#I will never live in England for moral reasons

[imagowrites]

Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Men Tell No Tales; Why It Shouldn’t Exist

Or how I invested time and energy into an analysis of a relatively dead franchise instead of doing it for my actual media analysis university course.

An essay by: a bitter and obsessed PotC fan since they were 7, with a lot of free time.

Lads, this is going to be long. You have been warned.

The Beginning

At the very beginning of the movie, we see a young Henry Turner looking for his dad.

Now, we're not talking about characterization problems or how likely it is that a ten-year-old child would risk his life to look for a man he technically only saw once; we're talking about plot problems, actual logical fallacies. My questions are:

How? The Flying Dutchman is a legendary ship, impossible to be found unless She wants to be found. The only reason we see Her in Dead Man's Chest is because Davy Jones himself is looking for Jack to collect his debt, and in that occasion the Dutchman's captain wasn't even doing what he was supposed to do, so he was most definitely in the living world. Will otherwise, he's doing the job Calypso gave him, so he's constantly in between. Is the movie trying to convince me that a kid was able to do something no one in the history of piracy was ever able to do? And even if he did, why hasn't anyone explained me how? He simply looks at a map and throws himself on the bottom of the ocean. How did he know The Dutchman was there? How did he know it would've come to surface?

Where is his mom? We got to know Elizabeth in the first three movies; we know she's a smart woman and we can assume she's an attentive mother. She didn't notice her son preparing himself for a trip in the middle of the ocean to go look for his dad? Was she distracted? Was she outsmarted by a 10ish-year-old? Or is she just not contemplated in this scenario?

Why does Will look like that? Will is doing his job, so... why does he look like he's slowly corrupting? That kind of corruption is the punishment Calypso reserves to The Dutchman's crew when the captain fails her, which isn't the case. Did they forget about it? Was the idea of putting algae on Orlando Bloom's face just impossible to resist to?

Alright, this isn't actually from this movie but it's bothering me, so I have to write it; also, it would make this whole movie unnecessary, so it's somehow related to it. Why (and I can't stress this enough) can't Elizabeth be on the Dutchman? Why can't they do the job together? Is it because she's not a pirate? I'm pretty sure se actually is. Is it because she's a woman? Last time I checked she was the KING. She wants to stay with Will forever, Will wants to stay with her forever, they can literally live forever on the same ship. Why aren't they?

Whatever the Hell Happened to Jack Sparrow

Imagine creating a character that is so iconic whenever you ask a person who was a kid in the early 2000 to imagine a pirate, they imagine said character.

Now imagine fourteen years pass and you decide to ruin that character by making him the most hideous, annoying, idiotic person in the whole saga, and we're talking about a saga that has Philip the Missionary in it. Why? Jack Sparrow is THE anti-hero. Never on the right side, but never on the wrong one. You can tell he's doing something morally questionable, but you still find yourself rooting for him. He's stupid enough to make you laugh, but he's secretly clever enough to always get away with it. Now he's just... drunk. And that's not even an excuse for this horrendous new characterization, because he was always drunk. The guy FORGOT HE WAS ROBBING A BANK, the same guy just one movie earlier was able to escape from the King of England's palace and steal a lady's earring (by pretending to be a literal slut) in the process. He just switched from the iconic drunk bi bestie everyone loves to my cringe uncle that drinks too much at Christmas parties and makes everyone uncomfortable. Please, if the risk is ruining an entire generation's beloved character, either don't make the movie or find a better explanation than "Bad luck dogs you day and night".

The Pearl in The Bottle

So... what you're telling me is that Jack Sparrow, the guy who was able to defeat Hector Barbossa, Davy Jones and Blackbeard thanks to his slyness, and who loves his Black Pearl more than anything else in the world, had said ship in a bottle in his pockets for FIVE YEARS... and he never thought about breaking the bottle to free Her. That's what you're telling me. This is the pivotal point upon which the entire Jack's plot hinges. I... I don't even know what to say. Was this supposed to be funny?

What an Incredibly Lucky Coincidence

A guy needs a treasure to save his father. To find it, he needs the help of a notorious and legendary pirate. He looks for him everywhere, sailing on dozens of ships just so he has the remote chance to stumble across the pirate. The last ship he's been on has sinked, he's the only survivor. He's been found in the middle of the ocean and someone brought him to the nearest city. Which city? I mean, the one that has both the pirate he was looking for and a lady who's the only person in the whole planet who's able to find the treasure he was looking for! And, oh my... he finds the both of them! In that same city! Without even LOOKING FOR THEM! A hell of a coincidence, if you ask me. Also known as lazy writing.

What's Wrong With the Guards?

Now, I know Pirates of the Caribbean isn't exactly known for its accurate historical reconstructions, but why are the guards in this movie acting like they're some sort of hellhounds ready to kill anyone in sight? Even pirates and traitors as Jack and Henry were supposed to stand trial before being sentenced to death. It would've probably been an unjust and barbaric trial, but there should've been one. We literally saw it, in the previous movie. Why's Jack been sentenced to death for simply existing here? He gave pirate vibes and they decided that was enough?

Paul McCartney

This is not an actual point of the analysis, I just wanted to remind people that Paul McCartney is in this movie and that's the only valid reason to watch it.

Salazar

I am confused. Once again, I have questions.

El Matador Del Mar was so good at his job he had almost defeated piracy. "The last ones joined together to try and defeat me". The last what? Pirates? There were no pirates left? This happened when Jack was young, so a lot of time before the first movie, right? Where were, I don't know... Blackbeard? Davy Jones? Barbossa? All the other Pirate Lords? I might be wrong, but I guess Salazar didn't kill them, did he? Why weren't they there during that "last battle" in which "the last ones joined together"?

The Devil's Triangle. I just don't understand what's the logic behind it. So, this is a cursed place. Whoever enters there, can't get out. One would think it means that if you get there, you die; and Salazar does die, but he somehow also becomes a ghost whose only purpose is to find Jack Sparrow and have his revenge. So, do people become ghosts when they get in The Devil's Triangle? We have to assume people have gotten stuck in there before; otherwise, there wouldn't be legends around the place. So why isn't it like full of spirits ready to haunt people? Why are Salazar and his crew the only ones?

Poseidon or Calypso?

What's the Trident of Poseidon? Does Poseidon exist? Isn't Calypso the Goddess of the sea? Breaking the Trident, you break all the curses of the sea, so the Trident must be more powerful than Calypso, which leads to a question. Where is she? She IS the sea, right? So she must have known someone was about to find the Trident and brake all curses, including her one. She just decided it was okay? It really feels like someone decided to suddenly change the world's mythology without giving explanations.

