stranger doesn’t need to hear his woes. “Found out my girlfriend’s getting back together with her high school sweetheart.” “Ouch,” the man replies, the word sounding slightly absurd in his rounded, posh accent. He looks at the bartender. “Leave the bottle.” (Dumped two days before Christmas by his girlfriend, Alex meets a British writer who's spending Christmas on his own in generic Tiny Town, USA, and together they discover something new to celebrate.)

the clementine thing by saintlynomenclature

And, really, it doesn’t matter whether or not Alex explains it to Liam and the rest of his friends. They’ve never really discussed it between themselves through the years. Slowly, Alex had gone from asking Would you please peel this for me? to Please? to silently extending the citrus without any comment at all, just a soft smile. It’s one of the things that make them Alex-and-Henry; the silent conversations and the contentment in each other’s company. Now, as Alex starts to flourish through his position on the lacrosse team, his slew of AP classes, and his role in student government, getting him to slow down at all is a feat. The only way that Henry can do it, guaranteed, is by one of those innocuous little fruits. There’s nothing Alex can’t do—surely, he could peel a fucking orange if he felt so inclined—but Henry delights in being able to do this for him. - Five times Henry shares a clementine with Alex, and one time Alex returns the favor

You're So Attractive; How Did That Happen by @sparklepocalypse

Henry is a big man. He’s tall — taller than either of his siblings and most of his cousins. His shoulders are broad. Years on horseback have helped him develop decent muscle mass. So when Alex storms into his life like a beautiful, infuriating tornado, Henry fully expects to continue feeling big. But Alex has ways of making Henry feel small, cherished, even precious. (Or, three things about Alex that make Henry feel wonderfully small, and one thing that doesn't.)

as always, if you want me to tag you for whatever reason just let me know. see you next week!

@starkfridays @stilesgivesmefeels

[brf-rumortrackinganon]

The chance of William not marrying for love is higher than what most people insist.

I just want to answer this anon. I think people like to think that William and Kate aren’t in love because they look at people through their roles or like generalized labels or like through the lens of rules they think should exist in the universe. As Joan Didion said, we tell ourselves stories in order to live. A lot of people know that royals or aristocrat often marry for money or convenience. It’s true that historically, royals get into arranged marriages.

But I would like to offer a different perspective. We can try and see the humanity in each person. I know that’s difficult to do with royals because they’re so media trained and private. But paying proper attention to the stories of these people, the tiny bit of personality that comes through in their interviews and stuff, sometimes we can see their individual stories, their individual personalities. While it’s true that there’s a high chance that the heir to the throne like William would not marry for love, we can infer from the story of his life laid out that there’s a chance he did. My opinion of William is that he’s actually a lot more transparent than people realize. Or maybe it’s just the result of his parents being Charles and Diana who couldn’t stop themselves leaking left and right in the 90s, that there’s no choice but for a lot of things to be laid bare for us. Of course, William is still very private and we might be wrong in our assessment, but we can’t also always generalize.

What I’m saying is, this is the man who in his engagement interview, didn’t shy away in showing how affected he was about his parent’s past. He said something about learning from the past. We also know from things Diana said and from William’s own demeanor that he’s someone who gives a lot of thought to things. We also know from interviews he’s given as a teenager that he struggles with the fact that his role pulls him in different directions and he’s protective of his self, which can sometimes appear to be stubbornness. What I’m saying is, we can infer from these things that this is a man with his own mind. So I would say that from all the things we think we know about William, there’s also a high chance that he would insist on marrying exactly who he wanted to marry or who he loved.

I would also say that even though we know historically that royals get into arranged marriages, we can’t always be sure of how the story goes. I mean, if we’re looking into history, for example, Henry VII and Elizabeth of York married for political reasons. Their union ended the War of the Roses, and yet most historians would agree that it seems they found love along the way and that Henry VII was one of the monarchs with no known mistress. However, royals can fancy themselves in love too in the beginning but the story doesn’t end in a good note. Henry VIII, for example. I think most historians would also agree that he was enamored with Anne Boleyn. Maybe it wasn’t love, maybe it was lust. But the thing is, he fancied himself in love at the beginning, but obviously it ended horribly. A lot of people also forget that Henry VIII was happy at one point with Catherine of Aragon.

What I’m saying is, while we can all generalize that “oh, royals do not marry for love” or we can have a sense of “oh these rich people are all unhappy!”, but they have their own stories too. And so do we, being “norma people” or not being as rich does not guarantee happiness or finding true love. Marrying for love does not guarantee happily ever after also, but we can only wish the best for everyone.

Thanks, anon! You make some really good points here.

I don't have anything to add except: if royals and aristos aren't supposed to be marrying for love, someone better tell the romance writers because they're out of a job now.

[myyoungroyalsblog]

Red, White and Royal Blue fic rec part 2 (part 1)

*Note: I have a lot of unfinished fics in my subscriptions but since there are over 120+ fics there from other fandoms too I won’t be able to add those, when they are finished I’ll do another post in the future!

*Also couldn't find some of these writers here on tumblr, if you know tell me and I’ll add their @ beside it!

MULTI-CHAPTER

Things I Cannot Accept

18 chapters, 69.703 words

By @sprigsofviolets AU where Ellen lost the election in 2016 and Henry and Alex reconnect in 2019. Super cute and interesting story, with a lot of fluff and angst, amazingly written!

Captious (calculated to confuse, entrap or entangle in argument)

3 chapters, 14.256 words

Blind date AU... Well... Sort of... You'll know when you read it hehe but honestly so so sweet with a bit of angst but so much fluff!

My Only Wish (This Year)

7 chapters, 26.374 words

By @dracowillhearaboutthis AU where Henry marries a woman and has two daughters, set 10 years later and Alex and Henry reconnect, and maybe a romance blooms... Of course it does lol very cute kid fic (with a bit of angst too) but still lots of fluff!

