#I still have a few ideas for more of these but in mid-century modern style~

[purenonsens]

More matchbox labels-inspired GO fanart! HERE's the first one :)

[renaissancefailmarriage]

this post is driving me fucking NUTS because people in the reblogs+replies are posting the dumbest historical misinformation that i thought waa debunked years ago but apparently not on this hellsite

OP this isnt @ you at all i know you probably just meant this to be a funny meme post but everyone is being loud and wrong in the comments SO

the only reason people are blaming beau brummell for this is because of that stupid alexandra rowland twitter thread from 2019 where every single failing of modern masculinity, from catcalling to male celebrities wearing boring suits to the met gala, is laid at the feet of This One Guy from the 19th century. the thread itself is colossally stupid and irritating and was debunked by multiple fashion historians, but it still hasn't been taken down. great.

the "Great Male Renunciation" is not really a thing, imo. Or at least its way more complicated than this wikipedia article is making it sound. (Which makes sense because it was coined by some guy who wasn't even a historian) just because something has a wikipedia article doesn't mean it's beyond question. yes, there are rapid and significant changes in european men's (and women's!) fashions in the 1790s-1810s. no, it's not because beau brummell was running around snatching powdered wigs off people's heads. like most examples of broad social change, it's much more complicated than that.

people in the reblogs+replies seem to be split between blaming the french and the british, and they're kinda both right, because there were two major things that lead to this change: english country styles and the french revolution.

from about the mid-18th century and on, fashion started to trend away from the super frilly, pastel rococo styles and towards a more subtle, earth-toned one. this was a very slow process, and plenty of these later "simpler" styles still look plenty ostentatious from a modern perspective.

for example, compare this portrait of françois boucher in 1741 to a portrait of an englishman by thomas gainsborough in 1765. the earlier portrait is in pale blue with large cuffs, lots of lace, and a long, relatively unstructured flowy wig. the later portrait shows practical earth tones, probably in a good english wool since it doesn't have the sheen of silk or velvet, and a much smaller and neater wig style. you can't really see it here, but the earlier coat would also have a much larger "skirt."

we can clearly see this shift happening well before the end of the 18th century, and indeed before beau brummell was even born! the idea that men should dress in a restrained but stylish way to communicate respectability is not new at all, and nor is it something that happened overnight. it was a gradual shift influenced by many factors. the idea was to look like an english gentleman at his country home, in well-made and tailored but practical garments. (the use of wool instead of silk might have also been patriotic since wool was a big industry in england at the time, as opposed to the french center of silk production in lyon, but that's a guess that i'm making, not necessarily a solid historical fact. important to distinguish between the two!) so beau brummell was certainly a style icon, but he was in favor for a relatively short time, and was also stylish within the confines of trends that had been developing for decades at that point.

the other big factor in this shift was the french revolution in 1789. clothing was actually explicitly defined in political terms around this time, with sans culottes referring to the fact of common men being less likely to wear the stockings and breeches (culottes) of the bourgeoisie and nobility, opting for practical trousers instead. this (along with other factors!) did lead to a GRADUAL change from breeches to trousers over the next few decades. this era is what the idea of the "great male renunciation" refers to, and there's definitely a strong aesthetic shift, but honestly i still don't think it's a very useful concept. male fashion continued to be brightly colored and more "fancy" well into the 19th century! just look at the snatched waists, fluffy hair, and patterned cloths in men's fashions of the 1820s-1840s. Or just look at this drawing of a sans-culotte from the 1790s--certainly not a boring navy men's suit of today.

side note lol but i really don't love how a bunch of these replies are framing this style change as some kind of toxic masculinity moment, as opposed to a very justified reaction to the aristocracy's excess when people were starving. i find it just a BIT dishonest. and its not even true that everyone suddenly became boring, see above.

anyway in conclusion, fashion history is an actual discipline and making definitive statements about it requires knowledge of political and economic contexts, critical thinking and lots of research into the period. not just shoving two images from over 100 years apart together and making a broad statement that "feels right", or pinning all the sins of modern men's fashion on one guy who said mean things at a party once. thank you and goodnight.

was a mistake

[zoewilkinson]

Blog Post 2 - Can Games Art Be a Total Work of Art?

In this week’s lecture we covered the topic of Gesamtkunstwerk, which translates to a total work of art. Different philosophers have defined Gesamtkunstwerk for different media artefacts in their own history, but does this apply to my own work?

What Is Gesamtkunstwerk?

The term Gesamtkunstwerk was first used by the German philosopher Karl Friedrich Trahndorff in 1827, but became popularised by Richard Wagner, a German composer, in the mid 19th century. Wagner believed that art should be an immersive experience, and that theatre is the ideal art medium. It incorporates multiple art styles; acting, singing, makeup, environment, music, sound effects, visual effects, everything working together to create an immersive experience.

This idea has translated across into modern day film, which I believe also aligns with Wagner’s ideals. Looking at films specifically, one that stands out to me as matching Wagner’s definition of Gesamtkunstwerk is Spiderman: Across the Spiderverse (2023). This is a sequel to Spiderman: Into the Spiderverse (2018), which was the film that inspired me to start looking at art and animation as a career path, so it’s a film universe that I find incredibly influential to both my own work, but also to the industry as a whole. Looking at Spiderman: Across the Spiderverse (2023), the combination of art styles used throughout the film alone makes this feel like a complete work of art to me. This combined with the use of animation, the comic style plot, the music, the acting and the extensive environments all work together to create a completely immersive film, it really feels like bringing a comic book to life.

Is My Own Work a Total Work of Art?

My art piece entitled "The Redcap" (2023)

To put it simply, no, I don’t believe that my own work fits under the definition of Gesamtkunstwerk. Looking specifically at my own art piece that I created for my bachelor’s degree, “The Redcap” (2023), which can be accessed on my ArtStation, this piece is a still image with no animation or interaction, and no dialogue or music. However, while my work on its own may not fit into the definition of Gesamtkunstwerk, it is a key part of creating a game that is a total work of art. Without the main focal piece, such as a character or environment, a game would not be immersive or even really exist as a game. I believe that a game can be defined as a total work of art, therefore games art fits into this category when combined with all the other aspects of game creation.

While my work is obviously not comparable to Spiderman: Across the Spiderverse (2023), which is what I consider to be a total work of art, there are elements from the film that I can take to consider ways to create my own total work of art in future pieces. Considering ways to expand from a still image to a more immersive piece, implementing the use of cinematics and motion could have a huge impact on the audience interaction, making it overall more interesting to look at than a still image. Additionally, adding some kind of audio or music that matches the theme of the artwork would also be beneficial to making a more complete piece of art. The majority of the characters I make are intended to be implemented into a game, and therefore would later be animated and used with a story, which would make it a key feature of a total work of art. Although my own artwork may not currently be a total work of art, I am confident that adding a few basic ideas to add dimension and further interactivity to the piece would create an overall immersive viewing experience.

Bibliography

Spiderman: Across the Spiderverse. (2023) Animated Film. Directed by Joaquim Dos Santos, Kemp Powers, and Justin K. Thompson. [DVD]. United States: Sony Pictures Animation.

Spiderman: Into the Spiderverse. (2018) Animated Film. Directed by Bob Persichetti, Peter Ramsey, and Rodney Rothman. [DVD]. United Stated: Sony Pictures Animation.

Wilkinson, Z., 2023. Final Project Redcap with Environment. [Online] Available at: https://www.artstation.com/artwork/496LRL [Accessed 20 October 2023].

[mcmansionhell]

Underground, Part 1

[Author’s Note: A year ago, when waiting for the DC Metro, I came up with an idea for a short story involving two realtors and the infamous Las Vegas Underground House, typed up an outline, and shoved it away in my documents where it sat neglected until this month. The house recently resurfaced on Twitter, and combined with almost a year of quarantine, the story quickly materialized. Though I rarely write fiction, I decided I’d give it a shot as a kind of novelty McMansion Hell post. I’ve peppered the story with photos from the house to break up the walls of text. Hopefully you find it entertaining. I look forward to returning next month with the second installment of this as well as our regularly scheduled McMansion content. Happy New Year!

Warning: there’s lots of swearing in this.]

Underground

Back in 1997, Mathieu Rino, the son of two Finnish mechanical engineers who may or may not have worked intimately with the US State Department, changed his name to Jay Renault in order to sell more houses. It worked wonders.

He gets out of the car, shuts the door harder than he should. Renault wrinkles his nose. It’s a miserable Las Vegas afternoon - a sizzling, dry heat pools in ripples above the asphalt. The desert is a place that is full of interesting and diverse forms of life, but Jay’s the kind of American who sees it all as empty square-footage. He frowns at the dirt dusting up his alligator-skin loafers but then remembers that every lot, after all, has potential. Renault wipes the sweat from his leathery face, slicks back his stringy blond hair and adjusts the aviators on the bridge of his nose. The Breitling diving watch crowding his wrist looks especially big in the afternoon glare. He glances at it.

“Shit,” he says. The door on the other side of the car closes, as though in response. 

If Jay Renault is the consummate rich, out-of-touch Gen-Xer trying to sell houses to other rich, out-of-touch Gen-Xers, then Robert Little is his millennial counterpart. Both are very good at their jobs. Robert adjusts his tie in the reflection of the Porsche window, purses his lips. He’s Vegas-showman attractive, with dark hair, a decent tan, and a too-bright smile - the kind of attractive that ruins marriages but makes for an excellent divorcee. Mildly sleazy.

“Help me with these platters, will you?” Renault gestures, popping the trunk. Robert does not want to sweat too much before an open house, but he obliges anyway. They’re both wearing suits. The heat is unbearable. A spread of charcuterie in one hand, Jay double-checks his pockets for the house keys, presses the button that locks his car. 

Both men sigh, and their eyes slowly trail up to the little stucco house sitting smack dab in the center of an enormous lot, a sea of gravel punctuated by a few sickly palms. The house has the distinct appearance of being made of cardboard, ticky-tacky, a show prop. Burnt orange awnings don its narrow windows, which somehow makes it look even more fake. 

“Here we go again,” Jay mutters, fishing the keys out of his pocket. He jiggles them until the splintered plywood door opens with a croak, revealing a dark and drab interior – dusty, even though the cleaners were here yesterday. Robert kicks the door shut with his foot behind him.

 “Christ,” he swears, eyes trailing over the terrible ecru sponge paint adorning the walls. “This shit is so bleak.”

The surface-level house is mostly empty. There’s nothing for them to see or attend to there, and so the men step through a narrow hallway at the end of which is an elevator. They could take the stairs, but don’t want to risk it with the platters. After all, they were quite expensive. Renault elbows the button and the doors part. 

“Let’s just get this over with,” he says as they step inside. The fluorescent lights above them buzz something awful. A cheery metal sign welcomes them to “Tex’s Hideaway.” Beneath it is an eldritch image of a cave, foreboding. Robert’s stomach’s in knots. Ever since the company assigned him to this property, he’s been terrified of it. He tells himself that the house is, in fact, creepy, that it is completely normal for him to be ill at ease. The elevator’s ding is harsh and mechanical. They step out. Jay flips a switch and the basement is flooded with eerie light. 

It’s famous, this house - The Las Vegas Underground House. The two realtors refer to it simply as “the bunker.” Built by an eccentric millionaire at the height of Cold War hysteria, it’s six-thousand square feet of paranoid, aspirational fantasy. The first thing anyone notices is the carpet – too-green, meant to resemble grass, sprawling out lawn-like, bookmarked by fake trees, each a front for a steel beam. Nothing can grow here. It imitates life, unable to sustain it. The leaves of the ficuses seem particularly plastic.

Bistro sets scatter the ‘yard’ (if one can call it that), and there’s plenty of outdoor activities – a parquet dance floor complete with pole and disco ball, a putt putt course, an outdoor grill made to look like it’s nestled in a rock, but in reality better resembles a baked potato. The pool and hot tub, both sculpted in concrete and fiberglass mimicking a natural rock formation, are less Playboy grotto and more Fred Flintstone. It’s a very seventies idea of fun.

Then, of course, there’s the house. That fucking house. 

A house built underground in 1978 was always meant to be a mansard – the mansard roof was a historical inevitability. The only other option was International Style modernism, but the millionaire and his wife were red-blooded anti-Communists. Hence, the mansard. Robert thinks the house looks like a fast-food restaurant. Jay thinks it looks like a lawn and tennis club he once attended as a child where he took badminton lessons from a swarthy Czech man named Jan. It’s drab and squat, made more open by big floor-to-ceiling windows nestled under fresh-looking cedar shingles. There’s no weather down here to shrivel them up.

“Shall we?” Jay drawls. The two make their way into the kitchen and set the platters down on the white tile countertop. Robert leans up against the island, careful of the oversized hood looming over the electric stovetop. He eyes the white cabinets, accented with Barbie pink trim. The matching linoleum floor squeaks under his Italian loafers. 

“I don’t understand why we bother doing this,” Robert complains. “Nobody’s seriously going to buy this shit, and the company’s out a hundred bucks for party platters.”

“It’s the same every time,” Renault agrees. “The only people who show up are Instagram kids and the crazies - you know, the same kind of freaks who’d pay money to see Chernobyl.” 

“Dark tourism, they call it.”

Jay checks his watch again. Being in here makes him nervous.

“Still an hour until open house,” he mutters. “I wish we could get drunk.”

Robert exhales deeply. He also wishes he could get drunk, but still, a job’s a job.

“I guess we should check to see if everything’s good to go.”

The men head into the living room. The beamed, slanted ceiling gives it a mid-century vibe, but the staging muddles the aura. Jay remembers making the call to the staging company. “Give us your spares,” he told them, “Whatever it is you’re not gonna miss. Nobody’ll ever buy this house anyway.” 

The result is eclectic – a mix of office furniture, neo-Tuscan McMansion garb, and stuffy waiting-room lamps, all scattered atop popcorn-butter shag carpeting. Hideous, Robert thinks. Then there’s the ‘entertaining’ room, which is a particular pain in the ass to them, because the carpet was so disgusting, they had to replace it with that fake wood floor just to be able to stand being in there for more than five minutes. There’s a heady stone fireplace on one wall, the kind they don’t make anymore, a hearth. Next to it, equally hedonistic, a full bar. Through some doors, a red-painted room with a pool table and paintings of girls in fedoras on the wall. It’s all so cheap, really. Jay pulls out a folded piece of paper out of his jacket pocket along with a pen. He ticks some boxes and moves on.

The dining room’s the worst to Robert. Somehow the ugly floral pattern on the curtains stretches up in bloomer-like into a frilly cornice, carried through to the wallpaper and the ceiling, inescapable, suffocating. It smells like mothballs and old fabric. The whole house smells like that. 

The master bedroom’s the most normal – if anything in this house could be called normal. Mismatched art and staging furniture crowd blank walls. When someone comes into a house, Jay told Robert all those years ago, they should be able to picture themselves living in it. That’s the goal of staging. 

There’s two more bedrooms. The men go through them quickly. The first isn’t so bad – claustrophobic, but acceptable – but the saccharine pink tuille wallpaper of the second gives Renault a sympathetic toothache. The pair return to the kitchen to wait.

Both men are itching to check their phones, but there’s no point – there’s no signal in here, none whatsoever. Renault, cynical to the core, thinks about marketing the house to the anti-5G people. It’s unsettlingly quiet. The two men have no choice but to entertain themselves the old-fashioned way, through small talk.

“It’s really fucked up, when you think about it,” Renault muses.

“What is?”

“The house, Bob.”

Robert hates being called Bob. He’s told Jay that hundreds of times, and yet…

“Yeah,” Robert mutters, annoyed.

“No, really. Like, imagine. You’re rich, you founded a major multinational company marketing hairbrushes to stay-at-home moms, and what do you decide to do with your money? Move to Vegas and build a fucking bunker. Like, imagine thinking the end of the world is just around the corner, forcing your poor wife to live there for ten, fifteen years, and then dying, a paranoid old man.” Renault finds the whole thing rather poetic. 

“The Russkies really got to poor ol’ Henderson, didn’t they?” Robert snickers.

“The wife’s more tragic if you ask me,” Renault drawls. “The second that batshit old coot died, she called a guy to build a front house on top of this one, since she already owned the lot. Poor woman probably hadn’t seen sunlight in God knows how long.”

“Surely they had to get groceries.”

Jay frowns. Robert has no sense of drama, he thinks. Bad trait for a realtor.

“Still,” he murmurs. “It’s sad.”

“I would have gotten a divorce, if I were her,” the younger man says, as though it were obvious. It’s Jay’s turn to laugh.

“I’ve had three of those, and trust me, it’s not as easy as you think.”

“You’re seeing some new girl now, aren’t you?” Robert doesn’t really care, he just knows Jay likes to talk about himself, and talking fills the time.  