The Compass

This is possibly the most blatant plot hole in the whole saga. Probably the most blatant plot hole I've ever witnessed, and man, I watched all the Harry Potter movies. In Dead Man's Chest, Jack meets Tia Dalma in her "shop" and he tells her he's looking for the Davy Jones' key. She asks him "The compass you bartered from me, it cannot lead you to this?", making another pivotal point of Dead Men Tell No Tales factually senseless.

That man couldn't have given his compass to Jack, because that wasn't his compass.

So either Salazar is lying while telling his tale or they forgot about that line in the second movie. Anyway, let's pretend that line doesn't exist; even if that captain gave Jack his compass in that exact moment, why would it be the key to free Salazar, exactly? How is the compass in any way related to The Devil's Triangle or to Salazar? In the movie, they try to explain it with a sentence: “if you betray it, your greatest fear comes true”. So, is Salazar Jack's greatest fear? I really doesn't seem right, Jack almost didn't remember Salazar when Henry mentioned him. To Jack, he's only a guy he outsmarted decades earlier. Also, Jack technically already gave the compass away, twice: to Elizabeth in Dead Man's Chest, to make her find the chest, and to Beckett in At World's End, when they're negotiating.

That's... That's Just Body Shaming, Mate

Let's talk about her. So, the woman's ugly. It can happen that a woman is ugly. Was it necessary to build an entire scene around some blatant body shaming? This scene wants to mimic the similar scene in Dead Man's Chest: Jack's on an island, running from the main villain, and he's forced to do things he doesn't want to do until someone saves him, then it was Will, now it's Hector.

Except in Dead Man's Chest it was LITERAL CANNIBALISM he was facing, and yet he looked LESS TERRIFIED and DISGUSTED. What's exactly the message here? Lads, is marrying an ugly woman worse than cannibalism? I don't know... that was just bad.

Justice for Hector Barbossa

If you know me (you probably don't, but if you do) then you know about my obsession with Hector Barbossa. I truly believe he's the best written character in the saga, and he's in my top five of the characters I love the most in all media. I watched The Curse of the Black Pearl when I was seven and I am autistic, so I had all the time to develop a literal relationship with these characters in my head. As much as Geoffrey Rush's interpretation was impeccable, as always, it really hurt to watch Hector in this movie. He just doesn't sound like him. First of all, why isn't he on the Queen Anne's Revenge? Why's he letting someone else sail around on his ships? He would've never. Why's he just sitting on a throne and shooting musicians instead of, I don't know... being a pirate? Being a pirate is the only thing that matters to him. He says it at the end of On Stranger Tides, and he even says it in this movie, to the witch. "I'm a pirate. Always will be".

So, why isn't he pirating? What happened to him? And what about the pact with the witch? He made her curse all his enemies; that's honestly the most out-of-character thing he could've done.

Seriously, watch this movie, and then The Curse of the Black Pearl and tell me he sounds like he's the same character. Then there’s his death... was it necessary? And I don't mean if it was necessary to the plot (it wasn't), but the way he died, did it make sense? He takes the sword and sacrifices himself to kill Salazar, but WHY? Salazar was back a mortal. They could've brought him to surface and then shoot him. What was the point of his death, Disney? I will never forgive you.

I would've preferred if they never showed him again. He's alive and living his best life in Tortuga, if you ask me.

How does Carina Smyth exist?

Let's do the maths. Carina Smyth has approximately the same age as Henry Turner, who was born around nine moths after the end of At World's End. At the end of that movie, Barbossa once again stole the Black Pearl (he's iconic we stan a legend), so we have to assume it is during that time (between the At World's End and On Stranger Tides) that he conceives Carina. He stays with this woman during the whole pregnancy, bacause he says he was there when she died. So nine months, at least, right? Except; Jack makes it clear that he and Barbossa met Carina's mom, Margaret, together.

When, exactly, did this happen? It can't be between On Stranger Tides and Dead Men Tell No Tales, because Hector himself says only five years passed between the two, and Carina doesn't look like a five-year-old;

it can't be between At World's End and On Stranger Tides, because we know Jack and Barbossa weren't together, and Hector was too busy losing a leg and planning his revenge by working for the King of England; it can't be during At World's End, because Barbossa was too busy rescuing Jack and then slaying (literally and metaphorically) Beckett's men to save piracy; it can't be during Dead Man's Chest, because he was dead; it can't be during The Curse of the Black Pearl, nor during the ten years before it, because he was... he was a skeleton, I hardly believe he could reproduce, despite what’s written in some fanficions; it can't be before, of course, because Carina would be too old. The only chance, but it's a stretch, is that Hector and Jack met this Margaret Smyth years and years before, and that at a certain point (while he was still busy slaying, losing a leg or planning his revenge), for some reason he decided to come back to her and accidentally had a daughter. That would mean that Jack remembered Margaret Smyth's name DECADES after he met her.

The Post-Credit Scene: What?

WHY'S DAVY JONES BACK? The Trident technically broke all the curses of the sea. He is THE cursed man of the sea. AND HE'S DEAD. The only answer I was able to give me, is that the moment the Trident broke the curses, the curse that said if you stab his heart he dies was also broken, so he technically didn't die, but it makes even less sense, because if the curses just aren't real anymore, then a man shouldn't be able to... carve out his heart and put it in a chest, right? (Which by the way, makes Will Turner being alive senseless as well). Even if so, Davy should've come back as a human.

My conclusion is that this movie should not exist, and we, as a community, should pretend it was never made. Hector is alive. Bye.

Imago

[mikeepoo]

Judy, a purebred pointer, was the mascot of several ships in the Pacific, and was captured by the Japanese in 1942 and taken to a prison camp. There she met Aircraftsman Frank Williams, who shared his small portion of rice with her. Judy raised morale in the POW camp, and also barked when poisonous snakes, crocodiles or even tigers approached the prisoners. When the prisoners were shipped back to Singapore, she was smuggled out in a rice sack, never whimpering or betraying her presence to the guards. The next day, that ship was torpedoed. Williams pushed Judy out of a porthole in an attempt to save her life, even though there was a 15-foot drop to the sea. He made his own escape from the ship, but was then recaptured and sent to a new POW camp. He didn't know if Judy had survived, but soon he began hearing stories about a dog helping drowning men reach pieces of debris after the shipwreck. And when Williams arrived at the new camp, he said: "I couldn’t believe my eyes! As I walked through the gate, a scraggly dog hit me square between the shoulders and knocked me over. I’d never been so glad to see the old girl!" They spent a year together at that camp in Sumatra. "Judy saved my life in so many ways," said Williams. "But the greatest of all was giving me a reason to live. All I had to do was look into those weary, bloodshot eyes and ask myself: 'What would happen to her if I died?' I had to keep going." Once hostilities ceased, Judy was then smuggled aboard a troopship heading back to Liverpool. In England, she was awarded the Dickin Medal (the "Victoria Cross" for animals) in May 1946. Her citation reads: "For magnificent courage and endurance in Japanese prison camps, which helped to maintain morale among her fellow prisoners, and also for saving many lives through her intelligence and watchfulness". At the same time, Frank Williams was awarded the PDSA's White Cross of St. Giles for his devotion to Judy. Frank and Judy spent a year after the war visiting the relatives of English POWs who had not survived, and Frank said that Judy "always provided a comforting presence to the families." When Judy finally died at the age of 13, Frank spent two months building a granite and marble memorial in her memory, which included a plaque describing her life story.