Comfort Crowd

8 chapters, 12.098 words

To all the boys I've loved before AU, I don't like the film but since I'm such a sucker for these two of course I read it and got obsessed with it afajsgshsvsg

And they call it—

2 chapters, 10.148 words

By @clottedcreamfudge AU where Alex can talk to animals, so when Henry needs a dog sitter he goes to Alex, and he and David obviously talk about Henry. So funny and fluffy, guaranteed to make you smile!

(do i really have to tell you) how he brought me back to life?

7 chapters, 38.498 words

By @coffeecatsme High school AU where Henry gets kicked out by Mary and lives with Alex's family. A whole lot of angst and a whole lot of fluff, just a superb story!

I'm Taking A Ride With My Best Friend

23 chapters, 79.302 words

By @cultofsappho The Last of Us AU where Henry is immune and Alex helps him get to the fireflies in hopes to create a vaccine. If you've watched the tv show or played the game, you know how this goes lol could not recommend it enough, so much angsty but has fluffy moments too! And the writing is impeccable

i'd lie

6 chapters, 18.058 words

AU where Alex and June move to England with thier mum and have the Fox family as their neighbours, we see the super six throughout the years and how Henry lies might not work anymore... If you want angst, this is the fic for you

ONE SHOT

talk too much

3.307 words

By @lazybug16 Alex has his wisdom teeth removed and Henry takes care of him, just fluff fluff fluff, super adorable (yes self promo because I'm very proud of this fic, I love it)

I trace your constellations

13.498 words

Soulmates, coffee shops and demi Henry AU, just pure flirting and fluff, suuuuuuper cute read!

Never Truly Leave

2.443 words

By @clottedcreamfudge Catherine finds a letter that Arthur wrote... To Alex. We cry alongside Alex as he reads it; very emotional, it will make you cry, and fall in love with these characters all over again, could not recommend enough

you knew the entire time (you knew that i'm a mastermind)

8.239 words

By @coffeecatsme Uni and autistic Henry AU, we see Alex and Henry fall in love. Fluffy but also a bit of angst, you just want to protect Henry and tell him everything is going to be okay

starry eyes sparking up my darkest nights

16.367 words

By @coffeecatsme Hugh school AU where Arthur is also alive and becomes like a second father to Alex. Very very sweet with a bit if angst as well, you'll love it and might have a few happy tears towards the end

learning to love (without it having to hurt)

4.861 words

AU where they aren't famous and they are roommates. We see Henry figure out his asexuality and Alex be there for him, and them getting together of course :) very very sweet read!

The last letter

2.173 words

By @floatingaway4 They are in the afterlife, at peace. This weiter managed to combine angst and fluff at the exact same time and I don't know how they did it, it will make you ugly happy cry!

Fourty-Four Days

8.675 words

They are living in the Brownstone when Henry needs to go to europe for the shelters and Alex to California for a campaign, and they end up not seeing each other for 44 days, and it's too much. Angsty but then fluffy, it just hurts seeing them miss each other so so much

take me out, and take me home

11.837 words

Roommates AU and we see Alex get some feelings, only friendly feelings of course... Really cute story and ending!

i’d take the bomb in your head and disarm it

22.392 words

By @evanbuvkley roommates AU and friends to angsty friends to lovers afahsgsjshdj so much angst that you might cry but a bit of fluff too (happy ending don't worry) such an engaging story, very well executed

and I wrote down our song

6.072 words

AU where Alex is a musician and Henry isn't a prince and they meet at a bar where Alex is performing. Super cute and we see how they fall in love and grow and it's just full of joy!

Group therapy

3.243 words

By @stutteringpeach AU where Ellen is Henrys therapist and he is dating Alex and talks to Ellen about their relationship, without knowing that it's actually his boyfriends mum... They "meet" at a family cook out and its honestly hilarious lmao you will not stop laughing

[tintagel-or-cockleshells]

WIP Wednesday

Oh good lord. @kiwiana-writes, @sherryvalli, you don't know what you've unleashed. @clottedcreamfudge does, though. For shame.

So @clottedcreamfudge jokingly told me she was going to come up with some AUs because my wedding was at a very picturesque place. We did not realise that actually an AU would bloom due to my wedding coordinator flippantly mentioning that she's never liked by venue staff.

And... yeah, okay, my wedding coordinator saw me nude about three times getting me ready, it's unlikely to be a man, but to be organised and really good at your job even if it pisses people off? That's an Alex trait.

Without futher ado:

Alex is always happy to help a panicked bride and groom. Or bride and bride. Or groom and groom. Gender isn’t something he fusses over when it comes to those seeking his services, which is about making sure two people enjoy their wedding day. And things were going so well with Sophia and Killian. He’d found himself actually laughing with them, making a genuine connection - right up until Sophia said their big day was booked at Mountchristen Manor. He’s a professional: he doesn’t let his distaste show. But venue staff hate wedding coordinators, and the staff at Mountchristen are worse than most. First there’s Mary, whose idea of a good wedding is full 1950s: receiving line and a polite tea-dance, absolutely no deviation from the norm. Catherine, who’s disorganised and scatty and has forgotten to cue the first dance before. Philip, who’s a stick in the mud and not a fan of plans changing, and Beatrice, best of a bad bunch. But his number one nemesis is Henry.

I am tagging: @cha-melodius, @dumbpeachjuice, @rmd-writes, @welcometololaland, @orchidscript, @celeritas2997, @everwitch-magiks, @cheesecurdsgravyandfries, @three-drink-amy, @indomitable-love and anyone who wants to join!