“Yeah. Casino girl. Twenty-six.”

“And how old are you again?”

“None of your business.”

“Did you see the renderings I emailed to you?” Robert asks briskly, not wanting to discuss Jay’s sex life any further.

“What renderings?”

“Of this house, what it could look like.”

“Oh. Yeah.” Jay has not seen the renderings.

“If it were rezoned,” Robert continues, feeling very smart, “It could be a tourist attraction - put a nice visitor’s center on the lot, make it sleek and modern. Sell trinkets. It’s a nice parcel, close to the Strip - some clever investor could make it into a Museum of Ice Cream-type thing, you know?”

“Museum of Ice Cream?”

“In New York. It’s, not, like, educational or anything. Really, it’s just a bunch of colorful rooms where kids come to take pictures of themselves.”

“Instagram,” Jay mutters. “You know, I just sold a penthouse the other week to an Instagram influencer. Takes pictures of herself on the beach to sell face cream or some shit. Eight-point-two million dollars.”

“Jesus,” Robert whistles. “Fat commission.”

“You’re telling me. My oldest daughter turns sixteen this year. She’s getting a Mazda for Christmas.”

“You ever see that show, My Super Sweet Sixteen? On MTV? Where rich kids got, like, rappers to perform at their birthday parties? Every time at the end, some guy would pull up in, like, an Escalade with a big pink bow on it and all the kids would scream.”

“Sounds stupid,” Jay says.

“It was stupid.”

It’s Robert’s turn to check his watch, a dainty gold Rolex.

“Fuck, still thirty minutes.”

“Time really does stand still in here, doesn’t it?” Jay remarks.

“We should have left the office a little later,” Robert complains. “The charcuterie is going to get –“

A deafening sound roars through the house and a violent, explosive tremor throws both men on the ground, shakes the walls and everything between them. The power’s out for a few seconds before there’s a flicker, and light fills the room again. Two backup generators, reads Jay’s description in the listing - an appeal to the prepper demographic, which trends higher in income than non-preppers. For a moment, the only things either are conscious of are the harsh flourescent lighting and the ringing in their ears. Time slows, everything seems muted and too bright. Robert rubs the side of his face, pulls back his hand and sees blood.

“Christ,” he chokes out. “What the hell was that?”

“I don’t know,” Jay breathes, looking at his hands, trying to determine if he’s got a concussion. The results are inconclusive – everything’s slow and fuzzy, but after a moment, he thinks it might just be shock.

“It sounded like a fucking 747 just nosedived on top of us.” 

“Yeah, Jesus.” Jay’s still staring at his fingers in a daze. “You okay?”

“I think so,” Robert grumbles. Jay gives him a cursory examination.

“Nothing that needs stitches,” he reports bluntly. Robert’s relieved. His face sells a lot of houses to a lot of lonely women and a few lonely men. There’s a muffled whine, which the two men soon recognize as a throng of sirens. Both of them try to calm the panic rising in their chests, to no avail.

“Whatever the fuck happened,” Jay says, trying to make light of the situation, “At least we’re in here. The bunker.”

Fear forms in the whites of Robert’s eyes.

“What if we’re stuck in here,” he whispers, afraid to speak such a thing into the world. The fear spreads to his companion.

“Try the elevator,” Jay urges, and Robert gets up, wobbles a little as his head sorts itself out, and leaves. A moment later, Jay hears him swear a blue streak, and from the kitchen window, sees him standing before the closed metal doors, staring at his feet. His pulse racing, Renault jogs out to see for himself.

“It’s dead,” Robert murmurs. 

“Whatever happened,” Jay says cautiously, rubbing the back of his still-sore neck, “It must have been pretty bad. Like, I don’t think we should go up yet. Besides, surely the office knows we’re still down here.”

“Right, right,” the younger man breathes, trying to reassure himself.

“Let’s just wait it out. I’m sure everything’s fine.” The way Jay says it does not make Robert feel any better. 

“Okay,” the younger man grumbles. “I’m getting a fucking drink, though.”

“Yeah, Jesus. That’s the best idea you’ve had all day.” Renault shoves his hands in his suit pocket to keep them from trembling.  

If you like this post, and want to see more like it, consider supporting me on Patreon!

There is a whole new slate of Patreon rewards, including: good house of the month, an exclusive Discord server, weekly drawings, monthly livestreams, a reading group, free merch at certain tiers and more!

Not into recurring donations but still want to show support? Consider the tip jar! 

Or, Check out the McMansion Hell Store! Proceeds from the store help protect great buildings from the wrecking ball.

[madmensideblog]

MAD MEN BOOK RECS

Happy pride/Don Draper’s fake birthday ❤️ Below the cut, I’ve listed info on my favorite Mad Men related books and a couple I haven’t read yet but I’m really looking forward to. Let me know if you check any of these out, or if you have any other recommendations! ❤️

Mad Men Carousel: The Complete Critical Companion by Matt Zoller Seitz

“Mad Men Carousel is an episode-by-episode guide to all seven seasons of AMC's Mad Men. This book collects TV and movie critic Matt Zoller Seitz’s celebrated Mad Men recaps—as featured on New York magazine's Vulture blog—for the first time, including never-before-published essays on the show’s first three seasons. Seitz’s writing digs deep into the show’s themes, performances, and filmmaking, examining complex and sometimes confounding aspects of the series. The complete series—all seven seasons and ninety-two episodes—is covered.

Each episode review also includes brief explanations of locations, events, consumer products, and scientific advancements that are important to the characters, such as P.J. Clarke’s restaurant and the old Penn Station; the inventions of the birth control pill, the Xerox machine, and the Apollo Lunar Module; the release of the Beatles’ Revolver and the Beach Boys’ Pet Sounds; and all the wars, protests, assassinations, and murders that cast a bloody pall over a chaotic decade.

Mad Men Carousel is named after an iconic moment from the show’s first-season finale, “The Wheel,” wherein Don delivers an unforgettable pitch for a new slide projector that’s centered on the idea of nostalgia: “the pain from an old wound.” This book will soothe the most ardent Mad Men fan’s nostalgia for the show. New viewers, who will want to binge-watch their way through one of the most popular TV shows in recent memory, will discover a spoiler-friendly companion to one of the most multilayered and mercurial TV shows of all time.”

A classic episode-by-episode look at the series from reviewer Matt Zoller Seitz.

The Legacy of Mad Men — Cultural History, Intermediality and American Television (Edited by Karen McNally, Jane Marcellus, Teresa Forde, and Kirsty Fairclough)

“For seven seasons, viewers worldwide watched as ad man Don Draper moved from adultery to self-discovery, secretary Peggy Olson became a take-no-prisoners businesswoman, object-of-the-gaze Joan Holloway developed a feminist consciousness, executive Roger Sterling tripped on LSD, and smarmy Pete Campbell became a surprisingly nice guy. Mad Men defined a pivotal moment for television, earning an enduring place in the medium’s history.

This edited collection examines the enduringly popular television series as Mad Men still captivates audiences and scholars in its nuanced depiction of a complex decade. This is the first book to offer an analysis of Mad Men in its entirety, exploring the cyclical and episodic structure of the long form series and investigating issues of representation, power and social change. The collection establishes the show’s legacy in televisual terms, and brings it up to date through an examination of its cultural importance in the Trump era. Aimed at scholars and interested general readers, the book illustrates the ways in which Mad Men has become a cultural marker for reflecting upon contemporary television and politics.”

This is a really beautiful collection. It was published in 2019. It’s rather expensive. (I found a used copy for much cheaper.) If you can afford it, I really, really recommend buying it. There is a pdf floating around if you know where to look though. But like I said, it’s really amazing work and the women who curated it deserve high praise and compensation.

A few favorite essays of mine include “Don Draper and the Enduring Appeal of Antonioni’s La Notte” by Emily Hoffman, “Mad Men’s Mid-Century Modern Times” by Zak Roman, “Mad Men and the Staging of Literature via Ken Cosgrove and His Problems” by Aaron Shapiro, and “What Jungian Psychology Can Tell Us About Don Draper’s Unexpected Embrace of Leonard in Mad Men’s Finale” by Marisa Carroll.

Mad Men and Philosophy: Nothing Is as It Seems (Edited by William Irwin, James B. South, and Rod Carveth)

“With its swirling cigarette smoke, martini lunches, skinny ties, and tight pencil skirts, Mad Men is unquestionably one of the most stylish, sexy, and irresistible shows on television. But the series becomes even more absorbing once you dig deeper into its portrayal of the changing social and political mores of 1960s America and explore the philosophical complexities of its key characters and themes. From Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle to John Kenneth Galbraith, Milton Friedman, and Ayn Rand, Mad Men and Philosophy brings the thinking of some of history's most powerful minds to bear on the world of Don Draper and the Sterling Cooper ad agency. You'll gain insights into a host of compelling Mad Men questions and issues, including happiness, freedom, authenticity, feminism, Don Draper's identity, and more.”

This collection was published just a month before the start of season 4, so it only concerns the first three seasons of the show. As such, it includes some assumptions that are proven false and a few strange misreadings that I’m sure would’ve been cleared up had they had the rest of the show at their disposal. But there are some great philosophical insights and analysis.

I haven’t yet read the whole collection, but my favorite essay of what I’ve read so far was “Pete, Peggy, Don, and the Dialectic of Remembering and Forgetting” by John Fritz.

The Fashion File: Advice, Tips, and Inspiration from the Costume Designer of Mad Men (by costume designer Janie Bryant)

From Joanie's Marilyn Monroe-esque pencil skirts to Betty's classic Grace Kelly cupcake dresses, the clothes worn by the characters of the phenomenal Mad Men have captivated fans everywhere. Now, women are trading in their khakis for couture and their pumas for pumps. Finally, it's hip to dress well again. Emmy-Award winning costume designer Janie Bryant offers readers a peek into the dressing room of Mad Men, revealing the design process behind the various characters' looks and showing every woman how to find her own leading lady style--whether it's vintage, modern, or bohemian. Bryant's book will peek into the dressing room of Mad Men and reveal the design process behind the various characters' looks. But it will also help women learn how fashion can help convey their personality. She will help them cultivate their style, including all the details that make a big difference. Bryant offers advice to ensure that a woman's clothes convey her personality. She covers everything from where to find incredible vintage clothing and accessories to how to pair those authentic pieces with modern shoes and jeans. Readers will learn how to find their perfect bra size, use color to convey a mood, and invest in the ten essentials every woman should own. And just so the ladies don't leave their men behind, there's even a section on making them look a little more Don Draper-dashing.

I recently ordered a used copy of this book and haven’t yet received it, but I’m very much looking forward to it. Like Mad Men and Philosophy listed above, it was published between season 3 and 4, so unfortunately does not cover the whole show. It sounds like it might just cover the women’s costume design, though I’m not sure. Janie Bryant is such a meticulous, genius costume designer that I can’t wait to read it. Relatedly, you should follow her incredible costume design instagram where she posts lots of her work from Mad Men and other shows with fascinating insight into her process.

The Universe is Indifferent: Theology, Philosophy, and Mad Men (Edited by Ann W. Duncan and Jacob L. Goodson)

Centered on the lives of the employees at a Manhattan advertising firm, the television series Mad Men touches on the advertising world's unique interests in consumerist culture, materialistic desire, and the role of deception in Western capitalism. While this essay collection has a decidedly socio-historical focus, the authors use this as the starting point for philosophical, religious, and theological reflection, showing how Mad Men reveals deep truths concerning the social trends of the 1960s and deserves a significant amount of scholarly consideration. Going beyond mere reflection, the authors make deeper inquiries into what these trends say about American cultural habits, the business world within Western capitalism, and the rapid social changes that occurred during this period. From the staid and conventional early seasons to the war, assassinations, riots, and counterculture of later seasons, The Universe is Indifferent shows how social change underpins the interpersonal dramas of the characters in Mad Men.

I only just found out about this collection, but I’m very interested in finding a copy. This was published in 2016. You can see the table of contents here. EDIT: This book is available to read on Scribd. They offer a 30 day free trial.

[galaxyshine24-7]

House Of Wax🕯

Hello Everyone I got a big Slasher Home vision for you. Today we got the Sinclair Brothers and the whole town of Ambrose. Picture this the boys decide to bring in more people into Ambrose and get it back on the map. They make the House of Wax the best on this side of the state. People get drawn to the town and with the money they rebuild it to its former glory. The dusty town turns into a charming tourist trap with a few new wax figures popping up here and there. A cute southern town in the forest with lots of charm its what Ambrose would be and the boys would be able to expand their homes and businesses to draw in more people.  

Bo Sinclair

First of the brothers we have smooth talking Bo Sinclair. Now with the extra money the brothers would be able to expand and spruce up their spaces. With Bo I started trying to find a good style for him at first I was thinking a dark rockabilly style, but upon my searching I didn’t find anything that fit him like that. So I searched into a dark mid century modern aesthetic and found many references that helped with his style. Bo I see has a navy kind of guy he likes the more moody tones and modern furniture but still tries to keep that 70′s flair from his childhood. He would add a workshop for more of his mechanic ideas outside the auto shop and create a space for him at home. Maybe even start making traps for nosy towns people. Bo is a classy guy so I can see him having a posh bar to make drinks and maybe take up a mixology hobby to relax. He would even hold parties in the museum to flirt and socialize becoming somewhat of a celebreality of the town. We all know he looks good in a suite so why not wear it out, but anyway Bo would be a person interested in a classy and dark themed style for his space.     

 Vincent Sinclair

Next up we have the best Wax Boy and its Vincent. So Vincent’s style is much older then his brothers, a bit of a gothic rustic kind of vibe. He would live more on the lower levels of the museum and with the money they collect he would expand the workshop and living space. His space will be filled with art and upgrading wax making equipment along with tools. He would also have a mini library for all the books he would collect. Vincent would now have room to put in a lot of canvases for paints and diving into all forms of artist expression. Vincent would buy a lot of paintings he likes and might even add new pieces to the Wax museum to bring people in. He would still be shy around others, but like to hear people apricate his work through the vents. His colors would be blacks, browns, and a few pops of color from his art. I also see him liking cream colors as well. He might even buy a few plants to add some freshness. I can see him having a taste for antiques and older styles that bring out his creative side.     

Lester Sinclair

Last but not lest we have Lester Sinclair. Now Lester is a simple man he doesn’t need anything fancy, but a good old rustic mountain vibe. He would probably have a house outside of the museum to be more in nature and by the roads. Lester would be a great lover of wood tones with lots of browns and stones. He would have a taxidermy workshop and maybe even start up his own shop for it if he gets enough money. He doesn’t need antiques like Vincent or fancy bars like Bo he just wants a roof over his head and a cozy fireplace to warm up to after a hard day of work. He loves fur and he would use any extra parts of the animal he has to use for other things besides taxidermy if its useful for him. He might even get a dog to keep him company when he is not around his brothers.  

[joneswuzhere]

hello join me in thinking about some books and authors that are, or might be, part of s5′s intertextuality

5.10 in particular offered specific shout outs, and also u know i’m always wondering what might be ahead so i have some ideas on that:

- first, as mentioned in a previous ask post, i know i wasn’t alone in keeping an eye out for 5.10 parallels to the lost weekend (1945) the film that gave episode 1.10 its name and several themes - or to the 1944 book by charles r jackson which the film is based on

- s5 has not been shy about revisiting earlier seasons, especially s1. altho i feel that 1.10′s parallels to the lost weekend centered characters other than jughead (mostly betty), a 1.10-5.10 connection involving jughead and themes from jackson’s story (addiction, writers block, self reflection) seemed v possible if not inevitable

- but like,, , for a hot minute after the ep, i was really stumped on understanding how anything from the book or film could apply, even tho the pieces were almost all there

- jackson’s protagonist don birnam goes thru and comes out the other side of a harrowing days-long drinking binge that could be compared to jughead’s one-night hallucinogenic writing retreat

- but jughead is struggling primarily with traumatic memories, not addiction and self control like birnam. and tho drinking activates birnam’s creativity, it paralyzes his writing as he gets lost in fantasies; he’s never published anything. jughead’s drug trip recreates circumstances that already helped him write one successful book. even the rat that startles him mid-high doesn’t line up with birnam’s withdrawal vision of a dying mouse, symbolic of his horror at his own self-destruction thru alcohol

- and maybe the most visible discordance: in the film there’s a romantic motif around a typewriter. first it’s an object of shame; birnam’s failure to write, tied up with his drinking, makes him flee his relationship. he tries to pawn the typewriter for booze money and finally a gun when shooting himself feels easier than getting sober. but with the help of relentless encouragement from girlfriend helen, he quits drinking, commits to her, and focuses on typing out the story he’s dreamt of writing. rd goes so far to avoid setting any comparable scenario that jughead has brought a wholeass printer into the bunker so there can still be a physical manuscript to cover in blood by the end, even without his own typewriter. the subtle detail of his laptop bg image is a little less noticeable than his avoidance of betty’s gift

- tabitha might be closer to a parallel than jughead is, but she’s still no helen. both refuse to take advantage of the inebriated men in their care, but birnam takes advantage of helen, financially and emotionally. jughead refused a loan from the tate family and now has resolved to deal with his shit before he considers a relationship with tabitha. instead of helen’s relentless and unwelcomed attempts to get birnam sober, tabitha reluctantly agrees to help jughead trip safely bondage escape notwithstanding. she even helps him get the drugs.