Purloined in it’s entirety from GH85Carrera

[broadwaybalogna]

I was told I got the “nail on the head” with my refute to this take so I’ll share it on here too because I think people need to hear it.

The only way this person wouldn’t be in the wrong is if shipping Zutara was inherently racist, which it isn’t. Many people paint Zuko to be a “colonizer” since his nation had colonized parts of the earth kingdom (mind you, that’s the only place any form of fire nation colonization has taken place), but Zuko never colonized any place himself, he was too focused on capturing the avatar. So… not a colonizer. What people are doing is conflating Zuko with his nation even though in the years where it actually counted, he was exiled and had no voice in the nation.

This is essentially saying that anyone who was alive when America was a colony and got independence couldn’t date any English person simply because of the fact that they’re British. It doesn’t matter if said english person lived outside of England or lived in England during the war and maybe even one time agreed with them, it’d be morally wrong. But that’s up to the American to decide, not anyone else. If the English person joined America in the battle of Yorktown and single-handedly took down a solid quarter of the British troops, would that be enough for the American to date them? Trick question! It’s not up to you to decide. It’s up to whoever wants to date them.

Before I continue, I was told by woc specifically that this next point was accurate. I consulted them before posting on here.

I think this personally actually stems from a place of racism on the kat/angers side. They see Katara as this young, innocent woc who needs to be protected and can’t fend for herself. It’s a white savior kind of situation. Because she is a woc, she shouldn’t date Zuko but rather Aang since “he proved multiple times just how much he loved her”; “She’s too innocent for Zuko”; or they’ll steer in the completely opposite side of the racism spectrum and say that Katara “bullied” and “harassed” Zuko simply because she didn’t trust him after he betrayed her. They paint Katara to be this aggressive woc who can’t see reason and is rude to people to want to help her. Even if that’s not what they want to convey, it still comes from a place of deeply rooted internalized racism.

All of this to say it’s not racist to ship Zutara. It never was and it never will be. If you want to tag your shit takes with the wrong tags, fine, knock yourself out, but be aware that those actions will have consequences since your point is inherently wrong.

[1americanconservative]

Judy, a purebred pointer, was the mascot of several ships in the Pacific, and was captured by the Japanese in 1942 and taken to a prison camp. There she met Aircraftsman Frank Williams, who shared his small portion of rice with her.

Judy raised morale in the POW camp, and also barked when poisonous snakes, crocodiles or even tigers approached the prisoners. When the prisoners were shipped back to Singapore, she was smuggled out in a rice sack, never whimpering or betraying her presence to the guards.

The next day, that ship was torpedoed. Williams pushed Judy out of a porthole in an attempt to save her life, even though there was a 15-foot drop to the sea. He made his own escape from the ship, but was then recaptured and sent to a new POW camp.

He didn't know if Judy had survived, but soon he began hearing stories about a dog helping drowning men reach pieces of debris after the shipwreck. And when Williams arrived at the new camp, he said: "I couldn’t believe my eyes! As I walked through the gate, a scraggly dog hit me square between the shoulders and knocked me over. I’d never been so glad to see the old girl!"

They spent a year together at that camp in Sumatra. "Judy saved my life in so many ways," said Williams. "But the greatest of all was giving me a reason to live. All I had to do was look into those weary, bloodshot eyes and ask myself: 'What would happen to her if I died?' I had to keep going."

Once hostilities ceased, Judy was then smuggled aboard a troopship heading back to Liverpool. In England, she was awarded the Dickin Medal (the "Victoria Cross" for animals) in May 1946. Her citation reads: "For magnificent courage and endurance in Japanese prison camps, which helped to maintain morale among her fellow prisoners, and also for saving many lives through her intelligence and watchfulness".

At the same time, Frank Williams was awarded the PDSA's White Cross of St. Giles for his devotion to Judy. Frank and Judy spent a year after the war visiting the relatives of English POWs who had not survived, and Frank said that Judy "always provided a comforting presence to the families."

When Judy finally died at the age of 13, Frank spent two months building a granite and marble memorial in her memory, which included a plaque describing her life story.

Read more : https://coolfactz.com/rescue-dog-holds-new-owners-hand.../

[stupidnicknamehere]

On Senna and the grooming allegations.

Half Brazilian here too! Although I have never been to Brazil, I am from another Latin American country. I find that many foreigners don't understand the Latin American context, especially in the 70s/80s.

It took a lot of courage to touch on this controversial topic. Please read at your own risk.

Our countries, to this day, are considered emerging zones. Poverty, violence, crisis and political instability are something we have had to learn to live with.

Sadly, age was not taken into account as much as convenience and economic security. Families, especially wealthy ones, sought to ensure economic well-being rather than healthy and happy relationships. Marriage is an agreement to protect the spouses, ignoring whether they were mentally or physically prepared for what it meant. These are practices that still continue to this day in some parts, therefore, the perception of moral standards was extremely different; this is told to you by someone whose grandmother married a man in his twenties at 14.

Was that wrong? Of course it was, many things were wrong at that time.

When Ayrton Senna mentioned in that interview for Playboy that he lost his virginity at 13 when his cousin took him to an adult prostitute (and as this was already considered late for his culture) it doesn't seem to have raised many outraged voices, not even to this day, which honestly worries me. Adriane Yamin was already 18 (legal age of consent in many countries) when she had intimacy with Senna, as told by herself. Senna was only 13, THIRTEEN, not even the age of consent in Brazil, which is 14. I don't think you understand how much this shit marks you, how much it traumatizes and affects your life.