[edwardseymour]

Anne of Cleves and Catherine Howard's relationship? I have seen many discussions

✨ terfs/zionists fuck off ✨

i am of the perhaps controversial opinion that they didn’t have a positive — or, rather, a close relationship. and i think it’s much more interesting that way.

it is interesting how the idea of ‘the other woman’ doesn’t really get applied to katherine howard during her time in anna’s household, in the same way it does anne boleyn and jane seymour. in large part this can be explained both by katherine’s obvious youth and anna’s lack of genuine love or passion with henry… but nevertheless, that is very much katherine and anna’s dynamic. they had no opportunity to establish any other, as there was a language and status barrier. to what extent was katherine involved in those awkward, probing conversations between anna and her ladies, exposing anna’s lack of intimacy with her husband? surely they could not have been close, as anna is not recorded as having much involvement with katherine in her capacity as her mistress, and katherine never expressed any loyalty towards anna. anna clearly resented katherine’s relationship with henry while queen: “on 20 june, she complained vigorously about [katherine] to the cleves agent in london, karl harst” (starkey); katherine evidently felt insecure about anna as a potential rival: “henry noticed that katherine was in low spirits, and when he asked her why ‘she said it was owing to a rumour that he was going to take back anne of cleves’. […] katherine reacted to it and even, in her weaker moments, found it credible” (russell).

i’ve seen it argued that they got along very well because of their performance over christmas, but in actuality i think that argument dismisses the fact that it was very much that: a performance. the pair fulfilled their social obligations — during a time of religious observance — anna by acting the loyal supplicant to her new king and his wife, upon whom she owed her position, and katherine by acting out the role of generous wife and queen, and court hostess. especially since they had to act as family members to one another, since anna was the king’s “beloved sister”, and therefore katherine’s sister, too. and clearly impressing a sense of etiquette and rank as queen was a concern of katherine’s (from norton: “katherine was in a state of nerves about how to receive her predecessor and she kept anna waiting while she discussed the correct etiquette for a current queen meeting an ex-queen with henry’s lord chancellor”)… not least because rumours were circulating around this time that henry intended to take anne back.

russell describes anna and katherine’s reunion at christmas as “manners one-upmanship”, and likewise heather r. darsie presents the dynamic as competitive: anne’s gifts, for example, were perhaps a flex of social rank and wealth, “a gift showed a potential rival one’s financial or domestic superiority”. by contrast, katherine sent gifts to anna with her husband, and i wonder if it was a conscious effort to present a united front and reassert her position as henry’s wife. moreover, anna’s deep curtsy and refusal to stand may have been intended as mocking, from a duchess in her own right who may well have viewed the annulment as illegitimate (from norton: “she was not the only person in england to believe that she was truly henry’s wife”; from darsie: “katherine was a former lady-in-waiting to anne, and now the former queen was forcing katherine to acknowledge her humility. […] this show by anne of dedication to katherine as queen consort [was] an ironic dumb show, a very subtle mockery of katherine and the absurdity of the situation”). meanwhile katherine’s lavish kindness, past the point of convention or precedent, may have been weaponised as a means of disarming anna from any means of overshadowing her. anna of cleves socially outranked katherine howard — both of them knew this. the event was successful, but i don’t think we should read it as entirely genuine. these were women doing politics during a pr exercise, and doing it well.

there is no evidence of them maintaining a relationship outside of their public obligations during christmas, however. nor did anna visit court during katherine’s time as queen. therefore i see no evidence to support this idea that they were friendly. arguably there is evidence to suggest they did not particularly respect each other, for if katherine was willing to undermine and ultimately supplant anna by way of courting her husband, then anna was willing to take advantage of katherine’s fall and pursue a marriage she could only feel entitled to if she had never valued katherine as any kind of equal. i don’t think it’s possible for them to have genuinely been close in those circumstances, yet it is interesting how the idea of ‘anna stepping over katherine’s body before it was cold’ doesn’t really get applied to her the way it has been jane seymour with anne boleyn.

[missesmckinnon]

a few days late, but can i talk about the red white and royal blue movie for a sec?

im so happy i decided to buy and speed read the book before the movies release, because the book was very good, but the movie was disappointing for a few reasons. it wasn’t bad, it was a good movie, but is was kind of a let down. does that make sense?

sorry if this is incoherent, i just need to get all my thoughts out.

!! SPOILERS AHEAD !!

first, let’s talk about my biggest issue: june. where the hell was she? she was such a big part of the story, and she is apart of the [??] six, and before that the white house trio. there is no white house trio with only two people. i thought that june showed an interesting contrast to alex, not wanting to pursue a career in politics like he does. she became my favorite character instantly, and it was really upsetting that they cut her out.

second: powder princess bea. i know it wasn’t a big part of the story, but it irked me when they cut that part out. bea didn’t have a lot of character in the films, and the parts of her they did show she was basically there to show that henry had a sister that he liked. in the books, bea had a strong personality and a complicated past.

third: rafael luna. oh my god, why cut him out. alex looked up to him as a young, and openly gay, politician. him leaving to work for richards upset alex deeply, and when raf returned, they had a conversation about richards’ advances toward raf and why raf needed to leave in order to bring richards down. alex and raf had such a sweet relationship, and who tf do they think they are, replacing the rafael luna with some dude named miguel.

fourth: philip. in the movie, philip was kind of shown as some guy who values the crown and the traditions it has, but in the books, he’s a dick. it got so bad that bea and henry didn’t talk to him and turned him away when philip offed to help them. if they’d kept his personality the same, i think it would’ve given more depth to henry’s family and the pressure he’s under.

fifth: liam. liam wasn’t a big character, but, if i remember right, alex called liam when he was having his lil gay crisis, and liam showed up at an event at the end of the story. that’s how alex and henry got the bikes to go to alex house in texas.

sixth: henry’s mum standing up to the queen. considering that henry’s mum being emotionally absent was a big part of henry’s story, when catherine (henry’s mum) stood up to the queen and threatened to have her dethroned for suggesting that henry had to hide was a big moment. it showed that she really cared for her kids but was too consumed with her loss to be there for them.

seventh: pez love interest. in the movies, pez and nora had a romance, but in the books it was pez and june. pez and nora don’t make sense to me at all. junes personality was brought out in the best way by pez, and they complimented each other beautifully. but, since june was cut out, they had to do something i guess.

eighth: dialing down richards. richards is a very bad man, and that’s a theme throughout the book. the book is extremely political, so i understand not going too far into that, but richards made advances on luna and his team leaked the footage and emails between henry and alex. it was really dialed down in the film, which upset me.

let me know what you guys thought of the movie, though. the actors who played alex, henry, nora, and ellen were perfect, and taylor/nicholas had amazing chemistry.