- whatever potentials exist for parallels to jackson’s story, they were not explored for this episode. ok so why tf am i even talking about this? what was there instead?

-  i have arrived at the point

- s5 has been revisiting s1, not directly but with a twist. and jughead’s agent samm pansky is back. u may recall, pansky is named for sam lansky

- jughead’s trip-thru-trauma is a story device tapped straight from lansky’s book ‘broken people’

- lansky is like if a millenial john rechy wrote extremely LA-flavored meta but just about himself no jk very like a modern successor to charles r jackson. both play with the boundary between memoir and fiction. lansky is gay; jackson wrote his lost weekend counterpart as closeted and remained closeted himself until only a few years before his death. both write with emotional clarity and self-scrutiny on the experiences of addiction, sobriety, and the surrounding issues of shame and self worth

- i feel like a fool bc after this ep i had been thinking about de quincey and his early writings on addiction (c.1800s), but i failed to carry the thought in the other direction, to contemporary writers in the genre, to make this connection sooner

- lansky’s second book, broken people, follows narrator ‘sam’, mid-20s, super depressed, hastled by his agent to write a decent follow-up to his first book, but too busy struggling with his self-worth and baggage from several past relationships. desperate, he takes up an offer to visit a new age shaman who promises to fix everything wrong with him in a matter of days. not to over simplify it but he literally spends a weekend doing psychedelics and hallucinating about his exes. jughead took note

- unless u want me to hurl myself into yet another dissertation about queer jughead, i think his parallel to sam - who, unlike jughead, has considerable financial privilege and whose anxieties center on body dysmorphia, hiv scares, and his own self-centeredness - pretty much ends there

- But,, the gist of the book could not be more harmonius with a major theme shared by the 2 films that inform the actual hallucination part of jughead’s bunker scene: mentally reframing past relationships to get closure + confronting trauma head-on in order to move forward

- so that’s neat. what other book and author stuff was in 5.10?

- stephen king and raymond carver get name dropped. i’m passingly familiar with them both but u bet i just skimmed their wiki bios in case anything relevant jumped out

- like jughead, carver was a student (later a lecturer) at the iowa writers workshop. also the son of an alcoholic and one himself

- i recall carver’s ‘what we talk about when we talk about love’ is what jughead was reading in 2.14 ‘the hills have eyes’ after he finds out about the first time betty kissed archie (at that time he does not respond as would any of carver’s characters)

- this collection of carver stories deals especially with infidelity, failings of communication, and the complexities and destructiveness of love. to unashamedly quote the resource that is course hero, ‘carver renders love as an experience that is inherently violent bc it produces psychic and emotional wounds.’ very fun to wonder about the significance of this collection within the s2 episode and in jughead’s thoughts. and maybe now in the context of the s5 state of relationships. or, at least, the state of jughead’s writing as seen by his agent

- anyway pansky doesn’t want carver, he wants stephen king

- i have too much to say about gerald’s game in 5.10, that’s getting its own post someday soon

- lol wait king’s wife is named tabitha uhhh king’s wiki reminded me of his childhood experience that possibly inspired his short story ‘the body’ (+1986 movie ‘stand by me’) when he ‘apparently witnessed one of his friends being struck and killed by a train tho he has no memory of the event’

- no mention of that in this rd episode but memories of a train could be interesting to consider with the imagery that intrudes on jughead’s hallucination. i still feel like it was a truck but the lights and sounds he experiences may be a train

- ok now we’re in the speculation part of today’s segment

- if jughead’s traumatic memory involves trains, then it’s possible this plot will take influence from la bête humaine <- this 1938 movie is based on the 1890 novel by french writer émile zola. this story deals with alcoholism and possessive jealousy in relationships, sometimes leading to murder. huh, kind of like carver. zola def comes down on the nature side of the nature-vs-nuture bad seed question (tho i should say he approaches this with great or maybe just v french compassion). also i can’t tell if this is me reaching but, something about la bête humaine reminds me of king’s ‘secret window’ which we’ve observed to be at least a style influence on jughead post time jump

- but wow a late-19th century french writer would be a random thing to drop into this season, right? then again zola also wrote about miners, which we’ve learned are an important part of this town’s history + whatever hiram is up to this time.  and most notably, zola wrote ‘j’accuse...!’ an open letter in defense of a soldier falsely accused and unlawfully jailed for treason: alfred dreyfus. archie’s recent army trouble comes to mind.

- since the introduction of old man dreyfuss (plausibly Just a nod to close encounters actor richard dreyfuss, but also when is anything in this show Just one thing) i’ve been wondering if these little things could add up to a season-long reference to zola’s writings. but i had doubts and didn’t want to speak on it too soon bc, u know, it’s weird but is it weird enough for riverdale??

- however,,,

- (come on, u knew where i was going with this)

- a24′s film zola just came out. absolutely no relation to the french writer, it’s not based on a book but an insane and explicit twitter thread by aziah ‘zola’ wells about stripping and? human trafficking?? this feels ripe for rd even outside the potentials here for the lonely highway/missing girls plot.

- that would add up to a combination of homage that feels natural to this show

- anyway pls understand i’m just having fun speculating, most of this is based on nothing more concrete than the torturous mental tendril ras has hooked into my skull pls let go ras pls let go

[chiseler]

The Mysterious Death of a Hollywood Director

This is the tale of a very famous Hollywood mogul and a not-so-famous movie director. In May of 1933 they embarked together on a hunting trip to Canada, but only one of them came back alive. It’s an unusual tale with an uncertain ending, and to the best of my knowledge it’s never been told before.

I. The Mogul

When we consider the factors that enabled the Hollywood studio system to work as well as it did during its peak years, circa 1920 to 1950, we begin with the moguls, those larger-than-life studio chieftains who were the true stars on their respective lots. They were tough, shrewd, vital, and hard working men. Most were Jewish, first- or second-generation immigrants from Europe or Russia; physically on the small side but nonetheless formidable and – no small thing – adaptable. Despite constant evolution in popular culture, technology, and political and economic conditions in their industry and the outside world, most of the moguls who made their way to the top during the silent era held onto their power and wielded it for decades. Their names are still familiar: Zukor, Goldwyn, Mayer, Jack Warner and his brothers, and a few more. And of course, Darryl F. Zanuck. In many ways Zanuck personified the common image of the Hollywood mogul. He was an energetic, cigar-chewing, polo mallet-swinging bantam of a man, largely self-educated, with a keen aptitude for screen storytelling and a well-honed sense of what the public wanted to see. Like Charlie Chaplin he was widely assumed to be Jewish, and also like Chaplin he was not, but in every other respect Zanuck was the very embodiment of the dynamic, supremely confident Hollywood showman.

In the mid-1920s he got a job as a screenwriter at Warner Brothers, at a time when that studio was still something of a podunk operation. The young man succeeded on a grand scale, and was head of production before he was 30 years old. Ironically, the classic Warners house style, i.e. clipped, topical, and earthy, often dark and sometimes grimly funny, as in such iconic films as The Public Enemy, I Am a Fugitive from a Chain Gang, and 42nd Street, was established not by Jack, Harry, Sam, or Albert Warner, but by Darryl Zanuck, who was the driving force behind those hits and many others from the crucial early talkie period. He played a key role in launching the gangster cycle and a new wave of sassy show biz musicals. At some point during 1932-33, however, Zanuck realized he would never rise above his status as Jack Warner’s right-hand man and run the studio, no matter how successful his projects proved to be, because of two insurmountable obstacles: 1) his name was not Warner, and 2) he was a Gentile. Therefore, in order to achieve complete autonomy, Zanuck concluded that he would have to start his own company.

In mid-April of 1933 he picked a public fight with Jack Warner over a staff salary issue, then abruptly resigned. Next, he turned his attention to setting up a company in partnership with veteran producer Joseph Schenck, who was able to raise sufficient funds to launch the new concern. And then, Zanuck invited several associates from Warner Brothers to accompany him on an extended hunting trip in Canada.

Going into the wilderness and killing wild game, a pastime many Americans still regard as a routine, unremarkable form of recreation, is also of course a conspicuous show of machismo. But in this realm, as with his legendary libido, Zanuck was in a class by himself. He had been an enthusiastic hunter most of his life, dating back to his boyhood in Nebraska. Once he became a big wheel at Warners in the late ’20s he took to organizing high-style duck-hunting expeditions: the young executive and his fellow sportsmen would travel to the appointed location in private railroad cars, staffed by uniformed servants. Heavy drinking on these occasions was not uncommon. (Inevitably, film buffs will recall The Ale & Quail Club from Preston Sturges’ classic comedy The Palm Beach Story, but DFZ and his pals were not cute old character actors, and their bullets were quite real.) Members of Zanuck’s studio entourage were given to understand that participation in these outings was de rigueur if they valued their positions, and expected desirable assignments in the future. Director Michael Curtiz, who had no fondness for hunting, remembered the trips with distaste, and recalled that on one occasion he was nearly shot by a casting director who had no idea how to properly handle a gun.

But ducks were just the beginning. In 1927 Zanuck took his wife Virginia on an African safari. In Kenya Darryl bagged a rhinoceros and posed for a photo with his wife, crouched beside the rhino’s carcass. Virginia, an erstwhile Mack Sennett bathing beauty and former leading lady to Buster Keaton, appears shaken. Her husband looks exhilarated. During this safari Zanuck also killed an elephant. He kept the animal’s four feet in his office on the Warners lot, and used them as ashtrays. If any animal lover dared to express dismay, the Hollywood sportsman would retort: “It was him or me, wasn’t it?” Zanuck made several forays to Canada with his coterie in this period, gunning for grizzly bears. Director William “Wild Bill” Wellman, who was more of an outdoorsman than Curtiz, once went along, but soon became irritated with Zanuck’s bullying. The two men got into a drunken fistfight the night before the hunting had even begun. In the course of the ensuing trip the hunting party was snowbound for three days; Zanuck sprained his ankle while trailing a grizzly; the horse carrying medical supplies vanished; and Wellman got food poisoning. “It was the damnedest trip I’ve ever seen,” the director said later, “but Zanuck loved it.”

Now that Zanuck had severed his ties with the Warner clan and was on the verge of a new professional adventure, a trip to Canada with a few trusted associates would be just the ticket. This time the destination would be a hunting ground on the banks of the Canoe River, a tributary of the Columbia River, 102 miles north of Revelstoke, British Columbia, a city about 400 miles east of Vancouver. There, in a remote scenic area far from any paved roads, telephones, or other niceties of modern life, the men could discuss Zanuck’s new production company and, presumably, their own potential roles in it. Present on the expedition were screenwriter Sam Engel, director Ray Enright, 42nd Street director Lloyd Bacon, producer (and former silent film comedian) Raymond Griffith, and director John G. Adolfi, best known at the time for his work with English actor George Arliss. Adolfi, who was around 50 years old and seemingly in good health, would not return.

II. The Director

Even dedicated film buffs may draw a blank when the name John Adolfi is mentioned. Although he directed more than eighty films over a twenty-year period beginning in 1913, most of those films are now lost. He worked in every genre, with top stars, and made a successful transition from silent cinema to talkies. He seems to have been a well-respected but self-effacing man, seldom profiled in the press. 

According to his tombstone Adolfi was born in New York City in 1881, but the exact date of his birth is one of several mysteries about his life. His father, Gustav Adolfi, was a popular stage comedian and singer who emigrated to the U.S. from Germany in 1879. Gustav performed primarily in New York and Philadelphia, and was known for such roles as Frosch the Jailer in Strauss’ Die Fledermaus. But he was a troubled man, said to be a compulsive gambler, and after his wife Jennie died (possibly of scarlet fever) it appears his life fell apart. Gustav’s singing voice gave out, and then he died suddenly in Philadelphia in October 1890, leaving John and his siblings orphaned. (An obituary in the Philadelphia Jewish Exponent reported that Gustav suffered a stroke, but family legend suggests he may have committed suicide.) After a difficult period John followed in his father’s footsteps and launched a stage career, and was soon working opposite such luminaries of the day as Ethel Barrymore and Dustin Farnum. Early in the new century the young actor wed Pennsylvania native Florence Crawford; the marriage would last until his death.

When the cinema was still in its infancy stage performers tended to regard movie work as slumming, but for whatever reason John Adolfi took the plunge. He made his debut before the cameras around 1907, probably at the Vitagraph Studio in Brooklyn. There he appeared as Tybalt in J. Stuart Blackton’s 1908 Romeo and Juliet , with Paul Panzer and Florence Lawrence in the title roles. He worked at the Edison Studio for director Edwin S. Porter, and at Biograph in a 1908 short called The Kentuckian which also featured two other stage veterans, D.W. Griffith and Mack Sennett. Most of Adolfi’s work as a screen actor was for the Éclair Studio in Fort Lee, New Jersey, the first film capital. The bulk of this company’s output was destroyed in a vault fire, but a 1912 adaptation of Robin Hood in which Adolfi appeared survives. That same year he also appeared in a famous docu-drama, as we would call it, Saved from the Titanic. This ten-minute short premiered less than a month after the Titanic disaster, and featured actress Dorothy Gibson, who actually survived the voyage, re-enacting her experience while wearing the same clothes she wore in the lifeboat. (This film, unfortunately, is among the missing.) After appearing in dozens of movies Adolfi moved behind the camera.

Much of his early work as a director was for a Los Angeles-based studio called Majestic, where he made crime dramas, Westerns, and comedies, films with titles like Texas Bill’s Last Ride and The Stolen Radium. In 1914 the company had a new supervisor: D. W. Griffith, now the top director in the business, who had just departed Biograph. Adolfi was one of the few Majestic staff directors who kept his job under the new regime. A profile in the February 1915 issue of Photoplay describes him as “a tallish, good-looking man, well-knit and vigorous, dark-haired and determined; his mouth and chin suggest that their owner expects (and intends) to have his own way unless he is convinced that the other fellow’s is better.” It was also reported that Adolfi had developed something of a following as an actor, but that he dropped out of the public eye when he became a director. Presumably, that’s what he wanted.

Adolfi left Majestic after three years, worked at Fox Films for a time as a staff director, then freelanced. During the remainder of the silent era he guided some of the screen’s legendary leading ladies: Annette Kellerman (Queen of the Sea, 1918), Marion Davies (The Burden of Proof, 1918), Mae Marsh (The Little ‘Fraid Lady, 1920), Betty Blythe (The Darling of the Rich, 1922), and Clara Bow (The Scarlet West, 1925). Not one of these films survives. A profile published in the New York World-Telegram during his stint at Fox reported that Adolfi was well-liked by his employees. He was “reticent when the conversation turned toward himself, but frank and outspoken when it concerned his work. Mr. Adolfi is not only a director who is skilled in the technique of his craft; he is also a deep student of human nature.” Asked how he felt about the cinema’s potential, he replied, with unconscious irony, “it is bound to live forever.”

III. The Talkies

In spring of 1927 Adolfi was offered a job at Warner Brothers. His debut feature for the studio What Happened to Father? (now lost) was a success, or enough of one anyway to secure him a professional foothold, and he worked primarily at WB thereafter. Thus he was fortuitously well-positioned for the talkie revolution, for although talking pictures were not invented at the studio it was Sam Warner and his brothers, more than anyone else, who sold an initially skeptical public on the new medium. After Adolfi had proven himself with three talkie features Darryl Zanuck handed him an expensive, prestige assignment, a lavish all-star revue entitled The Show of Shows which featured every Warners star from John Barrymore to Rin-Tin-Tin.

Other important assignments followed. In March of 1930 a crime melodrama called Penny Arcade opened on Broadway. It was not a success, but when Al Jolson saw it he sensed that the story had screen potential. He purchased the film rights at a bargain rate and then re-sold the property to his home studio, Warner Brothers. Adolfi was chosen to direct, but was doubtless surprised to learn that Jolson had insisted that two of the actors from the Broadway production repeat their performances before the cameras. One of the pair, Joan Blondell, had already appeared in three Vitaphone shorts to good effect, but the other, James Cagney, had never acted in a movie. Any doubts about Jolson’s instincts were quickly dispelled. Rushes of the first scenes featuring the newcomers so impressed studio brass that both were signed to five-year contracts. While Adolfi can’t be credited with discovering the duo, the film itself, re-christened Sinners’ Holiday,remains his strongest surviving claim to fame: he guided Jimmy Cagney’s screen debut.