The truth is, Senna's family was extremely controlling, and they needed to approve (choose) their girlfriends. Ayrton's marriage to Lilian was basically an arranged marriage. The same happened with Adriane Yamin, whose relationship was cultivated and strictly controlled by both families. An engagement was arranged for 1989, but Senna broke it off. He did not want to get married.

Perhaps this is, at least in part, the reason why this man was so keen to have control in his life as a public figure and as a driver, he wanted everything to go his way. It does not seem that many things in his early life were his decision, but it seems that deciding to return to England after announcing his retirement as a racing driver in 1981 was the incentive he needed. Well, here I am already falling into the territory of speculation, but I think I have made my point.

Say whatever about Ayton Senna, hate him or love him, the man is no longer with us to defend himself or speak for himself. However, I believe that judging him under current social values, ignoring the cultural and historical context in which he lived is unfair. It is unfair to all the people of Brazil and to the rest of Latin America. We're striving to change for the better.

[olympeline]

Been thinking about why I found Arthur in the Dark so impressive and it made me realise something kinda significant. Something significant that I’m going to put under a read more because it revolves around a heavy subject. So I wouldn’t advise looking beyond the cut if you’re sensitive to that kind of thing.

Less important, but everything below is a big spoiler and, guys seriously. If you like USUK and can handle darker fiction - no pun intended - give AitD a try. Don’t spoil yourself here. Go try it first and then come back if you’re interested. Try it if you’re neutral on USUK. Or, heck, even if USUK is a ship you dislike but isn’t an outright NOTP. I’d still recommend checking out this comic. Arthur in the Dark is still worth a read in my opinion. It’s that good. But enough gushing. Read on for the meat of this post.

Ready? Here we go: Arthur in the Dark has one of the best depictions of rape I’ve ever seen in a piece of media. “Best” as in most skillfully crafted for narrative purposes. Honestly and truly. Not even kidding. Which is kind of amazing considering it’s a depiction that came from a fan comic based on a jokey, anime gag series. Why do I feel this way? A couple of reasons:

Firstly, the rape in AitD is frighteningly, tragically realistic. Something the majority of fictional rapes are not. We tend to think of rape as taking place in a dark alley in the inner city. Stereotyping up a scene of a bottom feeder, criminal man dragging a (young, attractive) woman away to violate her. They’re usually total strangers and it’s always violent. These kind of rapes do happen, but statistics tell us they’re the minority. The majority of rapes happen like the one in AitD did: between two people who know each other well. Friends, romantic couples, even family members, make up the bulk of rapists and their victims.

Most narratives prefer the less common type of rape. Usually because the creator doesn’t want to tell a story about rape. Not really. What they want is a gut-punch to add easy drama and darkness to their creation. The sliding scale of “irredeemable bad guy” roughly goes: murderer → cold blooded torturer → rapist → child rapist. Making a villain a rapist is one of the worst things he - because 99% of the time it’s a he - can be. Conversely having a character be raped gains them instant sympathy because people are moral and empathetic creatures at heart. Most creators know this and throw in a rape for the shorthand: “Look how evil our villain is!” Which often makes the rape and its aftermath feel artificial. In no small part because the rapist characters, by virtue of being written to be the worst of the worst, don’t come off as very human. They can’t be when their main purpose is to be loathed by the audience. I could go on because there’s tons more to unpack about rape in fiction, but you get the point.

The rape in AitD isn’t like that. America and England know and love each other. Their relationship is complicated (oh boy, is it ever!) but that part of it is never in doubt. They’re each other’s most treasured person and have been for centuries. They’re not a duo made up of a flat, hate bait, villain on a collision course with their victim. Who’s doomed to suffer and be pitied until the creator decides the audience has had enough of their trauma and shuts it away so the story can move on. America and England are two people living together, going through a period of immense change and stress, trying to manage as best they can, and sometimes getting it very wrong. From a narrative point of view, this makes what happens between them so much better and so much more upsetting at the same time.

Which brings me nicely to reason number two of why this particular rape works: the build up. Like everything else in AitD, America raping England is carefully planned out and set up. The chocolate bar scene, man. Brilliant, I have to say. Alarming, uncomfortable, and brilliant. The scene in the garden is not just sprung on the reader for a jarring “Oh no! Oh shit-!” moment. If your typical under written rape is a cheap jump scare, the rape in AitD is a carefully crafted slowburn dread. Early on we start to become aware we’re building to something bad. From the foreshadowing, the art, the atmosphere, etc. We just know a storm is coming. It’s done without America acting OOC too, which is very important. It’s how he can come back from what he did. Something that would be impossible if the author didn’t handle this setup well. America’s actions aren’t right, but they are understandable. That’s the crucial distinction. The psychology of the whole thing is so very well done. America was in love with England and had been for a long time. The guilt he felt tormented him because of what their relationship was in the past. Caught between his human side and his immortal one. The guilt helped keep America in check because he didn’t want England seeing the lustful way he’d begun to look at him. Then they started living together and England was suddenly vulnerable. Vulnerable in more ways than America was aware. Which is another vital detail of how the creator keeps America sympathetic, but more on that in a moment. England willingly went blind so he wouldn’t have to see when America - the man grown from the child he raised - looked at him with lust. The guilt America felt peaked, only to clash with the realisation that he could freely indulge in his fantasies. Indulge and push (again, chocolate bar scene) now the usual moral restraint - England seeing his desire - was removed.

Meanwhile, England himself felt that same guilt but his was also laced with panic and despair. He didn’t want to lose or strain his relationship with the most important person of his centuries long life. Pulled between human standards of morality and the very inhuman existence of nation-people. Incidentally the clash between their existence as humans, while also being something more than human, is brilliantly done in AitD. It’s something that’s hard to get right - especially involving such taboo topics - but Hotama nails it. USUK usually handwaves the implications around England raising America, but here it’s made part of the narrative. Part of the tragedy, part of the resolution. Good stuff. Anyway, England begged Arthur to take his sight away so he wouldn’t have to see the way America looked at him. Then banished Arthur back into the dark in an attempt to run away from his problems. But without Arthur - without his strength - England couldn’t stand up to America when he needed to. Not that America was aware of any of this because he never knew about Arthur. Which brings me to point three: nuance of blame.