[agentrouka-blog]

I can’t believe we are still having pro Rhaegar discourse. My headcanon is he pursued her. It wasn’t physically forced immediately but he seduced/groomed her. He promised her he could get his marriage annulled and if she resisted, it didn’t last long. The power imbalance was too great.

For example, Anne Boleyn could not say no to Henry. Neither did Catherine Howard or even Catherine Parr. No one ever said no to him. If you were “chosen” you went without complaining. Anne Boleyn wasn’t in love with him but she knew she couldn’t escape the most powerful man in the land, so she tried exercising as little agency as she had and forced/persuaded Henry to marry her. She was brave and resourceful, and she still lost her life.

Lyanna was in a far worse position than Anne. She was isolated from her family in the midst of a war, she was also only 15, and unprotected. All that “Lyanna was a badass with a sword” discourse is woefully inaccurate, and it’s the reason Jon’s been prepared by the narrative to understand a princess in a tower predicament.

I mean, we can all make different guesses as to what happened but the idea that the author is asking a modern audience to consider the scenario he has created romantic is pretty laughable from any angle.

I'm personally more convinced that seduction is firmly out of the picture there, mainly because of how strongly Lyanna felt about Robert's bastard child and because of how strongly she felt about the concept of honor (while saving Howland, and as the Knight of the Laughing Tree) and that's very incompatible with the idea that she could at all be open to a relationship with married father Rhaegar, and unlike the various situations with Henry VIII, which were all happening more or less out in the open and with the arguable consent of the women's family's, any scenario with Lyanna is shrouded in secrecy mainly because she was both the daughter of and already officially betrothed to some of the most powerful nobles in all the land, who did have the power to say no on her behalf.

Where I can find common ground is the princess in the tower, and the degrees to which violence may or may not have played a role. Sansa is being groomed but decidedly not being seduced by Petyr, she doesn't want him and is accepting his attentions under duress (he is a powerful murderer holding her safety in his hands) and while she can slip into denial about her abysmal situation for moments at a time, she does not truly trust him ever. A similar scenario could easily have played out with Lyanna, kidnapping being obfuscated with a lie of protection from Aerys, with seduction never entering the picture. We know Sansa will escape her situation, but we can imagine a scenario where she doesn't.

If Petyr was less obessed with acting out a Catelyn-Happy-Ending-AU and instead with fathering a prophecy child, there's plenty of ways he could force the issue, from drugs to threatening manipulation to outright violence. There's a range of possible scenarios of what happened with Lyanna, but seduction and romance are... really low on the list of probabilities.

[bethanydelleman]

I saw a post you reblogged at some point about Fanny being stuck in a time loop and it got me thinking: if the main men (both protagonists and antagonists) of the different Austen novels time travelled back to the day they first met their love interest/the start of the novel - whichever is latest so wentworth, knightley, and Edmund Bertram would travel to the day the main events of their novels start - who do you think would end up changing the least of the events and the most (intentionally or not)?

Because I feel like Knightley would change the least and Henry Tilney and the three S&S gents would come next. But like Wentworth would immediately throw the entire novel off track and like Darcy and Henry Crawford would come in close second trying to change their truly awful first impressions

(Also I just want to add that I really love your Austen takes and discussions 😊)

Thank you!

This is a fascinating idea. Here are my thoughts:

Wentworth just marches into Uppercross Cottage and proposes again. Doesn't even wait to be properly introduced to the family. He's getting Anne back NOW. (She says yes, of course)

I can imagine Darcy having a tiny little crisis as he decides if he really wants to be married to Elizabeth, maybe he could just not accompany Bingley to Netherfield and his life could go the way he planned... nah, he can't resist. Off to Netherfield he goes and he lets Bingley introduce him to Elizabeth at the assembly ball. Things progress unimpeded and by Christmas there is a double wedding and Wickham's character is known throughout Hertfordshire. He skips town and Lydia is packed off to Pemberley to benefit from some better society. (Side note: Mrs. Bennet would push Mr. Collins on Mary if she had any inclination that Darcy liked Elizabeth).

If Bingley knew everything, he'd never leave Jane. He'd return from London and marry her, no matter what Darcy or his sisters said. (I wrote that once actually)

Does Wickham count as a main? Because I don't want him having the ability to predict the future. Yikes on bikes!

Henry Crawford is very interesting, because does he actually understand where he went wrong? I'm not sure he does. Can he resist a flirtation with two very pretty sisters? That would be a fun fan fiction to write. Because if he went for Fanny right off the bat and she knew nothing else about him... he'd probably succeed with her, secret Edmund love or not. And she certainly wouldn't have a leg to stand on in refusing his proposal.

Does Edmund come back in the same timeline as Henry? That would be so agnsty! If not, he'd probably be doing whatever he could to keep Maria and Henry apart, but he's shockingly ineffective in canon, so would he even be able to change anything?

Henry Tilney would probably just try to prevent Catherine being sent home alone. He could easily come back early.

Mr. Knightley's best move would be to tell Robert Martin to propose in person. I doubt Harriet could have resisted. Then he could just sit back and watch everything else play out.

Honestly, I don't know if Frank Churchill would change a thing, other than making sure his final letter was posted to Jane. He enjoyed the subterfuge.

Poor Edward Ferrars has to travel back while engaged to Lucy? I feel like he wouldn't even want to relive the novel, there is nothing he can do anyway.

Colonel Brandon would probably change a lot. He could immediately save Eliza and challenge Willoughby. He might even spare Marianne from a lot of pain.

Reginald de Courcy (Lady Susan) would likely act as well and save Frederica earlier than in the novel.

[pippin-katz]

just letting you know this ask will contain sensitive issues regarding Jewish identity and negative criticism that I’ve seen about rwrb. So I understand if you don’t want to answer at all - but I just wanted to see what your thoughts were about this (as I haven’t read the book but absolutely adore the movie) - if you want to make a separate post or something.