At this point the director formed a professional relationship that would shape the rest of his career. George Arliss was a veteran stage actor who went into the movies and unexpectedly became a top box office draw. He was, frankly, an unlikely candidate for screen stardom. Already past sixty when talkies arrived, Arliss was a short, dignified man who resembled a benevolent gargoyle. But he was also a journeyman actor, a seasoned professional who knew how to command attention with a sudden sharp word or a raised eyebrow. Like Helen Hayes he was valued in Hollywood as a performer of unblemished reputation who lent the raffish film industry a touch of Class, in every sense of the word.

In 1929 Arliss appeared in a talkie version of Disraeli, a role he had played many times on stage, and became the first Englishman to take home an Academy Award for Best Actor. Thereafter he was known for stately portrayals of History’s Great Men, such as Voltaire and Alexander Hamilton, as well as fictional kings, cardinals, and other official personages. The old gentleman formed a close alliance with Darryl Zanuck, whom he admired, and was in turn granted privileges highly unusual for any actor at the time. Arliss had final approval of his scripts and authority over casting. He was also granted the right to rehearse his selected actors for two weeks before filming began. All that was left for the film’s director to do, it would seem, would be to faithfully record what his star wanted. Not many directors would accept this arrangement, but John Adolfi, who according to Photoplay “was determined to have his own way unless he is convinced that the other fellow’s is better,” clearly had no problem with it. His first film with Arliss was The Millionaire, released in May 1931; and in the two years that followed Adolfi directed eight more features, six of which were Arliss vehicles. He had found his niche in Hollywood.

One of Adolfi’s last jobs sans Arliss was a B-picture called Central Park, which reunited the director with Joan Blondell. It’s a snappy, topical, crazy quilt of a movie that packs a lot of incident into a 58-minute running time. Central Park was something of a sleeper that earned its director positive critical notices, and must have afforded him a lively holiday from those polite period pieces for the exacting Mr. Arliss.

In spring of 1933, after completing work on the Arliss vehicle Voltaire, Adolfi accompanied Darryl Zanuck and his entourage to British Columbia to hunt bears. Arliss intended to follow Zanuck to his new company, while Adolfi in turn surely expected to follow the star and continue their collaboration. Things didn’t work out that way.

IV. The Hunting Trip

It’s unclear how long the men were hunting before tragedy struck. On Sunday, May 14th, newspapers reported that film director John G. Adolfi had died the previous week – either on Wednesday or Thursday, depending on which paper one consults – at a hunting camp near the Canoe River. All accounts give the cause of death as a cerebral hemorrhage. According to the New York Herald-Tribune the news was conveyed in a long-distance phone call from Darryl Zanuck to screenwriter Lucien Hubbard in Los Angeles. Hubbard subsequently informed the press. The N.Y. Times reported that the entire hunting party (Zanuck, Engel, Enright, Bacon, and Griffith) accompanied Adolfi’s remains in a motorboat down the Columbia River to Revelstoke. From there the body was sent to Vancouver, B.C., where it was cremated. Write-ups of Adolfi’s career were brief, and tended to emphasize his work with George Arliss, though his recent success Central Park was widely noted. John’s widow Florence was mentioned in the Philadelphia City News obituary but otherwise seems to have been ignored; the couple had no children. 

V. The Aftermath

Darryl F. Zanuck went on to found Twentieth Century Pictures, a name suggested by his hunting companion Sam Engel. One of the company’s biggest hits in its first year of operation was The House of Rothschild, starring George Arliss and directed by Alfred Werker. The venerable actor returned to England not long afterwards and retired from filmmaking in 1937. In his second book of memoirs, published three years later, Arliss devotes several pages of warm praise to Zanuck, but refers only fleetingly to the man who directed seven of his films, John Adolfi, and misspells his name.

In 1935 Zanuck merged his Twentieth Century Pictures with Fox Films, and created one of the most successful companies in Hollywood history. He would go on to produce many award-winning classics, including The Grapes of Wrath, Laura, and All About Eve. Zanuck’s trusted associates at Twentieth-Century Fox in the company’s best years included Sam Engel, Raymond Griffith, and Lloyd Bacon, all survivors of the Revelstoke trip. Personal difficulties and vast changes in the film industry began to affect Zanuck’s career in the 1950s. He left the U.S. for Europe but continued to make films, and sporadically managed to exercise control over the company he founded. He died in 1979.

In 1984 a onetime screenwriter and film critic named Leonard Mosley, who had known Zanuck slightly, published a biography entitled Zanuck: The Rise and Fall of Hollywood’s Last Tycoon. Aside from his movie reviews most of Mosley’s published work concerned military matters, specifically pertaining to the Second War World. His Zanuck bio reveals a grasp of film history that is shaky at times, for the book has a number of obvious errors. Nevertheless, it was written with the cooperation of Darryl’s son Richard, his widow Virginia, and many of the mogul’s close associates, so whatever its errors in chronology or studio data the anecdotes concerning Zanuck’s personal and professional activities are unquestionably well-sourced. 

When Mosley’s narrative reaches May 1933, the point when Zanuck is on the verge of founding his new company, we’re told that he and several associates decided to go on a hunting trip to Alaska. The location is not correct, but chronologically – and in one other, unmistakable respect – there can be no doubt that this refers to the Revelstoke trip. From Mosley’s book:

“There is a mystery about this trip, and no perusal of Zanuck’s papers or those of his former associates seems to elucidate it,” he writes. “Something happened that changed his whole attitude towards hunting. All that can be gathered from the thin stories that are still gossiped around was that the hunting party went on the track of a polar bear somewhere in the Alaskan wilderness [sic], and when the vital moment came it was Zanuck who stepped out to shoot down the charging, furious animal. His bullet, it is said, found its mark all right, but it did not kill. The polar bear came on, and Zanuck stood his ground, pumping away with his rifle. Only this time it was not ‘him or me,’ but ‘him’ and someone else. The wounded and enraged bear, still alive and still charging, swerved around Zanuck and swiped with his great paw at one of the men standing behind him – and only after it had killed this other man did it fall at last into the snow, and die itself. That’s the story, and no one seems to be able to confirm it nor remember the name of the man who died. The only certain thing is that when Zanuck came back, he announced to Virginia that he had given up hunting. And he never went out and shot a wild animal again, not even a jackrabbit for his supper.”

VI. The Coda

Was John Adolfi killed by a bear? It certainly seems possible, but if so, why didn’t the men in the hunting party simply report the truth? Even if their boss was indirectly responsible, having fired the shots that caused the bear to charge, he couldn’t be blamed for the actions of a dying animal. But it’s also possible the event unfolded like a recent tragedy on the Montana-Idaho border. There, in September 2011, two men named Ty Bell and Steve Stevenson were on a hunting trip. Bell shot what he believed was a black bear. When the bear, a grizzly, attacked Stevenson, Bell fired again – and killed both the bear and his friend.

That seems to be the more likely scenario. If Zanuck fired at the wounded bear, in an attempt to save Adolfi, and killed both bear and man instead, it would perhaps explain a hastily contrived false story. It would most definitely explain the prompt cremation of Adolfi’s body in Vancouver. Back in Hollywood Joe Schenck was busy raising money, and lots of it, to launch Zanuck’s new company. Any unpleasant information about the new company’s chief – certainly anything suggestive of manslaughter – could jeopardize the deal. A man hit with a cerebral hemorrhage in the prime of life is a tragedy of natural causes, but a man sprayed with bullets in a shooting, accidental or not, is something else again. That goes double if alcohol was involved, as it reportedly was on Zanuck’s earlier hunting trips.

Of course, it’s also possible that Adolfi did indeed suffer a cerebral hemorrhage. Like his father.

John G. Adolfi is a Hollywood ghost. Most of his works are lost, and his name is forgotten. (Even George Arliss couldn’t be bothered to spell it correctly.) Every now and then TCM will program one of the Arliss vehicles, or Sinners’ Holiday. Not long ago they showed Adolfi’s fascinating B-picture Central Park, that slam-bang souvenir of the early Depression years in which several plot strands are deftly inter-twined. One of the subplots involves a mentally ill man, a former zoo-keeper who escapes from an asylum and returns to the place where he used to work, the Central Park Zoo. He has a score to settle with an old nemesis, an ex-colleague who tends the big cats. As the story approaches its climax, the escaped lunatic deliberately drags his enemy into the cage of a dangerous lion and leaves him there. In the subsequent, harrowing scene, difficult to watch, the lion attacks and practically kills the poor bastard.

by William Charles Morrow

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

My sources for this article, in addition to the Mosley biography cited in the text, include Stephen M. Silverman’s The Fox That Got Away: The Last Days of the Zanuck Dynasty at Twentieth-Century Fox (1988), and Marlys J. Harris’s The Zanucks of Hollywood: The Dark Legacy of an American Dynasty (1989). For material on John Adolfi I made extensive use of the files of the New York Public Library for the Performing Arts. Special thanks to James Bigwood for his prodigious research on the Adolfi family genealogy, and to Mary Maler, John Adolfi’s great-niece, for information she provided on her family.

[solarscholarsofmagick]

Saturn in Aquarius: 2020-2023

Beginning on March 21, Saturn entered the revolutionary sign of Aquarius for a brief month and a half preview and will retrograde back into Capricorn until the end of September. On December 17, it will re-enter Aquarius until March of 2023. Saturn is known as the planet of limitations, boundaries, responsibilities and hard lessons, and up until now has been making its way through the restrictive and authoritarian sign of Capricorn since the beginning of 2018. Though Saturn is the ruler of earthy Capricorn and identifies well with that controlling energy, it doesn’t always do its best work in this sign. Traditionally, Saturn also rules the airy free-flowing sign of Aquarius and tends to be very comfortable in this sign, despite how different they may seem. When Saturn enters this humanitarian sign, it evolves into a higher version of itself, capable of bringing much needed equality and change into the world. How do we know this? Well, let’s take a look at the last few Saturn transits through Aquarius – from 1991 to 1994, and before that, from 1962 to 1964.

Let’s begin with Saturn’s transit through futuristic Aquarius back in 1962. Right off the bat, as Saturn entered the sign, the first automated (unmanned) subway train in New York City began running. Aquarius rules technology and automation, so this stood out to me as a very modern Aquarian development already. Also in 1962, Spacewar! was developed and released as the first computer game, featuring two spaceships fighting it out. Each spaceship was controlled by a player, meaning it was not only the first computer game, but also the first multi-player game for computers. Fitting, as Aquarius rules groups as well as spaceships and technology.

In the early 1990s, there were also some major technological advancements, specifically related to the internet and computers. In 1991, at the beginning of Saturn’s transit through Aquarius, Apple released the PowerBook, the first modern laptop computer, which was a huge development in the computer world and has influenced our modern computers significantly in their portability and design. The WorldWide Web was technically invented in 1989, while Saturn was transiting Capricorn, and it was exclusively meant for information-sharing between scientists in institutions around the world at that time. However, in April of 1993, after Saturn had entered Aquarius, CERN made the “www” software public, accessible to anyone with a computer. This is significant because Aquarius represents freedom and equality, and though it was still mainly the upper class that could afford computers at the time, this movement away from intellectual elitism essentially opened the internet up for free public use like we have today. In 1992, ViolaWWW was released, and was the first web browser to become popularized by users. It was also the recommended browser by CERN until it was replaced by Mosaic in 1993, the first web browser to display images with text rather than in a new window.

In the upcoming transit of Saturn through Aquarius, we can expect to see even more advanced technology developments. Many people are expecting Artificial Intelligence to really take off in the coming years, as well as 5G technology and space travel on a grander scale. Smart devices and appliances are becoming more readily available and more advanced.

The future of technology was on the minds of many in the early 1960s, reflected in ABC’s first color animated TV series, The Jetsons, premiering in September of 1962. Not only does Aquarius rule color television and cartoons, but the futuristic utopian vision held by The Jetsons is also very Aquarian in nature. Television also welcomed the eccentric and beloved Addams family in 1964 with ABC’s premiere of The Addams Family. This television classic questioned social norms of the time, specifically the values of the traditional mid-century American family, which were quite conservative at the time. This series became a symbol of the counterculture in television, a typically Aquarian concept. Another incredibly popular futuristic TV show that technically started during Saturn’s transit through Aquarius, Star Trek began filming in November of 1964, during the last couple months of Saturn’s journey through this sign. Star Trek is also notable for this transit due to the fact that it was one of the first television shows to give women, especially black women, prominent and respected roles. The character Lt. Uhura, the ship’s communications officer, was played by Nichelle Nichols, a black actress. At that time, black women typically only appeared in television as servants and maids, so this was a revolutionary change not only in television but in the civil rights movement as well. In fact, when Nichelle Nichols considered quitting the show to pursue a career on Broadway, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. met with Nichelle, convincing her to stay on the show as a part of history.

Television in the early 1990s during Saturn’s next transit through Aquarius was just as influential on culture as the television of the early 1960s. One of the first TV shows that comes to mind when I think of the 90s in television is the classic sitcom Friends. Though this show technically didn’t air until Saturn had moved into Pisces in 1994, the concept of the show resonates very closely with Aquarian themes. For one, the name “Friends” is representative of Aquarius, the sign of friendship and camaraderie. David Crane and Marta Kauffman, the show’s creators, began developing Friends in late 1993 under the early title of Insomnia Cafe, as Saturn made its way through the last 10 degrees of Aquarius. Though it initially had mixed reviews, Friends grew to become one of the most popular and beloved television shows of its time. Another well-loved show of the early 90s, though aimed more towards a younger audience, Bill Nye the Science Guy first aired in 1993, and embraced the forward-thinking Aquarian scientist archetype. Science in general is ruled by Aquarius, sign of innovation and discovery, and this show was designed to teach children about the realities of science and observation. One TV show I thought I should mention here as well is The Real World, which first aired on MTV in 1992, and is credited as being the birth of the “reality TV” genre of television, though it was edited quite often in favor of certain situations and reactions that didn’t quite reflect reality. It received a lot of criticism as well for not ever casting an Asian man in nearly 30 years on television. Reality TV is also very much a Saturn in Aquarius concept, as Saturn rules realism, and Aquarius rules television in general.

Aquarius is also the ruler of cartoons, as I touched on earlier, so it’s only fitting that I discuss a few cartoons of the early 90s. The trend of “cartoons for adults” was beginning to take off around this time, after The Simpsons paved the way in 1989 with its adult humor and hidden messages about adult life. One of the more “mature” cartoons that comes to mind when thinking of Saturn’s transit through Aquarius in the early 1990s is The Ren & Stimpy Show. This show first aired in 1991, and was quite grotesque in its animation style, featuring detailed animated close-ups with which other shows later followed suit. It was especially adored among college students due to its bizarre animation style and dark yet quirky humor. Another “adult cartoon” that began while Saturn was making its way through Aquarius is Beavis and Butt-Head, which first aired in 1993. This cartoon had mixed reviews and stirred up a lot of controversy with its seemingly idiotic social criticism, but became a staple of early 90s adult television nonetheless. The social criticism in this show is representative of Saturn in Aquarius as well, as Saturn portrays a harsh, critical nature, and Aquarius is a sign of society and social groups. Rocko’s Modern Life was yet another cartoon series that was aimed for young adults rather than children, and achieved moderate success after its initial release in 1993. This show was known for highlighting adult situations through cartoon animation- combining the adult responsibilities and themes of Saturn with the off-beat cartoony Aquarian personality. One last cartoon I’d like to mention in this segment of adult cartoons is Animaniacs, which first aired in 1993, and quickly became a hit with both children under age 11 and adults over 25. The large following among adults even led to one of the earliest Internet fandom cultures, another Aquarian concept.

Television in the coming years will likely circle around again to some of these rebellious Aquarian ideas, and it’s likely that TV will become even more entwined with the Internet over the next few years, as online streaming is more common these days than watching cable TV.

Saturn’s movement through Aquarius was a big part of the civil rights movement of the early 60s as well. The sign of Aquarius is a sign of freedom, equal human rights, and disrupting the status quo, which essentially were a few of the main goals of the movement. In fact, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. had a 10th house Aquarius Mercury, which is why we remember him best for his “I have a dream” speech, which he delivered August 28, 1963 in Washington D.C. for the 200,000+ people who gathered in front of the Lincoln Memorial for the March on Washington. During the time he was writing and revising this speech, Saturn was transiting his Mercury in Aquarius as well. Later in 1963, on October 22, roughly 200,000 students stayed out of school in Chicago to protest segregation of African-American students in schools. This was a major peak of an ongoing battle to desegregate schools across America, again acting out the Aquarian values of equality and social justice.