“Blame” is a very loaded word in this context, so I’ll do my best to talk about this carefully. Rape in the media is almost always black and white. Absolutely evil, irredeemable rapist. Absolutely blameless, sympathetic victim. But real life isn’t always that simple. Obviously the rapist is always the perpetrator and the one most in the wrong. I need to make that very clear. But the scene in AitD illustrates that sometimes a victim could have done more to help themselves. Not always, but sometimes. This is a delicate subject so I hope you understand I’m not trying to victim blame. Just saying that rape, like all crimes, doesn’t always deal in absolutes. Unlike media, real life is often complicated and tragic. Good people can give in to temptation. Be weak, do bad things, or allow those bad things to happen. England told America to stop, but failed to follow it up when needed. When America pushed for more and used England’s own words to argue he’d already been given consent, that was when England needed to push back. Interpretation comes in here but, personally, I think if England had told America to stop when prompted, America would have. But England didn’t and he gave in instead. Something America took as a tacit “yes.” Again, not right, but understandable in how it could happen. Their power imbalance had grown extreme, stress and feelings were running high, they were struggling to connect as they used to, England’s prior cowardice and separation from Arthur prevented him from being strong when he needed to be, America was ignorant of his problem, and it all came together in a horrible, tragic mistake. All throughout, the rape continued to be brilliantly, awfully realistic. America not noticing - either genuinely or from denial - that England was not enjoying what was happening. England quickly becoming too distracted by the pain to do anything other than focus on enduring it. Then the aftermath where America didn’t realise what he’d just done due to coming down from a post-sex, post-stress euphoria. Awful, miserable, horrifying, tragic, perfectly crafted scene.

Which brings me to my final reason why this comic impressed me in its depiction of rape: where the story goes from there. Where it goes and how the narrative builds from the rape instead of trying to move on because the “shocking” part is over and now we’re in diminishing returns. Going back to my first point, too many stories see rape as something that happens in an isolated part of the narrative. It happened, it was shocking and brutal, now it’s done and we can move on because we didn’t plan to interweve the rape with the rest of the story. So we won’t give it the weight it needs. At best the victim might get a few scenes expressing their trauma later on - maybe a callback or two - but that’s it. It’s shallow. Plenty of fictional rapes could be replaced with a savage beating and nothing would change. In the worst cases you could remove the rape, not replace it with anything, then run the story with minimal problems. Not so in AitD. There, the rape isn’t just another semi-important plot point. It’s a crucial one which couldn’t be replaced with anything else. The whole first part of the story, the engine of the narrative, is built around America and England failing to deal with their changing relationship. A relationship between a pair of humans who also happen to be strange, immortal beings that ordinary humans can’t understand. Changing from platonic/familial to romantic over hundreds of years. With romance comes lust. Lust can be perfectly healthy just like any other bodily appetite. In this case it became twisted by circumstance, and the only “suitable” narrative payoff was rape. Nothing else would have had the necessary impact.

Then there’s how the rape compares to the final sex scene in some classic narrative juxtaposition. The final sex scene which happens to be the only one in the comic that’s fully consensual on both sides. The one that goes beyond sex and becomes real, honest to goodness lovemaking. It’s a perfect contrast. The rape scene had all the trappings of a classic romance. Right down to it being their first time and taking place in a rose garden. But it’s tragic, horrifying, and deeply unsexy. Then, near the end of their story, America and Arthur get lost on their road trip and have sex in their car. Their crappy, cramped car, where they’re surrounded by ordinary luggage, both of them sweaty and a little cranky with each other after a long day. It’s awkward, ordinary, imperfect and gorgeous. If we didn’t have the rape before to show us the nadir of this relationship, the healing and the dawn that came after wouldn’t be half so meaningful. A very strange thing to say without context, but it was a perfectly done rape that gave the audience the payoff of perfectly done lovemaking. It’s no small feat to get a reader to cheer for a romantic resolution after all of the above. Kind of in awe of Hotama’s skills, I tell you what.

Up to this point and I don’t know what else there is to say other than, geez. This comic, man. Blew me away. I’m so happy I rediscovered my interest in Hetalia if for no other reason than I got to read Arthur in the Dark. I’m a bit of a bookworm in my spare time and I’ve read quite a lot of classic literature over the years. Classic literature with rape scenes not crafted half so well as AitD did. Really think about that. An amateur fan comic based on a jokey gag series about national personifications being silly with each other. Did better at something than the books we hold up as the best of the best. Can’t really say anything else than that is genuinely bloody amazing

[orphetoon]

Different person, I desire info on the ace attorney au

HI SORRY THIS IS LIKE A MONTH OLD AT THIS POINT

idk if i'll ever do more art bc when will i ever be interested in jjba AND aa at the same time again but just for you. the rough timeline of the entire au

PART 1: PHANTOM ATTORNEY

basically phantom blood but without vampires. jonathan is a defense attorney, the assistant switches between erina and speedwagon; first case is probably defending speedwagon. zeppeli isn't a hamon user here, but rather a spirit medium who gives jonathan some training. jonathan can't actually talk to ghosts, his ability is probably more similar to apollo's; maybe he can sense someones spirit 'wavering', aka when they're unsure.

main antagonist is dio, who is the opposing attorney. he's done a lot of shit he's never gotten caught for, but jonathan manages to reveal his crimes in the final case. dio gets sentenced to death, rip king.

PART 2: uh. battle tendency doesn't happen here.

idk how long it would've taken someone to get executed back in ye olde england times but for this au its long enough for jonathan to have at least two kids. one of these is george ii (joseph's dad), the other will create a branch family (aka giornos gotta exist somehow)

shortly after dio's execution, he forms as a vengeful spirit and is able to forcibly possess jonathan and kill him. dio's a bitch tho and continues to possess joestars whenever possible, but due to uh. reasons? he's not able to kill the next generation of joestars until they have had their own kids. deciding that going after the whole lineage would be tiring, dio just decides to focus on joseph and his descendants.

PART 3: jotaro fucks up

joseph manages to spirit train well enough that dio can't possess him or whatever, and lives a long life. holly manages to avoid him as well. jotaro was on the track to be strong enough to shut dio out, but decided to be an idiot 17 year old and try to banish dio for good. by some means both he and dio fail at their goals, and jotaro is stuck with dio...not really possessing him, but giving running commentary 24/7. joots tries to live with it for awhile, but the thought that dio could eventually succeed in possessing him and hurting those around him (aka baby jolyne) causes him to distance himself from everyone.