I saw a post on my “for you” feed (can’t find it anymore) that apparently Matthew’s decision to conflate and change Nora and June’s characters is antisemitic and bi-erasure? I only skimmed through it because it was very accusatory and the comments were also very negative.

I can understand being upset about losing some characters and the criticism about Nora’s bi-identity. I can’t really speak about the antisemitism as I’m not fully aware of that aspect from the book. But I was thinking - if they did make Nora bi and she still ended up being with Percy/Pez, would those critics be happy? Or would they still be mad because June wasn’t there for the polyamorous relationship that was hinted in the books?

They’re mad about Richards, Rafael Luna, Liam, divorce-free Claremont-Diaz household, no Queen Mary, no Princess Catherine, no this, no that. And they said it’s not a true rom-com because it doesn’t flesh out the romance between Alex and Henry? I just don’t understand what it takes for them to be satisfied. Casey said themself that if everything was done 100% from the books, fans still wouldn’t be happy with it. I mostly ignore the loud ones who hate the movie with all their being but when it comes up it’s so jarring. I don’t want the hype of this movie to lose out to the noise of the haters and bashers. This movie, and Alex and Henry’s love story has become so important to many people and we want more!

Funny you should bring that up to me of all people, seeing as I happen to be Jewish!

I think I may have seen posts like that in the past and immediately blocked the poster because I knew that if I wrote a response to them it would spiral out of control, and there were too many people in the replies to try and explain this to.

Post Writing Note: Buckle up for this one cause I definitely went on a tangent about Jewish culture, but I felt like it would help people understand, or at least be interesting.

The short version of this is that they are self centered idiots who have their heads up their ass.

Casey is 100% correct that even if they were completely true to the book, they wouldn’t be satisfied. They will always find something to complain about.

They also simply don’t want to like it, or understand it. All of those major changes were made for a reason, and make complete sense/were the right call for what Matthew was trying to accomplish with the film. But they don’t want to hear or accept that.

As for Nora and June, once again, they are being idiots.

Matthew has explained several times that the decision to cut June was a logical director’s decision.

With the limited time the film has, side characters simply can’t have as much detail or development as they have in the book. In the case of June and Nora, he explained that he essentially would’ve been giving half of a character to the two actresses. They would’ve been fighting for screen time, and would’ve felt unsatisfied with the roles. Therefore, he essentially combined the two into one full character to give to a single actress. It makes complete sense, and was the right choice.

Did that remove the polycule dynamic? Yes, but that was a side effect of the decision, not part of the reason. Matthew does not seem like the kind of person to remove something like that for no reason, or purely because it might "make the straights uncomfortable". It was just the way things happened.

Now, let me address Nora.

The thing that drives me a bit crazy about this is their determination to call her intentional erasure.

Just because those traits weren’t brought up in the film does not make them untrue. There is no reason to assume that she isn’t bisexual or Jewish just because they didn’t bring it up. They did not say anything that counters those details, therefore I don’t see them as being changed.

They are also exaggerating a lot.

Now, I’m saying all this as a Jewish person who would love to see more representation of Judaism casually included in characters.

Nora’s Jewish identity is completely irrelevant to the plot and is only mentioned in the book. When Alex wants to call someone on Christmas after his parents fight, he briefly says that she’s busy celebrating Chanukah. That is the only moment in the entire book that Nora being Jewish is brought up, as far as I can remember from the last time I went through to look for it, when I first saw a post about this. I checked again while writing this. Other book readers can correct me if I’m wrong about that, but I know for a fact that it is not something that’s regularly mentioned or relevant to the plot.

Again, I say this as a Jewish person with love, it was not important. I’ve said it before, and I’ll keep saying it until I fucking die: the book had no time limit.

The novel is not a massive one, but it is absolutely stuffed cover-to-cover with content. It’s a book told through Alex’s point of view, giving direct access into his thoughts and feelings through text.

When Alex offhandedly mentions in his head facts like that, the translation to the screen would be constructing a situation where bringing that up out loud is relevant. The other option is to put clues in the environment to indicate it.

The thing about those options though is that Nora does not have any scenes during the holiday portion of the movie. In fact, there is not even a mention of Christmas at all; the only reason we know is because of the decorations around the White House, but no one mentions it. There is only one scene that even takes place around Christmas in the film: Alex’s conversation with Zahra. From there, it’s straight to New Year’s.

Some may be thinking, “But those are so close together, it would still be relevant!” and I hate to tell you that you’re wrong, but there’s an 85% chance you’re wrong.

Chanukah shifts dates from year to year because it’s determined by the Jewish calendar, and that doesn’t match the normal calendar. As someone grew up celebrating it, and still does celebrate it, I can tell you from personal knowledge that most of the time, it happens before Christmas. Yes, sometimes it overlaps with it, or happens afterwards, but I can safely tell you that most of the time, it happens before; for example, this year Chanukah starts Dec. 8th and ends at sunset Dec. 15th. It starts and ends a whole week before Christmas.

Now, I have to also say, and I say this with as much love and respect as I can for all the normal Christians/Catholics out there, we don’t really… shove our holiday in everyone’s faces?

I know that sounds rude, and it might be, but I mean that everyone knows when Christmas is. Everything closes down for Christmas. Whether you celebrate it or not, you’re most likely going to be off-work or off-school for it. No one looks around and goes, “what day is Christmas again?” And most people know the basic gist of why it’s celebrated.

I’m pretty sure that at minimum 65% of the people who read this had no idea when Chanukah was, and have zero clue why it’s celebrated.

That’s not really their fault, it’s just a simple truth about Western society (especially American) that people don’t get educated on Judaism, even indirectly the way they do for Christmas. The same can be said for all of the religious minorities. I’m by no means innocent of being uninformed on the basics of other minority religions. I’m just bringing it up because it’s somewhat relevant.

When it’s Christmas, you know it’s Christmas. Everyone is talking about it and there’s decorations everywhere. And while there’s sometimes a few decorations for Chanukah and maybe Kwanzaa, it’s not common; especially given the unfortunate reality that said decorations are a beacon for hate crimes.