In the early 1990s, this theme re-emerged through the Rodney King riots in Los Angeles. A video went public in 1991 of five white Los Angeles police officers severely beating Mr. Rodney King after pulling him over for speeding. The riots began on April 29, 1992 after a trial jury acquitted four of the officers, enraging thousands of Southern Californians who took to the streets in anger. By the end of the riots, in early May, sixty-three people had been killed and thousands more were injured or had been arrested. The 1992 Rodney King riots went on to inspire the folk song “Like a King” from Ben Harper’s debut 1994 album Welcome to the Cruel World, which was released just after Saturn transited into Pisces; therefore, the songs were written and recorded while Saturn was in Aquarius.

In the coming transit of Saturn through Aquarius, we can expect to see another revolutionary movement, particularly watching the Black Lives Matter movement, because the hashtag was born while Saturn was in Scorpio, meaning Saturn in Aquarius will be coming up on a Saturn square for the birth chart of the movement.

Furthermore in music, there were a few major developments in the early 1960s while Saturn was in Aquarius that stood out to me. First, in the early to mid 60s, Joan Baez was beginning to make a name for herself in folk music during the American folk revival. Then in 1962, Peter, Paul & Mary released their debut album, which reached #1 on the US album charts. During the same year, Bob Dylan released his self-titled debut album of cover songs, and later went on to release his first original album The Times They Are a-Changin’ in 1964, towards the end of Saturn’s journey through Aquarius. These politically-charged folk artists all peaked with the folk revival during Saturn’s transit through Aquarius, which makes sense, as folk music is Aquarian in its nature, typically discussing issues of politics, inequality and other “radical” ideas of change. In fact, these artists also all performed “We Shall Overcome” at Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s March on Washington in 1963.

Another emerging group that stood out to me from this Aquarian transit was The Beatles. This incredibly successful rock group released their first couple of songs, “Please Please Me” and “Ask Me Why,” in January of 1963. By the next month, their single “Please Please Me” was topping the British rock charts. The Beatles released their debut studio album, Please Please Me, in March 1963, and by May had landed on the top of the UK album charts, staying there for 30 weeks, only to be replaced by their second studio album, With The Beatles. By October of 1963, the media began using the term “Beatlemania” to describe the frenzied behavior exhibited by Beatles fans across the globe. Many of their live performances were accompanied by the sounds of screaming fans and general hysteria. Fanatics, by the way, are also ruled by Aquarius. In February of 1964, The Beatles made their first appearance on The Ed Sullivan Show, drawing a record 73.7 million viewers. The crazed audience clearly depicts the “Beatlemania” phenomenon in full swing. But how do The Beatles relate to Saturn’s transit through Aquarius? First off, The Beatles were one of the first mainstream groups to market to the younger generation of teenagers rather than to their parents. This was a big shift in the music industry, as typically it was the older audience with all the spending power, whereas now, young teenage girls were a powerful force in the music market. Though their earlier songs avoided heavier social topics, it became obvious later in their career that The Beatles were a huge part of the birth of counterculture and anti-establishment ideas. In 1964, when the band was informed that a venue they were scheduled to perform at in Florida in the US was segregated, they refused to play unless the audience was integrated. Many more conservative countries refused to allow The Beatles to perform at all, in fear that their progressive counterculture ideas would “infect” their younger population. Even the United States attempted to ban all British acts in 1965, as they saw their emerging rock ‘n’ roll culture as “dangerous” to the youth of the nation. The Beatles were also highly progressive in their music style, and incorporated many new and unusual recording techniques into their albums. This ongoing theme of progressive thinking and “peace and love” apparent in the music of The Beatles is very in line with the nature of Aquarius.

Later, in the early 1990s, grunge bands were the new emerging music trend. A number of grunge rock bands all released major hit albums around the same time: right around Saturn’s transit through rebellious Aquarius. In 1991, Pearl Jam released their debut album Ten, followed by Nirvana releasing their second album Nevermind, and then Soundgarden with Badmotorfinger– all within a span of two months! All three albums were incredibly successful, and resonated strongly with the Aquarian counterculture and anti-establishment ideas brought out by the earlier generation in the early 1960s. Then in 1992, Alice in Chains released their second studio album, Dirt, which is considered by many to be their best work. Also released in 1992, Stone Temple Pilots debuted with their first studio album, Core, which received mixed reviews, though it went on to win a Grammy in 1994 for Best Hard Rock Performance. Nirvana received a lot of attention and success in the early 90s as well, and Kurt Cobain was dubbed “the voice of a generation” by many. Similar to The Beatles influence on counterculture, Kurt Cobain’s darker lyrical content touched many listeners’ hearts on a deeper level than the earlier hair metal had been able to.

In the next few years in music, we’re likely to see younger emerging artists, similar to Billie Eilish, who has an Aquarius Moon, taking over the scene with some revolutionary new ideas and social commentary in their lyrics.

Though Aquarius is a masculine sign, I’ve also noticed a pattern with emerging feminist movements during these transits due to the focus on equal human rights. The second wave of feminism began picking up speed around 1963, when two major works of feminist writing were published: The Bell Jar by Sylvia Plath and The Feminine Mystique by Betty Friedan. Both works were largely critical of the typical role of a female as a domestic housekeeper/mother figure in 1960s society. These works encouraged women to pursue careers that they felt passionately about for the first time. Also in 1963, journalist Gloria Steinem became a prominent figure in feminist culture after going undercover as a Playboy Bunny and revealing the poor treatment and underpayment of the waitresses at the Playboy Club.

In the early 1990s, during Saturn’s next transit through Aquarius, the third wave of feminism began to emerge. While second-wave feminism dealt primarily with issues surrounding equal opportunities for [predominantly white] women in the workplace, this third wave of feminism dealt with issues regarding intersectional feminism, violence against women and reproductive/sexual freedom. A trend of reclaiming “derogatory” female terms (for example: bitch, slut, whore) began largely with the Riot grrrl movement in punk music, popularized by female-constructed bands like Bikini Kill and Bratmobile, as a way of expressing feminine identity on their own terms.

Feminine power is already on the rise again, with Uranus having moved into feminine Taurus a couple years ago and still having several more years to go on that transit. Women in power will do great things with that power, and more women will come to be in power over the next few years with Saturn in this sign. Whether it be individual political power, or power in numbers, women around the world will come together and rise to power from now until 2023. Another trend I expect to see play out while Saturn transits Aquarius these next few years as well is that of gender revolution. With the gender roles of the past melting away, a revolution is roaring around the corner, and gender queer/LGBTQ+ identifying people will likely score a few big victories in the upcoming Aquarian transit.

Another theme I noticed through Saturn’s transit of Aquarius in the early 1960s was a theme of national independence and freedom. In August of 1962, the colony of Jamaica became independent, freeing Jamaicans from the United Kingdom after 300 years of British rule. In October that same year, Uganda also became independent from the UK. Then, in 1963, Kenya declared independence from the UK as well. Meanwhile, the Dominican Republic and Zanzibar both experienced major revolutions during this time frame in search of freedom. This trend continued in the early 90s, with many countries, including Lithuania, Ukraine, Latvia and Estonia, all declaring their independence from the USSR in 1991.

It’s likely that we will see many more uprisings and movements towards independence, including the United States’ Pluto return in 2022/2023, which is expected to be a revolutionary moment for the history of the country.

These are the kinds of themes we are likely to see re-emerging until March 2023, while Saturn roams through free-spirited Aquarius. Technological innovations are going to be increasingly involved with our lives, as the internet of things develops further. Television will trend towards witty humor and social criticism, as it did the previous few times Saturn was in Aquarius. Civil rights movements will be center-stage, writing more groundbreaking history into our textbooks, while the future leans towards figures who are genderqueer, females, diverse, and/or of color, rather than in favor of the cis-gender/heterosexual white male. Mainstream music will take on its own social commentary within the industry. Independence of the individual as well as the nation will be stressed in the coming years. Saturn feels confident in this sign, and we should too, moving forward into Saturn’s “Age of Aquarius” with hope for a better future.

[kiragecko]

Reviews of Christian Allegorical FANTASY

Note: Christianity is a broad, varied thing. I can only write from my perspective, and it’s hard to describe that perspective to an international audience. Words have different meanings in different countries. But this is what I think about the various Christian allegorical fiction I’ve read, measured by writing quality, allegorical quality, and ability to make me happy. Your perspective may vary.

 Chronicles of Narnia, by C.S. Lewis –

Writing: Y’all know this guy is good.

Allegory: Shockingly strong for something with such mass appeal. And deeper than you thought as a kid. Never sidelines the story, because he’s integrated the two so well.

Problems: So, you don’t notice the colonialism, racism, classism, sexism, and mild ableism as a kid. Dude was a white British man during the early and mid 1900s. He does not entirely rise above his culture. Some of the dehumanization of species/cultures that are obvious stand-ins for real world cultures horrified me during my latest reread. And it’s subtle enough that it’s hard to point out to kids.

Story: The story is great. I’ve read ‘The Horse And His Boy’ so many times that my papa’s copy is held together with tape. He wouldn’t let me take them when I moved out. Had to buy my own. It was tragic.

 The Archives of Anthropos, by John White –

Writing: Reminds me of Terry Brooks, a little. In that the writing is servicable, and some of the fantasy is pretty derivative, but it’s definitely not bad. The roots are strong, but he didn’t have enough experience to cut all the weaker bits and ruthlessly rewrite.

Allegory: Solid. Not tacked on, not super deep. Really good for a Narnia imitation.

Problems: Not sure, haven’t reread in a while. Pika didn’t like a battle near the beginning, so we had to stop.

Story: It’s set in Winnipeg!!! Unashamed about being heavily inspired by Narnia, this series is a delight. Not as good as it’s inspiration, of course, but it feels like a heartfelt fan letter. Some of the ideas are REALLY cool. This series is worth reading, you guys! Especially the first 2 books.

 The Circle (Black, Red, and White), by Ted Dekker –

Writing: Readable. Slick. Masculine.

Allegory: Lacked both the desired subtly and the necessary depth. Felt like it was written for fantasy fans that felt guilty about reading secular books, rather than to say something important.

Story: Don’t like Narnia-esque books aimed at adults. Allegories shouldn’t be trying to be cool. Not a fan. (But please note that these opinions were formed 15-20 years ago. I may have been missing something.)

 The Space Trilogy, by C.S. Lewis –

Writing: Again, this is C.S. Lewis. He’s good at writing.

Allegory: A little weird, for me. But I struggle with allegory for adults. One of the books is Adam and Eve on Venus, with original sin working slightly differently? I don’t get it.

Problems: My problem is that I don’t like it! Sometimes it reads like Douglas Adams, but not funny. That makes no sense!

Story: Don’t like Narnia-esque books aimed at adults, even if they’re written by the authour of Narnia. This is Sci-Fi. There is romance. Really not for me.

 The Story of the Other Wise Man, by Henry Van Dyke –

Writing: Good, if I remember correctly. Feels dated and classic, like it should be from Victorian times. (I just checked, it’s from 1895.)

Allegory: Like most morality from more than a century ago, it reads a bit weird. Just, life was a lot harsher then. Nice clear simple message, just taught from a mindset I don’t totally understand.

Story: As a kid, this one made me SAD! He loses everything and feels like a failure! Does have a good message, teaching is sound, good storytelling, but it wasn’t fun enough to make the lesson stick.

 Left Behind, by Tim Lahaye and Jerry B. Jenkins -

Writing: I remember the writing being fine. They read like thrillers, which isn’t a bad thing. I’ve enjoyed some thrillers.

Allegory: Revelations is ALREADY an allegory. This is just an uninspired expansion.

Problems: Everything.

Story: I hate apocalyptic/post-apocalyptic stories. This series wasn’t written by someone who was bothered by the suffering of everyone who made ‘wrong’ choices, and that makes it hollow and awful. ‘We’re so good and smart and better than other people!’ NO. That is not Christianity.

 A Wrinkle In Time, by Madeleine L’Engle –

I still don’t get how this series is Christian?? Really freaked me out as a kid. Had quite a few nightmares.

After a little research, it turns out that she has a very different understanding of Christianity then me. You’ll have to get a review from someone who can see from that perspective.

 Duncton Wood, by William Horwood –

Writing: Extremely good. Heavy and beautiful. Kept me reading as I got more and more weirded out.

Allegory: Not a Christian allegory. And yet Christian enough, in a weird Anglican(??) way, to make it difficult to interpret as non-Christian. There’s a Jesus figure who gets martyred. There are schisms. It’s weird.

Problems: Almost certainly shouldn’t be on this list, yet I spent half an hour searching for it because I was so sure it was supposed to be on this list.

Story: Moles and their experiences with religion. There are similarities to Watership Down and Redwall, Narnia and Lord of the Rings. (The last mostly in language/writing style). If it wasn’t so close to Christian allegory as to be in the uncanny valley, I would have loved it! As it is, I would have prefered LESS Christ.

 Christian ALLEGORICAL Fantasy

The Pilgrim’s Progress, by Paul Bunyan –

Writing: (Note: I’ve only read versions rewritten for kids. At least one was heavily abridged.) This was written in 1678. That is a LONG time ago. The worldview is really different from ours. Also, the versions I read were not inspired updates.

Allegory: This was written only 100 years after the Protestant Reformation. Punishments are incredibly disproportionate. Rich people have completely different rules than the poor, and this is seen as Godly. It’s been over 20 years since I read this book, and I don’t remember much, but it’s a weird read if you’re expecting modern concepts of right and wrong.

Story: Fascinating! Did not enjoy. Might as an adult. Reading an allegory that you can’t relate to at all is a weird experience.

 Hind’s Feet On High Places, by Hannah Hunnard -

Writing: (Note: I’ve only read the version rewritten for kids.) Writing is really good.

Allegory: Names that are just English words have always annoyed me. Other than that pet peeve, this is extremely good. Straight-forward enough to be read to a 7 year old, complex enough for me to reference when I’m trying to describe my experiences to my husband. Solid Christianity, with enough hard stuff to challenge you, while still managing to be fun.

Problems: We’ve got some nasty ableism baked into the setting (disability as metaphor for sin and bondage), and the images are painfully white.

Story: I love this book! This is a Pilgrim’s Progress that actually matches with Christianity as I understand it. If you’re looking for a fun fantasy with a good message, this isn’t it. If you’re looking for a distillation of Christianity, told as a story because that makes it more accessible – this is a good one.

 The Divine Comedy, by Dante Alighieri –

Haven’t read it.

 Tales of the Kingdom, by David and Karen Mains -

Writing: The first collection of stories is really strong. The next 2 get weaker. Short stories read differently than novels, and the writing style works well for that format.

Allegory: TOO strong. Some of the stories still make me mad to think about, because the messages are HARD. (Also, names that are just English words still annoy me, no matter now much I love the series.)

Problems: Ableism – true selves don’t have disabilities and are always beautiful. Art is not 100% white, but all the most beautiful people seem to be. And I love lizards far too much to handle the dragon story.

Story: These stories mean a lot to me. They are very much not something a non-believer is going to enjoy. They tend to focus on the parts of Christianity that are hard, uncomfortable, and/or different from mainstream culture. They also stick with you for decades. Narnia is my favourite series on this list to read, but Tales of the Kingdom might be the best for exploring your faith. Highly, highly recommend.

[helpicant-stop]

Aesthetic headcanons

dream smp edition

*i won't be adding ones for factions that already have ones, like snowchester and the antarctic empire. except classic l'manberg because reasons ok

**also theres a big chance that i'll be drawin all of these sooooo

Before Tommy

No particular era — people simply did whatever they pleased, and there was little to no rhyme or reason for anything. Think modern geometric house directly next to c. 1634 tavern type shenanigans.

Classic L'Manberg

1790s-early 1800s style, especially in the uniforms. However, everything was still made with modern materials or an improved version of the originals.

Dream SMP

After seeing the pretty, sleek organised feel of L'Manberg, the rest of the server began attempting to form some sort of cohesive aesthetic. They ended up with one of those "Medieval" "High Fantasy" aesthetics; you know, the ones that are several eras haphazardly patched together and are simultanously Modern, Medieval, Renaissance, and *insert every other era here*. People mostly just opened their 2020 wardrobe and found the clothes that looked roughly "medieval-y".