PART 4: AND NOW FOR SOMETHING COMPLETELY DIFFERENT

apologies to josuke for stealing his part number.

anyway. almost completely unrelated to all that, pannacotta fugo is a prodigy prosecuting attorney who has one of the highest success rates in the country. he has a found family sort of thing with the rest of bucci's gang, who he's all advised on legal matters at some point. they (sans fugo) run a restaurant; this isn't important at all to the au, i just like the idea. anyway, fugo's life is pretty good, until.

giorno fucking giovanna.

he arrives out of nowhere and quickly becomes the best defense in the country, even tho he's younger than fugo (both of them are too young to be attorneys, but this is aa). doesn't matter if his client is clearly guilty, giorno can get them off the hook (he only takes clients he believes should be seen as innocent, but giorno has his own interesting moral system). these two idiots battle it out in the courtroom, until bucciarati is framed for a murder.

unable to defend him, fugo turns to the only person he can, giorno. giorno completely clears bucci's name, unraveling the truth of the case - aka taking down diavolo, who's organized most of the crimes in this 'game'. since trish is the assistant for this game, she becomes kinda the main character during the final case lol. either way diavolo goes to jail, and both gio and trish are sort of folded into the bucci gang.

PART 5: GHOSTS ARE REAL

the second 'game' would be giorno with jolyne as an assistant; he clears her from the vehicular manslaughter and both of them resolve to solve the conspiracy behind it (it's pucci. pucci's behind it). josuke is here as a side character, being a police detective

the final case involves revealing pucci's crimes and jolyne finding a way to free her father from dio's spirit. no universe reset here lads :)

50/50 onto whether giorno finds out he's actually related to the joestars or not. he still bills them either way

PART 6: feedback investigations

fugo gets his own games but idk a whole lot about the investigations games so uh! lets just say its normal aa shenanigans with the purple haze feedback characters in there as well

[eretzyisrael]

by Terry Glavin

For Sarah Rugheimer, a professor of astronomy at York University in Toronto, the first sign of the virulent strain of antisemitism now embedded in Justin Trudeau’s Canada appeared on a lamppost.

It was a few weeks after the Hamas massacre of last October 7. Rugheimer, 41, was walking in a park near her home in the city’s quiet Cedarvale neighborhood when she saw a poster of the Israeli hostage Elad Katzir, a 47-year-old farmer from Kibbutz Nir Oz, covered with swastikas.

In the days that followed, as the war raged in Gaza, swastikas turned up all over Cedarvale. They also started appearing on the York campus, where Rugheimer serves as the Allan I. Carswell Chair for the Public Understanding of Astronomy. As fall turned to winter, a swastika showed up in the snow outside the campus building where she works.

An astrophysicist with a particular interest in the origins of life on Earth and the possibility of life on other planets, Rugheimer tended to confine her worldly concerns to scientific matters. So the swastikas came as a shock. But worse was to come.

She grew up in Montana, and her academic career took her around the world—from a PhD in astronomy and astrophysics at Harvard University to Scotland, England, and now Canada. But until taking up her post at York University two years ago, Rugheimer said she’d never encountered any overt antisemitism. Nor had she given much thought to her identity as a Zionist: Like the vast majority of Jews around the world, Rugheimer believes in Israel’s right to exist.

A broken window at the Kehillat Shaarei Torah synagogue in Toronto on May 17, 2024. It was vandalized again last week. (via David Jacobs/X)

Jew-hatred was a phenomenon of the fringes, she reckoned. “It wasn’t on my radar,” she told me. Now, it’s everywhere. “Every week there is a major incident in Canada, and multiple minor ones every day in my neighborhood.”

It was what was happening inside her university that disturbed her the most.

York’s student unions issued a declaration just after the attack calling the barbarism of October 7 a “justified and necessary” act of resistance against settler colonialism, genocide, and apartheid. The student groups found widespread support among York’s professors—some of whom Rugheimer considered friends.

A politics department faculty committee demanded the university enforce a definition of “anti-Palestinian racism” that encompassed any expression of sympathy for the right of Israelis to exist within their own state: “Zionism is a settler colonial project and ethno-religious ideology in service of a system of Western imperialism that upholds global white supremacy.”

She was shocked by the declarations, and the defaced posters, and the swastikas. But for Rugheimer there was something worse. “The denial is what’s painful,” Rugheimer said. The denial of the rapes and savagery of October 7, 2023. The denial of the pervasive antisemitism in “anti-Zionist” polemics. The denial of Jewish history itself. “Reasonable people can disagree about what to do in an intractable conflict, but the denying of what should be uncontroversial facts makes it impossible to have hope.”

This sort of despair has become a feature of everyday life for Jews across Canada who are experiencing open hatred—and yet are living under a government that appears either blind to it, paralyzed by it, or indifferent to it. Law enforcement in Canada is not blind. Quite the opposite. Officers want to do their jobs. What they say is that they lack the moral support from the political class to enforce the law. And that they cannot keep up with the volume of hate crimes—crimes that arise from a widespread ideology that has normalized the idea that “Zionists” anywhere are a fair target for attack.

Police at Bais Chaya Mushka elementary school in Toronto on May 25, 2024 after two people fired shots outside. (Andrew Francis Wallace via Getty Images)

Perhaps nothing captured Canada’s dark new reality better than a split-screen story from late last month.

On November 22 in Montreal, at the 70th annual session of the NATO parliamentary assembly, rioters organized by the organizations Divest for Palestine and the Convergence of Anti-Capitalist Struggles wreaked havoc on the city. They ignited smoke bombs, threw metal barriers into the street, and smashed windows of businesses and the convention center where the NATO delegates were meeting. The rioters torched cars. They also burned an effigy of Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

While Montreal burned, Trudeau was dancing and handing out friendship bracelets at a Taylor Swift concert in Toronto. It took 24 hours for him to weigh in with a single tweet.

‘It Was Like a Dam Burst’

The impression that the violence unfolding around them is somehow invisible to the state responsible for their protection has overwhelmed not only relative newcomers to Canada like Rugheimer, but also Jews who have lived in Canada for decades. People like Robert Krell, 84, the former director of postgraduate education in the Department of Psychiatry at the University of British Columbia.

A pioneer of Holocaust education in Canada and a specialist in survivor trauma, Krell immigrated to Canada at the age of 11, after having been hidden by a Catholic family during the Nazi occupation of Holland. Krell was not as shocked by the unspeakable barbarism of the Hamas massacre of October 7 last year as by the jubilation the atrocities elicited from within the “progressive” milieu across Canada—and by the total silence from the “social justice” scene.

Police respond to a dispute between an Israel supporter and pro-Palestinian supporters in Toronto on June 9, 2024. (Nick Lachance via Getty Images)

On Sunday, October 8, activists affiliated with the terrorist-designated Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine were already shouting their happiness into megaphones to a crowd at the steps of the Vancouver Art Gallery, only a few minutes’ drive from Krell’s home. “We are calling on those in so-called Vancouver to uplift and honor the resistance,” they said. “Show solidarity and celebrate the steps towards liberation!”

Scenes like these repeated themselves in cities across Canada—all the way to St. John’s, Newfoundland.