Circling back to Nora, the easiest way to provide indications that she is Jewish is through decorations in her office/apparel choices. I just explained why she would be unlikely to have decorations in her office for Chanukah, but what about non-holiday specific decor?

Well, in my experience as a reformed Jewish person, there's not a lot of decor that's not very obvious or specifically religious in its representation. I say "specifically religious" because Judaism is a culture as well as a religion. I'm a Jewish person, but I don't regularly attend Temple or practice daily prayer. My experience with Judaism stems more from how we celebrate the major holidays, the kinds of food we eat, clothing we wear, and stuff like that, not passages of the Torah.

We also just don't really have as much physical decoration options as Christians/Catholics, at least for Jews who are not devoutly religious.

Judaism is practices aniconism.

Don't be alarmed, most people don't know what that word means; I only know because I learned about it briefly in an art history course a few years ago. Aniconism is the absence of artistic representations of certain figures in religions. Judaism is generally "anti-iconic", meaning it's strongly discouraged to create imagery, specifically human imagery, of God or other saint-like figures from the Torah. It's not completely unheard of, but think about how frequently you see imagery of Jesus in Christianity/Catholicism, or all the famous imagery of God, and depictions of scenes of the Bible and the saints, etc. etc. etc. Jews just don't do that, at least not nearly to the extent or as commonly as Christians/Catholics.

Jews instead have focused artistry into the form of ceremonial objects, i.e. the menorah, Kiddush goblets, etc.

In fact, my Jewish heritage comes from my father's side, so my grandfather on that side has always been a practicing Jew, and my grandmother converted back when they married. They're not super religious, but more so than my parents and how I was raised.

Thinking back to their home, I'm realizing that all of their Jewish "decor" was fine dishware sort of like this they kept in a China cabinet, like this:

Nora's not going to keep fine China in her office.

The only piece of "decor" that I have in my parents' home is not even really decor. This is a super common thing to find in Jewish households. It's call a mezuzah:

It's a little container that keeps a scroll with two prayers from the Torah written in Hebrew by a calligraphist. They are a symbol of connection and protection amongst the Jewish community. They are an ancient tradition. Nora would definitely have one.

However, these go on the doorframes of the entrance to a home. They're not hung up anywhere to look nice. She wouldn't have one on her office doorway, which is glass anyway.

So I've eliminated physical decorations, so how about jewelry?

This is where I'm sure a bunch of those people will shake their fists at me. The easiest and simplest way to imply a Jewish character (especially a female one) is the same as a Christian/Catholic character: a necklace.

Obviously, it is common practice for crosses to be worn on necklaces. Wearing the Star of David on a necklace is also common, but not nearly as common as the cross. I've noticed over the course of my life an increase in seeing them, but they're still uncommon.

And incredibly recently, I actively chose to stop wearing mine because we are at a point of actual danger in the US right now, specifically Florida, where I happen to be so lucky to live.

Regardless, it's debatable on how likely it would be for Nora to be wearing one. I feel like it's pretty split on how much of the Jewish population does and doesn't. So let's take a look at her style then:

The only outfit I couldn't find a clear still image of was the one in the jeep, but there are GIFs of that:

Note: I swear, if this fandom doesn't start posting more content of the side characters, I'm going to throw something; y'all are making it very hard to write my essays!! 😂

Out of her seven outfits, she is only wearing a neck accessory in ONE. More notably, she's not wearing a necklace in either of her formal outfits: the wedding and the party dresses. If she were going to wear a necklace, a fancier outfit usually makes it more likely. She seems to like wearing earrings more. Earrings with the Star of David exist, but I've personally never seen someone wearing them.

So based on everything I've been talking about, and Nora's personality, and her characterization in the book, and everything else, it's probably unlikely that she would wear a religious necklace, if not because she's not heavily religious, then because she just doesn't wear necklaces.

Could you ignore all that and complain that they could've given her a necklace or something anyway? Yeah, you could, but you are just being annoying and overreacting. She's still a Jewish character. People who haven't read the book may not know that, but tons of people who have read the book didn't even remember that. It's not an intentional decision made to erase her Jewish heritage. It is purely a side effect of having very limited time to cover way too much content.

The same can be said for her being bisexual. There's no reason to assume she's not. Hell, we've been joking about the face she makes when she meets Bea since we saw it:

This look alone is enough to make non-book readers go, "oh ship! ship! ship!". She's not straight just because they don't address her sexuality. Again, it was not an intentional decision made to erase her bisexuality.

Look, I'm not saying you have to like it, but for the love of god, stop acting like Matthew is the devil incarnate who made every change and cut out of spite, and to hurt you specifically.

As for the comment about not fleshing out Alex and Henry's relationship? I... I have no fucking words. That's a lie, I have so many fucking words, but I've been writing this for too long, so I'll speed run this:

First of all, if you don't think the romance between Alex and Henry is "fleshed out" in the film, I cannot say anything else than you are a fucking idiot. I don't like rom-coms, but this one is so fucking genuine, emotional, and sweet that even my cold dark soul feels warmth while watching it.

Second of all, how the fuck are you going to make the claim that they didn't flesh out Alex and Henry's romance, while simultaneously bitching about 3+ hours of book content that didn't make it? Do you not have any logical reasoning skills or common sense, at all??

I WILL SAY IT AGAIN: THE BOOK HAD NO TIME LIMIT. THE MOVIE DID.

Alright, that's enough of all that; I have an essay that I wrote the day after the movie originally dropped that went more in detail about that last one, so I'm not going to get super into that here. That's the short version of that, and if you want to hear the long version, go read this.

I hope that cleared some stuff up for you Anon! Sorry for the rambling lmfao

Thanks for reading!! If you enjoyed this essay & would like to support me, you can give me a tip on my Ko-Fi! ☺️

[fideidefenswhore]

did a partial reread (it’s been many, many years....im ancient...it’s been 84 years.gif) of tcp last night and it was...an experience.