Manberg

Mid-late 1830s, but with a bit more black; it looks vaguely like it was supposed to be happy and fluffy some time ago, but now it just looks somber and sentimental. Most people look tired, or angry, and they look like they tried to make their crumpled outfits as neat as possible but failed. The architecture is changed subtly enough to not be too obvious, but just noticeable for people who were there to see it change — it's cleaner and more practical but less, well, alive. Everything looks fake and manufactured, where everything just doesn't look like people put as much passion into it as they did Classic L'Manberg.

Pogtopia

Late 1930s-early 1940s (aka WW2 Era). Self-explanatory.

Badlands

Imagine an avant-garde military aesthetic from the 18th century — like a more outlandish Classic L'Manberg (imagine tourniiquet on twitter's aesthetic, but like more), and intricate armor whenever they go into battle. All the architecture looks like weird modern art pieces.

New L'Manberg

1900s-1910s, especially 1912 in particular because it's when the Titanic sunk and that just seems strangely fitting to me. Almost everyone has a separate closet for nautical attire and it probably always smells like the sea.

Dream SMP, again

During this time, their aesthetic began to shift into something slightly more modern. Everything looks like it's from a typical modern person's idea of "Vintage" "Retro" "1950s" aesthetics, but with a dash of Dark Academia spliced into the mix. Aka they saw Wilbur, the dead ex-president of their enemy nation, and said "yep, we're emulating his style now but we're gonna look up 'vintage aesthetic' once and mix them together until we see something we like.'"

Eggpire

The Badlands, but add "Medieval religious clothing" into the mix and a few undertones of Eldritch Horror and absurdly cultish signs.

[televisionrulesthenation]

S1E2 - “My Blonde-Haired Brunette”

Original air date: October 10, 1961

Episode recap

Laura tries to wake Rob up at 9 o’clock in the morning on his day off. She’s been up since 7 and wants to have breakfast together. He insists on sleeping until 11.

Rob comes to the kitchen at 11 (dressed ridiculously) and Laura is upset. Rob teases, calling her his old lady and plucking a grey hair from her head and she gets more upset. Incredibly, she cooks him breakfast anyway.

The next day Laura confides in her friend, Millie, telling her she’s worried about Rob not caring about their relationship anymore. Millie tells her to bleach her hair to spice things up.

At the office Rob talks to Sally and Buddy about not understanding why Laura is upset. Sally tells him he needs to tell Laura he loves her and pay attention to her. He calls home and tells Laura he loves her and he’s taking her out to dinner tonight.

Meanwhile she has bleached her hair blond and looks ridiculous. She asks him on the phone if he’d like her bleached blond and he says no. She freaks out and begs Millie to help her change it back to brown.

Rob comes home to find Laura and Mille only halfway done changing her hair back to brunette. Laura breaks down and Rob comforts her and they make up.

Everything is about me

We recently took the 5 Love Languages self-assessment and her top 2 were my bottom 2. And my top 2 were her bottom 2.

Words of affirmation are a mismatch for us. Like Rob, I could do better there. And it wouldn’t that big of a stretch for me because I would actually mean the words of affirmation, I just don’t think to say them.

The biggest difference though is gift giving. It’s by far the most important thing for her, and by far the least important thing for me.

When we talked about it, I struggled not to sound like a terrible person. She was being empathetic, saying she has to understand that receiving gifts isn’t important to me. But I was like, I like getting gifts just fine, I don’t like the process of getting other people gifts. The taking note of subtle hints, the planning, the shopping, etc. So my preference not to give gifts drives my lack of joy in receiving gifts, not the other way around.

Then she asked me if I like receiving gifts, how come my Father’s Day present remains in its original packaging on the floor in our closet? So who knows, either way, it’s a mismatch.

This one seems hard to solve because solving it means one of us doing something they don’t like. Not sure how to meet in the middle.

Episode observations

Life before cell phones

Cell phones wouldn’t have fundamentally altered the plot here. Obviously, Rob and Laura’s phone conversation would have probably been texts rather than on those retro phones with cords. But the plot holds.

Clothes and fashion

Rob’s clothes when he comes down for breakfast look ridiculous. Black and white don’t do it justice, but it’s almost like a modern day homeless person. A sweater with holes and stains over a polo shirt I think with odd pants, maybe corduroys. (His hair is perfectly styled though.)

But I guess this was life before active wear. What else are you going to wear around the house on your day off? Well, in the final scene, he’s in the living room, reading the paper, wearing a cardigan over pressed collared shirt tucked into fitted slacks. So that’s the answer if you care about your appearance. Again no active wear.

I’ve long thought the advent of comfortable clothes has to have at least some small part in the obesity epidemic. I am typing this in a T-shirt and pajama pants. If I wore what Rob was wearing in the final scene around the house at all times, I am sure I’d be a few pounds lighter.

Pop culture references

Laura is going for the Marilyn Monroe or Brigette Bardo look when bleaching her hair, but is said to look more like Harpo Marx. I had never heard of Brigette Bardo before, then I Googled her and feel like maybe I have or at least should have. I have definitely heard of Harpo Marx, then I Googled him and realized I had never seen a picture of him before.

Vocabulary lesson

“Is this a rip?” asks the pharmacist irritatedly to Millie on the phone when presented with “a hair emergency.” In context I get that rip meant joke. And you can see that in the third definition in Wikipedia. 10 years ago I worked with a guy 20 years older than me and he was constantly saying he “didn’t give a rip” about something or another. I feel like this is might be a related usage.

Checking in with my mom

Laura and Millie were spending time together “addressing envelopes.” My mom says it could have been for some PTA or charity project. But more than likely it was writing out the return for bills or something mundane. Not only was there no online bill pay back then, bills didn’t even come pre-addressed. So it was a chore just preparing your mail.

She said she never saw her mom take a break during the day. She was always cooking, cleaning, sewing or doing laundry. They didn’t even have a washer or dryer.

I know this is cliche, but I don’t understand how we feel so busy nowadays.

Best joke/funniest moment

Laura, laying it on thick, prodding and guilting Rob to wake up, says, “would you rather just lie there?”

You think the guilt trip is finally working. But then Rob responds, “yeah I would.”

Other assorted thoughts on life in the 1960s

They sleep in separate twin beds. I understand this was just some public decency sign of the times in regards to what you could show on television. Still weird though.

Rob does jumping jacks when he wakes up. I also understand exercise and fitness didn’t really take off until the ‘80s, not sure what the jumping jacks were all about.

Laura’s hair, half blond and half brunette when Rob happens upon her mid-fix, is punk rock. It was played for laughs. But honestly it would be less weird to see someone walk around with that hair in 2021 than it would from them to have the actual 1961 Laura Petrie cut.

You could call the pharmacy and have them deliver. Last episode featured a home doctor visit. It is my understand this was during the milkman delivery era of life too. Is everything old new again? Maybe Amazon and Uber Eats is just a return the ideas from the mid-twentieth century.

Final thoughts

This episode wasn’t that funny. And Rob was kind of a dick. And Laura was kind of whiny. We’ll see where this goes.

[rmichaelwahlquist]

Juilliard is the tip of the iceberg. If Juilliard grads are struggling to find work – coming from one of the the most prestigious and well funded programs in the country, with some of the most high profile instructors – imagine the job prospects of all the state school grads. It's hard to imagine any scenarios where potential employers are going to take a ***** State University candidate over someone from Juilliard.

What follows may be my longest tumblr essay ever, buckle up for a ride through the perils of music education and a few ideas and solutions along the way!

And yet music programs around the country continue to expand the number of students in their programs – more students is after all in best interest of the institution (more students=more funding) – somehow without much regard to the hard numbers of how well these graduates will do in their careers.

Now, I work in music education and I readily acknowledge that changing this system is like changing the course of a glacier. For over two hundred years the higher education system in music has focused on a relatively narrow range of topics and techniques to train musicians. Berlioz's irreverent send-up of scholastic fugues during the finale of his 1830 Symphonie Fantastique is just one early example of students rankling at the limits of what was taught in school.

And for the first hundred or so years of the conservatory system (the 1800s), especially when it came to orchestral musicians, the product generally matched the demand - well trained musicians to play the music of the times.

On the other hand, I defend the traditional idea that not everything about a music education in a university has to be about job preparedness. For example, whether or not a musician teaches music history or theory for their career, I believe they should be well rounded and have a knowledge of those things. I tell my students: you want to be the whole package. And no matter what innovations come in music education, it would seem unquestionable that certainly the program should train musicians in excellent technique and performance.

I don't have the answers. I wish I did. I wish every person who wants to make music for a living could go to college and leave prepared to have an enjoyable, reliably profitable career in making the music that makes them happy. But right off the bat if you want to make pop (or any popular genre of) music or video game music or movie music – most university programs can hardly begin to help you with that. While some few specialized programs exist, you've really got to be the cream of the crop in the first place to even get your foot in those doors.

But where are the musicians making the money today? What skills do they have that enable them to make this living? And why does a music education have so little to do with either of those answers?

Many first year music students are surprised and disappointed to find that unless they want to be a band conductor, an orchestra musician, or a private instructor, being a music major may not be for them. And indeed it may not be! Many of the 20th century's and now 21st century's most wealthy and successful musicians became so without a formal music education behind them. Same for many of the ones who, while not wealthy, are working in studios and in live gigs with a steady income. Talent, work and creativity have always mattered a lot more in music than a piece of paper from an institution.

I have been wondering lately whether all of this really boils down to the fallout from the invention of recording technology over a century ago. Prior to the age of recordings, western musical notation had had a thousand years to develop and influence the way music was made, performed, and disseminated. Simply put, if you wanted to write, share, or perform music widely, then written music notation was pretty much the only way to do so. The accumulation of this tradition lead to the heights of late 19th century romanticism and the dawn of musical modernism. It's a staggering artistic achievement for humanity, no doubt about it, and it was all made possible because each generation could build on the written tradition of the previous one.

However, the advent of audio recordings abruptly interrupted (and/or accelerated) this progression/fragmentation. The need for creating and reading sheet music has gone from being universal to being niche - as long as the song can be performed, it can be recorded. The middle-man of notation no longer has a monopoly. This has led to the rise of new genres and commercial aspects of music that have fluctuated with the changing times and technology.

Jazz is an interesting case – an entirely new musical genre whose rise I would credit to recording and broadcast technology. Suddenly you didn't have to have tickets to an exclusive venue, training at a fancy school, or even the sheet music. You copied and learned from what you heard on the radio or recordings. You learned right from the best, right in the comfort of your home. You got playing experience doing live gigs. The genre evolved rapidly from Jelly Roll Morton to Louis Armstrong to Duke Ellington to Charlie Parker to Miles Davis to John Coltrane in just a few decades, becoming a well established and vibrant musical language – so well established that it can now retroactively enter higher music education. Those early jazzers would be quite amused, I think, that you can now (as I once did) get a degree in jazz.

Unfortunately, the same effect may be happening to Jazz education as happened to classical music education – the education becomes more about preserving the past than about keeping the music itself alive. (Have you heard some of the things the best jazz musicians are doing today? It is as far from even the wild jazz of the 60s as the earth is to the moon. Still recognizably jazz but not anything you'll learn in school!) Perhaps by its nature, a music education is only capable of teaching about the past. But I think that's an assumption worth challenging.

We may expect a trained jazz musician to be able to play big band styles and bebop with equal fluency, much the same way a violinist may be expected to play Bach and Brahms and Boulez. But is there a point at which a music education becomes too fixated on the past without adequately preparing for the right now, let alone the future, of life as a musician?

In fact, every non-notated music tradition is at risk of the same effect due to recordings. Say you recorded a native music maker from an endangered tradition in the early or mid 1900s. Now for all time, to make music in that tradition there is this temptation to calcification - hardening the whole style around a few interpretations just because they happen to be the earliest of which we have record. The reality is that no musical style ever stays the same forever. Those recorded in the 1900s were not even doing the music in the exact same as their parents, let alone 50 or a 100 years prior. The times changed, the people changed, the music changed.

It will always be that way. Music education may be a glacier set on its course but the flow of music increasingly is finding its way around and beyond it in terms of the art, the artists, the culture, and the money. Now, the times still change, the people still change, the music still changes, while the cultural and practical relevance of a formal music education wanes and wanes.

Man, I hate being so negative about this, but to fix things you have to first diagnose the problem. So let me propose a few solutions or at least work-arounds, especially for music majors.

- don't go into a music degree expecting it to do everything for you. Understand what it is and what it isn't. It will help you be a good musician. It may not prepare you for many other aspects of the career. You can do everything right in a music degree, pass with 'top marks', and still not be ready to go to work in your field.

- do look for opportunities to perform and make music outside the university. How do you expect to suddenly have music making be a money-making enterprise if you haven't already been practicing that? Why wait until you are a 'pro' to start a youtube channel, self release recordings on bandcamp or soundcloud, to self publish sheet music on sheetmusicplus.com? It takes time to build up a following and a reputation and it doesn't come automatically just when you get a diploma.

- do everything you can to learn about music business, copyright, contracts, recording, sound engineering, advertising, etc. whether or not it is required for a class. Learn what you need to know, not just the minimum for the grade or degree.

- be disciplined with your time. Give due diligence to your classes and practice but don't let those things take over the rest of your time. Balance your life and your art. If you don't learn to do that in school you'll have to learn it while trying to start your career...and why wait until that crucial period?

- you've got to be quite committed to make a music career work. It may involve participation in a combination of money-making streams - academia, private lessons, performances, recording, etc. You may even have to balance music making with other non-music income (I know of a successful composer who loves her second career as a yoga instructor). Carefully consider if all this is for you. You can have a lifelong, satisfying and fulfilling engagement with music making without ever making it the sole focus of your study or employment. There is no shame in seeking stability in a career, which music just can't promise.

- don't dismiss the value of the things in your college education that may not be "directly" relevant to the functioning of your music career. Modern college education has a foundation in the ideal that each person should have a well rounded grasp of some of the basics of the world. There's a reason all college grads are required to take classes like math or sociology or science. Practice finding that reason with each class and you'll have a happier time getting through those hoops. There can be relevance in pretty much any topic but don't expect college to spoon-feed you the application of that knowledge.

- Same goes for music topics that seem irrelevant. Just because the class is talking about music history, theory or repertoire that seems useless to you, it doesn't mean that you don't want to know those things as a musician. As I wrote above, you want to be the whole package: a well rounded musician who understands a thing or two about many aspects of life, the world, and music culture specifically.

- do take advantage of every resource that is available for your success. This may not be only within the university system. Look everywhere for mentors, professional contacts, grants, support, performance opportunities, learning opportunities and creative outlets. If you meet somebody who is making it work, pick their brain, ask for their help! If you aren't a voracious type of learner inside and outside of school, being a music major is going to be a tough road. Why suffer through four plus years just to eke out the degree that may not even lead you to a job?

- make the music of TODAY, of RIGHT NOW. Make music that matters to you and to your peers. Make music that is relevant and current and is more than a living museum. Don't be afraid of new music, be afraid of a world without new music!

- keep up with changes in the industry, especially paying attention to where the money is coming from and going. A music career doesn't have to be all about money but, you know, making a living matters unless you are 'of independent means'. Could be NFTs, could be grants, could be (as in the article above) playing your instrument with unusual ensembles. Be as creative with your income pursuits as you are in your art and I bet you can find a happy balance between making the music you like and making money in the process.

- don't give up hope that all the brokenness I mention above can be fixed. Total cultural change is possible and perhaps inevitable within a generation. Balance learning from the past with a push to make a difference in the directions you want to see.

I'll see you in a more vibrant and sonically rich world!

R. Michael Wahlquist | March 2021 | Rexburg, Idaho

[windermeresimblr]

Historical Paper Dolls: The Sun King’s Court

Last week, we discussed ruffs. Today, we’re staying in the 1600s, but focusing on a fairly specific niche: the fashions of Versailles between the 1660s and the 1690s. I was inspired to do this by @rennylurant‘s and my discussion of the “Versailles” series. 

Alun and Alasdair and Joyeuse and Guiomar are all sharing center stage today. I simply couldn’t resist getting them all dressed up and making them go on a walk to see and be seen. I originally wanted them to promenade in a “Hall of Mirrors” set, but I couldn’t figure out how to get the pictures to not show the sky instead of the second story, so we have our trusty backdrop instead.

Men’s Fashion

Louis XIV mandated that all men who appeared at Versailles were to wear a long coat, a vest or waistcoat, a cravat, and knee breeches. This ensemble also required a hat for wearing outdoors. Charles II copied these fashion edicts upon his restoration to the throne in the 1660s. Don Draper’s work wardrobe and the trope of the “man in the grey flannel suit” are directly traced back from this style.

The waistcoat often reached to the jacket hem or just above it, buttoning up the front similarly to the modern version. (Earlier in the period, it had been rather shorter.) It was a canvas for embroidery, and could be made of contrasting fabric to add to the opulence of the look. The back of the waistcoat often remained plain, as it was not often seen when the justaucorps was worn; there are some instances of waistcoats having sleeves for winter wear. (Of course, you can then say that it is no longer a vest, and is instead a short coat--but that’s what the early form of the waistcoat was!)