[ierotits]

Tell us more about why you want to beat up Charles Dickens please?

ABSOLUTELY

it all boils down to the Franklin Expedition, and the way he treated Inuit testimony.

long story short if you are unaware: 1845 2 ships HMS Terror and HMS Erebus went into the arctic to search for the northwest passage, among other things, commanded by Sir John Franklin. both ships promptly disappeared, never to be seen by white people again. many expeditions were sent to search for them, never with any luck. the ships really had just disappeared.

UNTIL

in 1854 a man named John Rae was leading one of these overland expeditions to try find the (by now long dead) Franklin Expedition. along the way he met with and spoke with groups of Inuit living and hunting in the area. they told him of a group of white men they had seen a few years back, traveling in a group of about 45. they spoke of the men starving to death, slowly dying off. they also (most importantly) they spoke of a camp site where they had later found the bodies of about 30 men the next spring, with evidence they had cannibalized each other, bones with cut marks, in cooking pots, etc.

John Rae correctly took this as testimony that the members of the Franklin Expedition had all starved to death, and the last living men had resorted to eating each other, a very normal solution in those sorts of situations. he returned to England and shared this news with the admiralty, who tried to keep the information secret but it ended up in the press. this, of course, caused a huge scandal. the men had been lauded as heroes in the press, so the idea that they had resorted to eating each other really put a dampener on the idea.

there was a lot of upcry about it, not least from Lady Jane Franklin, Sir John Franklin's wife who had been insistent that they could still be alive and be saved. she accused John Rae and the Inuit who had shared the testimony of lying.

Lady Jane had a very significant friend's ear at this time. our darling Charles Dickens. he then wrote a section in his popular magazine decrying John Rae's testimony, saying it was all slander made up by the "wild savages" and John Rae was naive to believe it at all. Dickens said that Englishmen were too civilized and would never resort to cannibalism, and only the lowest most savage races of people cold ever consider it.

Charles Dickens, all in all, was one of the main factors in 1. John Rae being ridiculed and not getting any credit for his discoveries until after his death and 2. encouraging the public to think of native people's as savages, not believing any of their other valuable testimony, and paving the way for other ridiculous theories such as "actually the Inuit people killed them all and ate them, then blamed it on our wonderful morally pure white sailors".

the information provided to Rae by the Inuit has been proven time and time again since then, and there is no denying that the last of the expedition resorted to eating each other. the Inuit testimony has typically been relatively reliable with some inconsistency as time went on, and it was pure racism that motivated Charles Dickens in his defense of the men of the expedition.

if you're interested in any of this aside from my brain spew from memory, for further reading on the Inuit testimony and a full analysis of every piece of testimony I recommend "Unraveling the Franklin Mystery: Inuit Testimony" by David C Woodman. for more info on John Rae's expeditions and discoveries (and how much Lady Jane Franklin sucked so so bad) I recommend "After the Lost Franklin Expedition: Lady Jane Franklin and John Rae" by Peter Baxter.

and if you've got other recommendations or extra reasons to hate Charles Dickens (other than his books just sucking but that might be personal opinion) please let me know!!! most of my reading is just based on whats available at the library lmao.

[dross-the-fish]

What were the gangs childhoods like? (Well… minus Adam… cuz yknow)

Watson-pretty normal, he had parents and an older brother, all of which were deceased by the time he met Sherlock upon his return to England from the battlefield. Selma Morris- was very close to her mother and her Abuela. Her father and brothers did the bulk of the monster hunting when she was young and she didn't join them until two of her brothers were killed. Most of Uncle Quincey Morris's fortune was divided between his living relatives so she was comfortable enough though not exceptionally wealthy as much of the money went to supplies and training. Her upbringing was very strict and her mother was a devout catholic which lead to frequent tension in Selma's teen and young adult years. Overall though she loves and misses her family and grieves that she can't return to them. Quincey Harker- had a happy childhood with is parents and siblings. His parents doted on him and instilled in him a strong sense of morality and the importance of good manners so he is a polite young man and always eager to be helpful. Lawrence Talbot- Had an excellent childhood. He traveled a lot with is parents to America and was adored by his mother's family in Boston. As an only child he did end up a little spoiled but very good natured and his parents were kind people. He often thinks of his childhood and misses them. Henry Jekyll- His father came into wealth when Henry was young and the family was moved from Scotland to England when his father was made partner of a profitable shipping business. The sudden change in social class and the expectation to blend in with upper-class English society was hard on Henry and his father was often very harsh with him telling him that the rest of the upper class wanted him to fail and were looking for any reason to ridicule them so no mistakes could be tolerated. As he grew up he struggled with the burden of expectation that came with being new money in a world of old money and fading aristocrats. It wasn't enough to have wealth if he didn't have the breeding so he needed a good reputation and a respectable career. Erik- Rejected by his own mother from an early age he left home very young and traveled. As a teenager he found his way to Persia and made a name for himself there as an assassin. The closet thing he had to a family was the Daroga, a kind man who often gave him a place to stay, comfort and food and who has shaped Erik more than he'd care to admit. Though not ethnically Persian Erik has adopted a lot of the culture into his daily life and while not religious he prefers to eat and prepare Halal food just in case the Daroga wants to eat with him. Theo- Raised by an Irish mother and grandmother and English father she grew up in poverty but wasn't unhappy in her early childhood. Her grandmother often told her stories about the fairfolk and what to do if she were to meet a member of The Gentry. Theo is easily the most superstitious of the crew and never stopped believing in fairies, even sometimes leaving out a little milk as an offering. When it was proven in the AU that they did exist she shelled out a few "I told you so!"s to some of the more skeptical crew members. Theo's childhood was short lived, when she was 9 her father was arrested and sent to prison for petty theft where he died. She lived in a London poorhouse for a time but the conditions proved to harsh for her mother and grandmother, both of whom died a year later. She was sent to an orphanage and then at twelve she started work in a factory. Things improved when she auditioned at 14 to play a role with a theater troupe and once she became a proper actress she never looked back.

[existential-life-crisis]

☆ Get to know me :) (updated)☆

Hi! A bit of info to start with: I'm a minor; a lesbian; and a cis girl (she/her).

Ethnicity and language

I live in England and currently only speak English fluently however I am currently studying both French and German! (German is definitely my favourite of the 2)

Subjects and Interests

My favourite subjects are Maths and Classical Civilisation but I enjoy most subjects. (Lessons can still suck tho bc dam some teachers can be boring)

I enjoy drawing, playing games, reading (books and fics), listening to music and watching youtube.