[wqnwoos]

seventeen as jane austen characters

because i’m self-indulgent & rereading pride and prejudice for the 739482837th time

seungcheol as captain wentworth (persuasion) — if you haven’t read it, you just have to trust me. if you have, you will get it.

jeonghan as henry crawford (mansfield park) — slick charming dude with like. very mischievous undertones (no spoilers but jeonghan is better than this man it just fit him the most)

joshua as henry tilney (northanger abbey) — omg. charming and sweet but also a little witty and sarcastic.

jun as colonel fitzwilliam (p&p) — ok this is odd bc this character is barely present in the story but i was just reading the part he’s in and he just. seems like a really nice guy. in a jun type of way.

hoshi as mr bingley (p&p) — just a cheerful joyous lil fellow. happy to be here.

wonwoo as anne eliot (persuasion) — “elegance of mind and sweetness of character” YESSIRRR. (alternative could be colonel brandon from sense & sensibility?? idk i feel like anne is just my self indulgence running wild because i’m in love with her and also with wonwoo)

woozi as georgiana darcy (p&p) — she’s super good at music & just always described as “highly accomplished” and that reminds me of him. talented ass people.

dk as jane bennet (p&p) — a sweetheart who can do no wrong ever. and i mean ever.

mingyu as catherine morland (northanger abbey) — a little bit of a scaredy cat. but we love her still. v sweet & caring.

minghao as mr darcy (p&p) — he has nice hands.

seungkwan as emma woodhouse (emma) — gossip queen. also i feel like seungkwan would play matchmaker.

vernon as mr bennet (p&p) — THIS ONE IS. idk it makes sense but it doesn’t but it DOES okay like he’s so funny. and u know what it doesn’t have to make sense to YOU. it makes sense to ME.

chan as marianne dashwood (sense & sensibility) — very passionate and maybe a little bit impulsive but very loving & loyal.

[meraki-yao]

RWRB Movie Analysis + Feelings: The King, and Parental Love

Okay heads up, this is gonna be an amalgam of a meta/analysis, and my own feelings and experience/me venting, because I’m going through some things right now in my life and this is how I cope.

So in the book, the “final boss” on Alex's side is Richards. In the movie, I would say it’s more the action of being outed than Miguel himself, but yeah. The former is politically driven to screw things up while the latter is career-driven. To understand this change please read this essay.

Henry’s “final boss” is his Grandmother Queen Mary in the book, and his Grandfather King James in the movie. These two are in a similar position: the head of the monarchy and of the family, both trying to make Henry hide the truth. On first glance it might feel like they simply gender-bent the Queen for the movie for the sake of distancing the movie from the actual royal family, which, fair.

(Tangent: Also the fact that Stephen Fry is not only a gay icon in the UK but also a good friend of King Charles, yet he took this role without hesitation, I applaud you Sir)

But as I watched the Buckingham confrontation more, I noticed something.

And I noticed this because I’m familiar with it, in fact I’m living with it.

Either way, both the Queen and the King wanted Henry to hide his sexuality. That is forcing him into the closet, especially the way the Queen still brings up finding a wife in the book and Alex is right there, it’s forcing him into the closet for his entire life. That, is awful.

But there’s a difference.

In the book, Queen Mary doesn’t care about Henry. She berates Henry for damaging the crown’s image. She only mentions things from his perspective and says she’s only “protecting” him when she’s trying to convince Henry once she realizes that he’s not going to budge. She barely acknowledges Alex. Even till the end, she never really gave in: Princess Catherine gave her an ultimatum, and because she still wants to be in power, she extremely begrudgingly, agreed to Catherine’s terms. Not Henry, Catherine’s. It just so happens that Catherine’s terms are supporting Henry. On top of that, Catherine mentions feeling awful because of Mary (Quote: “And I swear on my life, and Arthur’s. I will take you off the throne before I will let them feel the things you made me feel”), so it’s clear that this is generational. Queen Mary is arrogant, power-hungry, and uncaring for her children and grandchildren. All she sees is the crown. She does not love Henry.

Okay, now look at the movie.

In the movie, King James says he’s protecting Henry at the start of the conversation. He admits that Alex and Henry’s love is genuine. He says the nation will not accept a prince who is homosexual. Which is still bullshit, but look at it. He’s speaking about Henry. This is about Henry. This isn’t about the crown as a whole, this is about Henry being shunned. About Henry facing scrutiny. He even says no one is saying Henry doesn’t deserve to be happy, and the implication there is that he thinks Henry will be unhappy if he comes out. In the end, he didn’t stop Henry from going onto the balcony when, as terrible as it would be, he could have. He just asked if Henry was sure because there is no turning back. He stepped back from the situation, and with a warning, let Henry decide for himself.

So here’s the thing.

There’s a type of parents, that truly do love their child and want them to be happy. But it comes out wrong and hurtful, because they want what they think is the best for their kid, without considering what their kid actually wants. They stick with the world and mindset they grew up with, and enforce that on their child, without acknowledging that after decades, the world the child lives in, and the world they lived in at that age, are extremely different. They want their kids to get the things that make the parents happy, but they don’t realize that the same thing might not make the child happy, maybe even make the kid feel worse. This is a different type of pain than straight-up abuse and neglect. (Please note that I am absolutely not saying that this type of pain is more than abuse/neglect. Abuse/neglect is still extremely fucking awful. But pain isn’t something that should be compared.)

And I say this, because my parents belong to this category. And it took me 18 years to realize that they can truly love me, and hurt me at the same time, and it’s not actually my fault that I feel bad about myself, it’s theirs.

Here’s the personal part. Please bear with me. (If you’re not interested, or find family issues or devaluing of mental health issues potentially triggering, please skip to *****)

My parents are older for my cohort, come from an extremely traditional and conservative society, and immigrated to my city during the 90s. I’m Gen Z. So our generation gap and cultural gap ended up being pretty fucking wide. I’m a very emotional, artsy person while my parents are pragmatic and hold traditional ideas very strictly. So what happens is that they don’t value the things I want to and like to do, because it doesn’t fit the perspective they grew up with and ended up being stuck with. I’ll state two examples from the clusterfuck that is my life.