The cravat is the ancestor of the modern necktie. Usually made of lace or fine linen, it was wound around the neck before allowing the ends to fall loose in front. There was a fashion in the 1660s for a ribbon to be tied around the cravat, which Alun is sporting once he’s fully dressed. The ribbons around the cravat were usually red, although other colors such as blue were not unheard of. This fashion trend continued, with the ribbons increasing in size and amount, until the 1690s. Then the cravat was worn without such decoration.

Knee breeches had been fuller (and/or shorter) prior to the 1660s, but with the popularity of the long-line justaucorps and waistcoat, slimmer and longer styles became more fashionable. Breeches were often made in the same fabric as the coat. They could be tied with ribbons or buttoned shut.

Because the new style was meant to emphasize the new-found peace after the turbulent early part of the 1600s, boots were gradually eschewed in favor of shoes. They were usually square toed and decorated with ribbons and bows and shoe-roses (essentially a pompom); there was a trend in the 1680s for red heels on one’s shoes. The heel, of course, became rather high, in order to emphasize the shapeliness of one’s calves, which were shown off by the slim knee breeches.

The long jacket was also known as a justaucorps, and would remain in fashion (with a great deal of change in how it looked) until the 1800s. The sleeve length varied from above to below the elbow, allowing the wearer’s shirt to poke through at the ends. Whether it had deep cuffs or shallow, broad lapels or none, and closed in the front or was worn open, the jacket was longer and more loosely cut than in previous decades. By the 1680s, it reached almost to the knee and remained full through the waist. 

Men wore their hair long, often to mid-back. While some people kept their hair mostly straight, especially in Spain, loose curls or waves were favored. Louis XIV, who had gone bald at an early age, started a wig mania that didn’t die down until the late 18th century. He wanted something that would mimic his natural hair, only, of course, thicker and superior in almost every respect. The men of Versailles soon copied him. This early wig mimicked the wearer’s natural hair color, was not tied back in any way, and was styled with a rather severe and exaggerated center part. 

A variety of hats were worn. The most common was a hat with a wide brim and a moderate crown, often decorated with feathers; your classic “Musketeer” hat. One side of the brim was often turned up; this turned into a brim-turning craze, resulting in the tricorne. 

Women’s Fashion

From the 1660s to the 1670s, the trend in women’s fashion was a broad or off-the-shoulder neckline with full, elbow-length sleeves, a tightly corseted body, and a full skirt. While the gowns shown in portraits may look like a one-piece garment, the trend was actually for a separate bodice and petticoat, which usually were the same color and material. The bodice was attached to the skirt with tabs, which eventually transformed into less obvious hook-and-eye closures. (Terribly fiddly, of course, and essentially defeating the purpose of separates.)

The neckline became quite low in some cases, especially for portraits. In some cases, the breasts were totally exposed; more commonly, a good deal of the breast was shown, pushed up and accentuated by the tight corsetry of the period. It was a look very suited to the deceptively casual, libertine atmospheres of Charles II’s and Louis XIV’s courts. It was of course was frowned upon by the moralists, and was not terribly practical for those who needed to do anything more strenuous than embroider. 

Throughout the period, pearl earrings and necklaces were very popular. The earrings often featured very large, teardrop-shaped pearls; the necklaces were made of the ordinary round, moderately sized pearls. Necklaces were worn very tight and very high, at the base of the throat. This was a look that would continue through the eighteenth century. Pendants were not as popular as they had been in previous years, but were still worn. Gemstones were also still very popular, as Joyeuse shows; I liked the contrast of the sapphires and her pink (salmon?) dress, and took a lot of inspiration from an image of Madame de Montespan I’ve linked in the credits.

Women generally did not openly wear wigs in this period; instead, they wore their natural hair (or someone else’s, if they had the misfortune to go bald). In the 1660s and 70s, the fashion was for curls at the front with buns in the back.

Here’s the fashion trend of the 1680 and 90s, the mantua. The mantua actually began as an “undress” dress, or casual wear; it was meant to showcase elaborate and exotic patterned fabric from overseas. It started as a fairly simple shoulder-to-floor open-fronted overdress (dolman-style sleeves, no fancy seam work, etc.) with a long train However, it soon evolved into the pleated, pinned, and looped style we see showcased here. 

Although this was worn over the wearer’s shift, stays and petticoat, with only a stomacher (a decorative modesty panel pinned to the stays) and a coordinating outer petticoat keeping the underwear from becoming outerwear, the high neckline and longer sleeves were more modest than the somewhat revealing off-the-shoulder look previously popular.

In the 1680s and 90s, the hair was piled up at the front of the head and dressed with the towering mass of wire and ribbons known as the fontange. The fontange was inspired by one of Louis XIV’s “petit maitresses” doing up her hair in a pinch with a ribbon, and gradually mushroomed out of proportion into something involving starch, wire, and a serious amount of hat pins. This is a mere shadow of its extravagance.

Credits

Alasdair

Wig by Cloudwalker Sims | Waistcoat by EA | Justaucorps and Waistcoat (V2) by Fortuna/Irene-Gouret on TSR | Knee Breeches by EA | Stockings by revolution-sims | Shoes by @revolution-sims | Hat by @deniisu-sims

Alun

Hair by @chazybazzy and Anto | Waistcoat and Knee Breeches by EA | Justaucorps, Waistcoat, and Knee Breeches by EA | Stockings by revolution-sims | Bow by s-club | Shoes by revolution-sims | Tricorne by assas-sims-creed

Guiomar, 1660-79

Hair by @aikea-guinea and Sussi | Earrings by Ladesire | Necklace by Vitasims | Bodice and Skirt by EA

Guiomar, 1680-99

Hair by Chazzybazzy and Toksik | Earrings by Ladesire | Necklace by Vitasims | Fontange by Traelia | Mantua by GlorinosaVG

Joyeuse, 1660-79

Hair by Chazzybazzy and Applekisssims | Jewelry by Tankuz | Bodice and Skirt by EA

Joyeuse, 1680-99

Hair by EA | Fontange by Traelia | Earrings by Ladesire | Necklace by Vitasims | Mantua by GlorinosaVG

Poses

Walking Couple poses by Lenina90

A few necessary side notes:

Image 2: The breeches are not quite correct for the period, nor are the lapels. The shoes are also a little anachronistic. However, they look nice.

Image 6: The severe line of the corset in this period is not a look easily achievable with sliders without distorting the clothes, unfortunately. See this wax figure of Madame de Montespan for an idea of how this looked in real life. It’s not really a look for the faint-hearted or prim-and-proper types.

Image 8: I honestly don’t know what’s going on with Guiomar’s hair. It’s not spaniel curls, it’s not really a bun, but she can almost pull it off. 

Image 9: Neither of these are very close to a proper mantua, but I have yet to find a mesh I really love, or one that I can convert without it being a problem.

I’m still really pleased how much of this could be done using EA meshes. I also think I will permanently move these to Saturdays.

[andromeda-sapphire]

Saturn in Aquarius: 2020-2023

Beginning later this month, on March 21, Saturn enters the revolutionary sign of Aquarius for a brief month and a half preview before it retrogrades back into Capricorn until the end of September. Then at the end of the year, on December 17, it will re-enter Aquarius for the long-haul until March of 2023. Saturn is known as the planet of limitations, boundaries, responsibilities and hard lessons, and up until now has been making its way through the restrictive and authoritarian sign of Capricorn since the beginning of 2018. Though Saturn is the ruler of earthy Capricorn and identifies well with that controlling energy, it doesn't always do it's best work in this sign. Traditionally, Saturn also rules the airy free-flowing sign of Aquarius, and tends to be very comfortable in this sign, despite how different they may seem. When Saturn enters this humanitarian sign, it evolves into a higher version of itself, capable of bringing much needed equality and change into the world. How do we know this? Well, let's take a look at the last few Saturn transits through Aquarius - from 1991 to 1994, and before that, from 1962 to 1964.

Let's begin with Saturn's transit through futuristic Aquarius back in 1962. Right off the bat, as Saturn entered the sign, the first automated (unmanned) subway train in New York City began running. Aquarius rules technology and automation, so this stood out to me as a very modern Aquarian development already. Also in 1962, Spacewar! was developed and released as the first computer game, featuring two spaceships fighting it out. Each spaceship was controlled by a player, meaning it was not only the first computer game, but also the first multi-player game for computers. Fitting, as Aquarius rules groups as well as spaceships and technology.

In the early 1990s, there were also some major technological advancements, specifically related to the internet and computers. In 1991, at the beginning of Saturn's transit through Aquarius, Apple released the PowerBook, the first modern laptop computer, which was a huge development in the computer world and has influenced our modern computers significantly in their portability and design. The WorldWide Web was technically invented in 1989, while Saturn was transiting Capricorn, and it was exclusively meant for information-sharing between scientists in institutions around the world at that time. However, in April of 1993, after Saturn had entered Aquarius, CERN made the "www" software public, accessible to anyone with a computer. This is significant because Aquarius represents freedom and equality, and though it was still mainly the upper class that could afford computers at the time, this movement away from intellectual elitism essentially opened the internet up for free public use like we have today. In 1992, ViolaWWW was released, and was the first web browser to become popularized by users. It was also the recommended browser by CERN until it was replaced by Mosaic, the first web browser to display images in line with text rather than in a new window, in 1993.

In the upcoming transit of Saturn through Aquarius, we can expect to see even more advanced technology developments. Many people are expecting Artificial Intelligence to really take off in the coming years, as well as 5G technology and space travel on a grander scale. The Internet of things is also on the rise, with smart devices and appliances becoming more readily available and more advanced.

The future of technology was on the minds of many in the early 1960s, reflected in ABC's first color animated TV series, The Jetsons, premiering in September of 1962. Not only does Aquarius rule color television and cartoons, but the futuristic utopian vision held by The Jetsons is also very Aquarian in nature. Television also welcomed the eccentric and beloved Addams family in 1964 with ABC's premiere of The Addams Family. This television classic questioned social norms of the time, specifically the values of the traditional mid-century American family, which were quite conservative at the time. This series became a symbol of the counterculture in television, a typically Aquarian concept. Another incredibly popular futuristic TV show that technically started during Saturn's transit through Aquarius, Star Trek began filming in November of 1964, during the last couple months of Saturn's journey through this sign. Star Trek is also notable for this transit due to the fact that it was one of the first television shows to give women, especially black women, prominent and respected roles. The character Lt. Uhura, the ship's communications officer, was played by Nichelle Nichols, a black actress. At that time, black women typically only appeared in television as servants and maids, so this was a revolutionary change not only in television but in the civil rights movement as well. In fact, when Nichelle Nichols considered quitting the show to pursue a career on Broadway, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. met with Nichelle, convincing her to stay on the show as a part of history.

Television in the early 1990s during Saturn's next transit through Aquarius was just as influential on culture as the television of the early 1960s. One of the first TV shows that comes to mind when I think of the 90s in television is the classic sitcom Friends. Though this show technically didn't air until Saturn had moved into Pisces in 1994, the concept of the show resonates very closely with Aquarian themes. For one, the name "Friends"is representative of Aquarius, the sign of friendship and camaraderie. David Crane and Marta Kauffman, the show's creators, began developing Friends in late 1993 under the early title of Insomnia Cafe, as Saturn made its way through the last 10 degrees of Aquarius. Though it initially had mixed reviews, Friends grew to become one of the most popular and beloved television shows of its time. Another well-loved show of the early 90s, though aimed more towards a younger audience, Bill Nye the Science Guy first aired in 1993, and embraced the forward-thinking Aquarian scientist archetype. Science in general is ruled by Aquarius, sign of innovation and discovery, and this show was designed to teach children about the realities of science and observation. One TV show I thought I should mention here as well is The Real World, which first aired on MTV in 1992, and is credited as being the birth of the "reality TV" genre of television, though it was edited quite often in favor of certain situations and reactions that didn't quite reflect reality. It received a lot of criticism as well for not ever casting an Asian man in nearly 30 years on television. Reality TV is also very much a Saturn in Aquarius concept, as Saturn rules realism, and Aquarius rules television in general.

Aquarius is also the ruler of cartoons, as I touched on earlier, so it's only fitting that I discuss a few cartoons of the early 90s. The trend of "cartoons for adults" was beginning to take off around this time, after The Simpsons paved the way in 1989 with its adult humor and hidden messages about adult life. One of the more "mature" cartoons that comes to mind when thinking of Saturn's transit through Aquarius in the early 1990s is The Ren & Stimpy Show. This show first aired in 1991, and was quite grotesque in its animation style, featuring detailed animated close-ups with which other shows later followed suit. It quickly became a cult classic, especially among college students, who adored its bizarre animation style and dark yet quirky humor. Another cult classic "adult cartoon" that began while Saturn was making its way through Aquarius is Beavis and Butt-Head, which first aired in 1993. This cartoon had mixed reviews and stirred up a lot of controversy with its seemingly idiotic social criticism, but became a staple of early 90s adult television nonetheless. The social criticism in this show is representative of Saturn in Aquarius as well, as Saturn portrays a harsh, critical nature, and Aquarius is a sign of society and social groups. Rocko's Modern Life was yet another cartoon series that was aimed for young adults rather than children, and achieved moderate success after its initial release in 1993. This show was known for highlighting adult situations through cartoon animation - combining the adult responsibilities and themes of Saturn with the off-beat cartoony Aquarian personality. One last cartoon I'd like to mention in this segment of adult cartoons is Animaniacs, which first aired in 1993, and quickly became a hit with both children under age 11 and adults over 25. The large following among adults even led to one of the earliest Internet fandom cultures, another Aquarian concept.

Television in the coming years will likely circle around again to some of these rebellious Aquarian ideas, and it's likely that TV will become even more entwined with the internet over the next few years, as online streaming is more common these days than watching cable TV.

Saturn's movement through Aquarius was a big part of the civil rights movement of the early 60s as well. The sign of Aquarius is a sign of freedom, equal human rights, and disrupting the status quo, which essentially were a few of the main goals of the movement. In fact, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. had a 10th house Aquarius Mercury, which is why we remember him best for his "I have a dream" speech, which he delivered August 28, 1963 in Washington D.C. for the 200,000+ people who gathered in front of the Lincoln Memorial for the March on Washington. During the time he was writing and revising this speech, Saturn was transiting his Mercury in Aquarius as well. Later in 1963, on October 22, roughly 200,000 students stayed out of school in Chicago to protest segregation of African-American students in schools. This was a major peak of an ongoing battle to desegregate schools across America, again acting out the Aquarian values of equality and social justice.

In the early 1990s this theme re-emerged through the Rodney King riots in Los Angeles. A video went public in 1991 of five white Los Angeles police officers severely beating Mr. Rodney King, who was black, after pulling him over for speeding. The riots began on April 29, 1992 after a trial jury acquitted four of the officers, enraging thousands of Southern California residents who took to the streets in anger. By the end of the riots, in early May, 63 people had been killed and thousands more were injured or had been arrested. The 1992 Rodney King riots went on to inspire the folk song "Like a King" from Ben Harper's debut 1994 album Welcome to the Cruel World, which was released just after Saturn transited into Pisces, therefore the songs were written and recorded while Saturn was in Aquarius.

In the coming transit of Saturn through Aquarius, we can expect to see another revolutionary movement for POC, particularly watching the Black Lives Matter movement, because the hashtag was born while Saturn was in Scorpio, meaning Saturn in Aquarius will be coming up on a Saturn square for the birth chart of the movement.

Furthermore in music, there were a few major developments in the early 1960s while Saturn was in Aquarius that stood out to me. First, in the early to mid 60s, Joan Baez was beginning to make a name for herself in folk music during the American folk revival. Then in 1962, Peter, Paul & Mary released their debut album, which reached #1 on the US album charts. During the same year, Bob Dylan released his self-titled debut album of cover songs, and later went on to release his first original album The Times They Are a-Changin' in 1964, towards the end of Saturn's journey through Aquarius. These politically charged folk artists all peaked with the folk revival during Saturn's transit through Aquarius, which makes sense, as folk music is Aquarian in its nature, typically discussing issues of politics, inequality and other "radical" ideas of change. In fact, these artists also all performed "We Shall Overcome" at Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.'s March on Washington in 1963.

Another emerging group that stood out to me from this Aquarian transit was The Beatles. This incredibly successful rock group released their first couple of songs - "Please Please Me" & "Ask Me Why" - in January of 1963. By the next month, their single "Please Please Me" was topping the British rock charts. The Beatles released their debut studio album, Please Please Me, in March 1963, and by May had landed on the top of the UK album charts, staying there for 30 weeks, only to be replaced by their second studio album, With The Beatles. By October of 1963, the media began using the term "Beatlemania" to describe the frenzied behavior exhibited by Beatles fans across the globe. Many of their live performances were accompanied by the sounds of screaming fans and general hysteria. Fanatics, by the way, are also ruled by Aquarius. In February of 1964, The Beatles made their first appearance on The Ed Sullivan Show, drawing a record 73.7 million viewers. The crazed audience clearly depicts the "Beatlemania" phenomenon in full swing. But how do The Beatles relate to Saturn's transit through Aquarius? First off, The Beatles were one of the first mainstream groups to market to the younger generation of teenagers rather than to their parents. This was a big shift in the music industry, as typically it was the older audience with all the spending power, whereas now, young teenage girls were a powerful force in the music market. Though their earlier songs avoided heavier social topics, it became obvious later in their career that The Beatles were a huge part of the birth of counterculture and anti-establishment ideas. In 1964, when the band was informed that a venue they were scheduled to perform at in Florida in the US was segregated, they refused to play unless the audience was integrated. Many more conservative countries refused to allow The Beatles to perform at all, in fear that their progressive counterculture ideas would "infect" their younger population. Even the USA attempted to ban all British acts in 1965, as they saw their emerging rock 'n' roll culture as "dangerous" to the youth of the nation. The Beatles were also highly progressive in their music style, and incorporated many new and unusual recording techniques into their albums. This ongoing theme of progressive thinking and "peace and love" apparent in the music of The Beatles is very in line with the nature of Aquarius.

Later, in the early 1990s, grunge bands were the new emerging music trend. A number of grunge rock bands all released major hit albums around the same time - right around Saturn's transit through rebellious Aquarius. In 1991, Pearl Jam released their debut album Ten, followed by Nirvana releasing their second album Nevermind, and then Soundgarden with Badmotorfinger - all within a span of two months! All three albums were incredibly successful, and resonated strongly with the Aquarian counterculture and anti-establishment ideas brought out by the earlier generation in the early 1960s. Then in 1992, Alice in Chains released their second studio album, Dirt, which is considered by many to be their best work. Also released in 1992, Stone Temple Pilots debuted with their first studio album, Core, which received mixed reviews, though it went on to win a Grammy in 1994 for Best Hard Rock Performance. Nirvana received a lot of attention and success in the early 90s as well, and Kurt Cobain was dubbed "the voice of a generation" by many. Similar to The Beatles influence on counterculture, Kurt Cobain's darker lyrical content touched many listeners hearts on a deeper level than the earlier hair metal had been able to.

In the next few years in music, we're likely to see younger emerging artists, similar to Billie Eilish, who has an Aquarius Moon, taking over the scene with some revolutionary new ideas and social commentary in their lyrics.

Though Aquarius is a masculine sign, I've also noticed a pattern with emerging feminist movements during these transits, due to the focus on equal human rights. The second wave of feminism began picking up speed around 1963, when two major works of feminist writing were published - The Bell Jar by Sylvia Plath, and The Feminine Mystique by Betty Friedan. Both works were largely critical of the typical role of a female in 1960s society - that of the domestic housekeeper/mother figure. These works encouraged women to pursue careers they felt passionately about for the first time. Also in 1963, journalist Gloria Steinem became a prominent figure in feminist culture after going undercover as a Playboy Bunny and revealing the poor treatment and underpayment of the waitresses at the Playboy Club.

In the early 1990s, during Saturn's next transit through Aquarius, the third wave of feminism began to emerge. While second-wave feminism dealt primarily with issues surrounding equal opportunities for [predominantly white] women in the workplace, this third wave of feminism dealt with issues regarding intersectional feminism, violence against women and reproductive/sexual freedom. A trend of reclaiming "derogatory" female terms (for example -  bitch, slut, whore) began largely with the Riot grrrl movement in punk music, popularized by female-constructed bands like Bikini Kill and Bratmobile, as a way of expressing feminine identity on their own terms.

Feminine power is already on the rise again, with Uranus having moved into feminine Taurus a couple years ago and still having several more years to go on that transit. Women in power will do great things with that power, and more women will come to be in power over the next few years with Saturn in this sign. Whether it be individual political power, or power in numbers, women around the world will come together and rise to power from now until 2023. Another trend I expect to see play out while Saturn transits Aquarius these next few years as well is that of gender revolution. With the gender roles of the past melting away, a revolution is roaring around the corner, and gender queer/LGBTQ+ identifying people will likely score a few big victories in the upcoming Aquarian transit.

Another theme I noticed through Saturn's transit of Aquarius in the early 1960s was a theme of national independence and freedom. In August of 1962, the colony of Jamaica became independent, freeing Jamaicans from the United Kingdom after 300 years of British rule. In October that same year, Uganda also became independent from the UK. Then in 1963, Kenya declared independence from the UK as well. Meanwhile, in the Dominican Republic and Zanzibar both experienced major revolutions during this time frame, in search of freedom. This trend continued in the early 90s, with many countries, including Lithuania, Ukraine, Latvia and Estonia, all declaring their independence from the USSR in 1991.

It's likely that we will see many more uprisings and movements towards independence, including the USA's Pluto return in 2022/2023, which is expected to be a revolutionary moment for the history of the country, over the course of the next few years.

These are the kinds of themes we are likely to see re-emerging until March 2023, while Saturn roams through free-spirited Aquarius. Technological innovations are going to be increasingly involved with our lives, as the internet of things develops further. Television will trend towards witty humor and social criticism, as it did the previous few times Saturn was in Aquarius. Civil rights movements will be center stage, writing more groundbreaking history into our textbooks, while the future leans towards gender queer/female figures of color, rather than in favor of the cis-gender/heterosexual white male. Music will take on its own social commentary within the industry, perhaps birthing a new genre of sorts. Independence of the individual as well as the nation will be stressed in the coming years. Saturn feels confident in this sign, and we should too, moving forward into Saturn's "Age of Aquarius" with hope for a better future.

If you enjoyed reading this post, feel free to buy me a coffee here!

https://ko-fi.com/andromeda_sapphire

[snowflake-of-destruction]

This isn’t something I normally participate in, but, since I didn’t write much in June and shared hardly anything(something I plan to change in July if I can), I thought I should give some proof of (creative) life if anyone wants it.

Under the cut, a series of tiny excerpts, most more than six sentences, of different Kingdom Hearts pieces to be rescued from the limbo of “half finished chunk of something in a google doc.” Some of them belong to WIPs and some are from various other things started and then interrupted or....we’ll say set to a back burner.

All excerpts headed by a bolded header in the style of 

Title of Piece This Belongs To (Brief description of what kind of fic that is in between parenthesis)

Advantage Rule (Isalea Modern AU. First Chapter Up On AO3. More Info There.)

"You lost or are you the new caulk?" The speaker didn't fit the typical profile of a tech professional, especially one that worked behind the scenes with the coders. Mid-fifties judging by the lines on his face with thinning blond hair so light you could hardly tell where some parts had gone silver combed to stick up as a compensation for where it threatened to recede and leather skin that said he'd worked outside in some decade past, paired with a southern accent that seemed stronger than it was with the effect added by the toothpick precariously balanced in the corner of his mouth. He'd rejected business attire in favor of cargo pants and a dark blue flight jacket that looked like they'd been bought in the last century, and the look in his eye was so fierce without prompting that Axel had to wonder if he was a failsafe for the air conditioning breaking down.

"Am I the what?"

"Caulk." The toothpick switched sides of the man's mouth with a roll of his bottom lip. "Fixing the leaks? The cybersecurity specialist? Axel Lea?" His impatience mounted by the moment. Working on the fourth floor would certainly be interesting.

"Yes, sir. That would be me." Axel tried to smooth the way with deference and the easy smile that rarely steered him wrong. "Does that make you...?"

"Cid Highwind. I'll be showing you the ropes. Now that you've seen fit to grace us with your presence." Cid continued to stare him down and Axel wasn't sure if he was supposed to apologize or bare his teeth and smack his chest like a gorilla to challenge the alpha.

Without False Hope ( First Chapter Up On AO3. More Info There. Akuroku KH/FFX crossover)

Axel was waiting for them, or  it seemed that way at least and Roxas didn’t think himself vain for thinking so, when Roxas spotted the lanky redhead not jogging himself but leaning against a pole until he saw the Crusaders approaching and then falling in next to Roxas just behind Xion as she bellowed, "Young Crusaders gather 'round,"  the beginning of a call and response chant that the rest of them would answer with a promise to knock enemies back and stand their ground or an alternate about beating Sin beneath the ground if they were feeling

Axel finished the line a beat before the Crusaders would have, substituting his own words. "...Eager for Sin to put you in the ground." Roxas's heart, which had soared for a moment when Axel had come up beside him and dared to hope that Axel's first words would be a version of sorry or an invitation out somewhere without other people, took a sharp plummet to his toes then returned to his chest angry at being mocked.

Assorted grumbles and shouts showed many others felt the same way, but Xion seemed to take it in stride, sing-songing her own improvised lines that continued the cadence of the original chant without missing a beat, "Young civilian come to heckle and stare. What would you do if a fiend attacked and we weren't there?"

Axel near stumbled but recovered and let out a short bark that might have been a laugh he wasn't sure he was allowed without inviting training Crusaders to make him pay for it, afterward rumbling in an impressed tone, "You, I like,."

"You should. " Xion shot back and her casual tone alone was enough that everyone else in the formation knew Axel was an acceptable stranger even if he was rude, and that they should ignore the intrusion. "I'm not sure I like you back. Roxas has been mooning and it makes him impossible."

Guardian Force (Akuroku. Axel and Roxas in the next life, living as NPCs in the world of/during the story of FFVIII. Part of my eventual plan to show Axel and Roxas living out every Final Fantasy game. Unpublished/First chapter never completed because I decided on Without False Hope/a FFX crossover instead)

"You often talk to yourself?" an insolent lazy drawl came from somewhere to Axel's left and he turned, eyes narrowing to see a boy in a rumpled Balamb cadet uniform lying across the second highest step, book in hand, vibrant blue eyes, ice eyes like he'd junctioned Shiva right to his vision, trained on him over the spine.

"To my Guardian Force," Axel explained, though that seemed worse. Over six foot of height and lean muscle and the SeeD uniform Axel wore at least enough parts of for it to be vaguely recognizable that he belonged to the elite unit, all usually worked together enough that there was usually no reason to be embarrassed by anything he let slip out.  Nobody would laugh even if Axel welcomed it.

"Thought you didn't like using Guardian Forces," the lounging student's voice was just as nonchalant as it was before, but his gaze was sharp, interested, and he spoke as if he knew Axel.

"Have we met?" Axel knocked the sole of his left boot against the side of his right as if scraping mud off the bottom. It wasn't odd for him to shift constantly even when mostly still, unless he was specifically called to stand at attention. There was an air of discomfort about the present action though, when taken with how jade eyes known for constant analysis on and off the battlefield, seemed attracted to the handrail of the steps rather than searching the face of the boy that had just spoken to him with familiarity.  Axel's normally iron stomach soured immediately at the idea they had met and he'd forgotten, to the point he couldn't even bring himself to try and jog his recollection. All he could do was force out his least favorite question next to 'when did that happen?'

Lollipop (Soriku and Akuroku. College AU/Modern AU. Unpublished. Sora and Roxas in an acapella group because that was the only way I could work out how to get them to sing and do choreo for songs that get stuck in Shaky’s head, which was the Goal of the Day one day before I got distracted)

When Sora said he had a new idea for a piece for the CrescenDudes' next performance, Roxas had been more than happy to volunteer to work on the arrangement with him. Sora was great for ideas, large picture and little flourishes that made a song a show, and he was, hands down, who you wanted doing choreography, even if he tended to get carried away and not realize there weren't many others with the dance and movement background he had in their group, but he wasn't suited for the musical side of sculpting a piece. He'd sing what he was given and he'd stay on pitch doing it, but he had no idea to weave songs together to form a mashup that sounded natural and created the right feeling in a crowd,  and he'd forget to accommodate  for everyone's voices or go the opposite direction and try to highlight everyone and have twenty solos. So it was up to Roxas to take his vision from neat idea to reality, and he jumped at the chance. He'd do anything at this point to distract Sora from dragging him into wedding planning for a few days when that should be Riku’s job as the other groom.  

Hourglass (Unpublished. Self-indulgent BBS Era--at least for this excerpt-- story about KH Squall/Leon and Seifer growing up in Radiant Garden and explaining how they got to be on separate planets and separate ages by the time KH1 rolls around. May be competed and posted to AO3 or just used as a base/record of headcanon for sprinkling backstory references in other pieces.)

Seifer challenged Lea and Isa to break back into the castle and come back with proof this time. He would have just called Lea a liar, but that would lead to Lea trying to fight him, which would lead to Isa trying to fight him, which would lead to Squall getting in the way, thinking Seifer couldn't handle a two on one fight with some chicken wusses. Then Squall would still try to sneak into the castle himself to see Ellone anyway--and she wasn’t in the castle in the first place...probably. Seifer would have to drag Squall’s ass out of there, and, if they got caught by the Royal Guard, then they’d be the next rumored prisoners in the basement.  It was safer to make it be Lea and Isa's challenge.

Lea took the bait. Isa, surprisingly, added they were planning a return trip anyway. Squall shot Seifer a questioning look, which he ignored in favor of taunting Lea and sealing the deal, "I can't wait to see you two hobble in tomorrow after getting your asses beat by the Guard. Try not to hit your thick skulls on the flagstones when you get thrown out."

Drowning (Unfinished/unpublished. Placeholder name. Sorikai. Supposed to be for the Sorikai Summer Event. Prompt: Drowning. Long one shot about eight times one of the Destiny Trio has nearly drowned and then been saved by the others)

Their first prototype of a raft had fallen apart underneath them in open water, the ties that lashed the planks together having not been as securely tied as they could have been--the book on sailor's knots Sora had provided was a lot more obtuse than it had seemed at first, descriptions dense and picture demonstrations too sparse. Kairi and Sora each fared well, each grabbing onto a floating plank to drift a minute and orient themselves after being plunged into the water. Riku was less successful, being fixated on saving as many of the supplies Kairi and Sora had gathered (coconuts, mushrooms, and bottles of water mostly, though there had been a tackle box that Riku's father would kill him for losing if he had to go back and face him, and that was what Riku was primarily focused on) and exhausting his breath on too many dives in a row without recovery in between until he was lightheaded from not taking in enough air in his hasty gulps when he broke the surface and increasingly imprecise in where he chose to come out of the water until he hit his head on the bottom of the plank he was loading the recovered supplies onto and went down without resurfacing.

No Set Recipe (Unfinished/unpublished.  Sorikai. Supposed to be for the Sorikai Summer Event. Prompt: Ice Cream. Kidfic. Sora’s mom is left with the job of explaining polyamory while making homemade ice cream with a group of five and six year olds.)

It was all Selphie's fault to start with, though if she was going to be ascribed the blame for the hurt feelings, she would have to be given credit for all that happened after, which Riku and Sora both agreed she did not deserve, even if Kairi was more magnanimous, so it became habit just to talk of the ice cream and the impact it had on their future. Still, the most accurate account begins with: one day when they were all young-- too young to even be allowed to swim in the water surrounding play island without an adult in the surf with them, if that gives perspective--Selphie, to everyone's surprise, scored the winning goal in the game of land-blitzball the group of them were playing in order to decide what game they would really spend the day playing, and chose, to absolutely nobody's surprise, house.

Everyone accepted their fate and divided into family units with minimal grumbling, phrasing which means that Wakka threw the blitzball into the sea and lost it forever when Jecht--the parent chaperone on play island that day who was five minutes away from falling asleep on the sand and typically didn't care what they did, unlike most parents who at least had restrictions about not hitting each other in the head with wooden swords or throwing sand, and was the favorite of the children for that attitude of freedom to make mistakes being a better teacher than rules--refused to go into the water after it.

Selphie, however, found a problem with Sora, Riku, and Kairi's family. Specifically, she didn't like that the family was Riku, Kairi, and Sora all together parenting a yellow coconut Kairi was trying to rock to sleep while Riku built him a bed out of sand and palm fronds and Sora cooked dinner for the household--a savoury stew of sticks, sand, and mushroom. She stood with pursed lips and hands on hips, and declared that their proud coconut son, Rekka, couldn't have all three of them for parents because that wasn't how things worked.

"Why not?" Sora asked with all the curiosity and innocence of a child.

Riku tried a more practical, solution based approach with, "Can we change the rules?"

Kairi was more direct and firm, her, "It does if I say so," leaving very little room to argue.