Last night when I tried to subtly explain my recent struggles to my mom, she straight up said emotional people are egotistical and tend to end up mentally ill by their own doing. I excused myself and locked myself in my room to sob for ten minutes because whether or not she realised it, she was also talking about me, and holy fuck it hurt. What she said is fucked up, but the problem is I know why she thinks this way: a combination of her personality, personal experience, society and environment resulted in this perception being the only way she has ever viewed emotional people, and she just… never changed. Maybe if she heard more narratives or stories about “emotional people” she might change her mind, but right now the only exception is her daughter, who she can easily pass off as “not trying hard enough”.

My personal choices for university were between psychology, science & arts, and sociology, but on the day of finalizing my university choices, my parents spent hours telling me, in both shouting matches, and gently convincing in the same tone the king tries to persuade Henry with, about how those degrees aren’t useful, and I won’t get a job, and they need me to support myself by 25. Under pressure, borderline hysteria and non-stop crying from said pressure, and the knowledge that 1, I can’t convince them at this stage 2, I’m running out of time 3, they’re paying for my tuition, I caved in. I am now stuck with a degree I hate and feel like I have no motivation to live every fucking day. I meant it when I said RWRB is like, my only light in life right now. I’m literally writing this to avoid schoolwork. I’m also not saying my parents’ concerns aren’t valid, they are, that being said it took me so long to realize that it is not normal for me to feel so shit about myself and my life every fucking day, and that we didn’t even come to a compromise, because based on what their society taught them, they think they’re in the absolute right, and I’m being naïve, and they ended up forcing me into this. I refuse to say this was my choice. It wasn’t. It’s theirs.  

*****

Movies, books and shows are my escapism. I find comfort in stories, and even more so when I see characters who I can relate to, who are in same way, starting at a point where I am.  

When I read the book, I fell in love with both of the boys. But between them, I related more to Henry: a family who doesn’t understand us, with the sole exception being our sister, having out-dated traditional ideas enforced on us, and having parts of us being invalidated. Granted Henry’s core issue being his sexuality and my core issue being my personality and interest makes the whole issue still different, but there are bits and pieces that are similar, and I find comfort in that.

But then I watched the movie, and for some reason it hit harder. I found myself relating more to Movie Henry than Book Henry (again, I love them both, one’s not better than the other, they are different, and both precious). And I ended up clocking it on the King.

The king didn’t come across to me as cold and uncaring the way the Queen in the book did. He came across to me as someone who genuinely loves Henry, but failed to understand how Henry wanted and needed to be loved, and failed to see how the perception and opinions of the younger generation have changed. Let’s be honest, having a heterosexual prince isn’t a requirement the way the King and subsequently Henry viewed it, it’s just an expectation because that’s how the royal family’s image in the past was: either you’re straight, or you’re queer and hidden. The King was stuck with that expectation while ignoring the growing acceptance of the LGBT+ community among the people, even for prominent figures, because that wasn’t the society that he was raised in, and therefore stuck with. The king meant it when he said he wanted to protect Henry, and he didn’t support Henry because he believed that Henry was naïve or not looking at the bigger picture when he wanted to come clean about his relationship and that doing so would be Henry’s detriment. I have heard that used on me too many times.

The king loves Henry the way my parents love me: genuine, but ultimately hurtful.

And in all honesty, I think that might be a more relatable/humanizing characterization for this type of family member.

With this in mind, I do believe that perhaps when Henry was younger, when he was a boy, he had good memories with his grandfather the way I still do make good memories with my family despite all the conflict, that once upon a time the King wasn’t the king to Henry, but just Grandpa who would let him sit on his lap and read stories to him. I can’t see the Queen from the book doing that at all.

(There’s also this incredible fic imagining King James “protecting” Henry because he too is gay, but lost his love during a far more unforgiving and cruel period of time, thus fearing for Henry, It’s absolutely magnificent, please go check it out: AO3 link)

I know I said I’m on the fence about getting a sequel (although if we do get one of course I’m watching it regardless), but this feels like something, granted unique to the movie, that would be interesting to explore. Somewhat like the conclusion of Disney’s Encanto, where the older generation needs to realize that their way of thinking is outdated and hurtful and that they need to listen to what the younger ones have to say. (the younger ones aren’t always right, but they need to at the very least, be heard and respected)

The King in the movie does truly love Henry, and that, allows space for forgiveness and reconciliation, and a chance for him to learn to love his grandson in the right way. It would be nice to see that.

[palaceoftears]

"It is, of course, possible that these Spaniards lied, or dressed up the truth, to protect their beloved princess. It is also possible that they did not. Either way, they were no more or less likely to be lying than the witnesses in England. That makes their testimony as valid as that of those who claimed to have met an ebullient Arthur demanding beer to quench the thirst of a night of hard love-making. Their words add, if not a definitive tilt, then some extra grains of sand to one side of the moral balance on which Catherine is habitually weighed. That balance measures whether she was the pious victim of a cruel, selfish husband or a consummate liar hiding behind an apparently saintly exterior. Judgements of her have swung backwards and forwards from one extreme to the other over the centuries – and still divide people today. [...] Catherine can, of course, be measured on many more scales than just that which deems her either truthful or deceiving. The most important traits of her character have, in fact, little to do with honesty or falsehood. What really matters about her is the strength of that character. A protected childhood amid a family of intense, self-demanding Spanish women does much to explain where this came from. Catherine grew up to become a woman of deep, even exaggerated, intensity. The complex and unhappy early English years, with their constant illnesses, eating problems and stern written instructions from the pope to avoid the self-harm of excessive fasting, give the first few clues to that nature. These were the reactions of a young, perfectionist woman who found herself lonely, lost and unloved in a foreign land. That same intensity and perfectionism explain, too, both her success and popularity as a queen consort and her final embrace of potential martyrdom."

-Giles Tremlett, Catherine of Aragon: Henry's Spanish Queen