Video games

I have a few favourite games at the minute:

• Hades

• Horizon: Zero Dawn and Forbidden West

• Genshin Impact

Finished games I still love:

• Astro Bot (its a vr game abt a little robot)

• Spiderman PS4

• Spiderman PS5 Miles Morales

• Portal 1 and 2 ♡♡♡

I am also 100% a completionist so if I finish a game I probably have 100% on it.

Reading

My fav books are everything Rick Riordan but i plan to read some other stuff as well soon.

My fav characters from the main series are Nico, Leo, Frank and Lester/Apollo but I do love pretty much all of the main cast. I haven't read Magnus Chase or Kane Chronicles since I was a kid so I'm gonna reread those before deciding favourites but I think they were Alex and Carter. Also, in love with all of the side characters even if they are 90% hc.

My fav canon ships/friendships are

• solangelo (Will x Nico)

• percabeth (Percy x Annabeth)

• frazel (Frank x Hazel) (But I do hc that either Frank was younger or Hazel was older bc the age gap was a bit strange in canon, being 13 and 16. Its a bit inconsistent , as all ages are in PJO, but if time works normally Hazel should be 14 and therefore definitely older than Nico too but thats a topic for another time)

• shelper (or shipper as I like to call them) (Shel x Piper)

• Lost trio (platonic)

• PJO trio (platonic) (Grover my baby, why must they always forget you)

• Lester and Meg (I dont think i have to say this but platonic) (please say I don't have to say that. No one ships that right)

• Reyna and Thalia (platonic) (omg let aroace characters exist in peace) (no hate if u ship it but my gods)

Fanon ships/friendships

• Valgrace (Leo x Jason) (but aroace Leo is still amazing)

• Pollen (Apollo x Darren) (Is this entirely about Dear Reader by wrongcaitlyn? Yes. Do I care? Nope. Am I insanly invested in their relationship? Oh absolutely.)

• Nico and Leo (platonic) (This had no reason to not be canon and had every reason to be and I will never forgive Rick for this until he fixes it)

• Frank and Leo (platonic) (I swear every book they would fix their relationship and then as soonas the next one starts they would hate each other again)

• Nico and evey side character ever (platonic) (especially year round campers) (bc hes genuinely just a nice guy)

• Will and Clarrise (platonic) (this is kinda canon but all we really know is that he can calm her down)

Feel free to ask for fic recs if u want them.

Music

My fav music artist is Grandson. (He writes rock/alternative/indie/rap (?) music often about political/social/personal issues.)

But I listen to tons of other kinds of music too from metal to pop to instrumentals by a ton of different artists:

• Måneskin (italian rock band)

• Polyphia (instumental, primarily guitar, math rock)

• Chappell Roan (yk who that is)

• Chase Atlantic (u have probably heard at least 1 of their songs, pop/alternative/indie/r&b)

• Mother Mother (yk who that is right?)

• Eminem (right?)

• MSI (punk/alternative/rock)

• Penelope Scott (indie)

• Rio Romeo (indie)

And a whole lot more

I also play guitar (acoustic and electic).

TV

EPIC THE MUSICAL MY LOVE ♡♡

Loveeee Spiderman: Into and Across the spider verse.

My fav characters are Miles, Hobie, Pavitr, Spidernoir and Gwen but I love all of them.

Shows:

• Avatar the Last Airbender

• The Legend of Korra

• Batman: the animated series

• Voltron :)

Beliefs

Im an atheist but I support people of all religions. I support Palestine. I am left liberal (again I'm British so keep that in mind, I know nothing abt US politics besides the basic/well known stuff). I believe in equal rights for all groups and am open to other ideas and perspectives.

If you cant respect that then please get of my page. You don't have to agree with me but you do have to respect me and others.

Thats all for now.

Byeee ♡♡♡

[hold-fast-to-hope]

There is one scene from the book Jonathan Strange & Mr Norrell (henceforth JS&MN) which lives rent-free in my mind, absolutely devastated me, and singlehandedly reshaped my thoughts of what I want from life, and I have never heard anyone talk about it. Therefore, I am going to do so. (Major spoilers follow.)

Throughout the book, the human characters grapple with their relationship to the transcendent. At first, in a Napoleonic Wars setting where God is frequently mentioned and characters even debate heresies like whether magically resurrected persons belong to God or to the magicians who raise them, it seems as though God would be the natural place for such characters to look for the something-more they so evidently wish to find. But the God of JS&MN is emphatically a deist's God, not reachable by human concerns. This is best shown in a narrative aside where a Church of England character feels envy for a Catholic character who can call on the saints, as the CofE character can only say "Dear me!" and "Upon my word!" and "Lord bless me!" and this is not consoling her in any way. This simultaneously hurts both Protestants (portrayed as having no ability to pray sincerely) and Catholics (portrayed as having their consolations in saints somehow opposed to consolations in God). All this is meant for satire, it is true, but the content of the satire is telling, especially in a society where religion seems to have been turned primarily to advising public morals, providing garbled parts of spells, and engaging in scholarly debates. There is no relationship with God to be had here.

On the surface of it, our characters are left merely on the natural plane, on the scales between rationality without power (humans) and power without reason (fairies). But they are not content to be there. Both the Enlightenment skepticism of Mr Norrell and the Romantic self-centeredness of the gentleman with thistledown hair prove hollow. The longing for God will out, and in JS&MN, desire for the transcendent finds its home in the person of the Raven King.

The Raven King is a mysterious figure, somewhere between the human and the fairy, certainly not (on the face of it) a divine person; yet characters feel about him an almost religious fervor. Mr Norrell's frantic denial of the Raven King, rooted as it is in his own disappointment with the Raven King's failure to show up for him in the way he wanted, echoes many stories of people walking away from faith. Jonathan Strange's longing to be approved of by a person greater in his very being than himself is similarly reminiscent of many a spiritual seeker in this world. And John Childermass? He is the Raven King's declared servant and true believer. As he says in response to Lascelles's mockery of his faith in the Raven King,

"Nothing would please me better than that my King should come home. It is what I have wished for all my life."

This brings us to the scene of which I spoke. The Raven King has, in fact, returned. He appears to his servant, Childermass, on a lonely moor, where they are currently the only two people conscious (arguably, the only two alive). Childermass has been cast out of Mr Norrell's service and wounded in the process, and he is struggling with the dead body on which the Raven King's writing is preserved. The Raven King identifies Childermass as his servant, heals his wound, raises the body from apparent death, and gives Childermass a calling and a purpose in interpreting his writing. All throughout this, Childermass tries to prevent the Raven King from stealing the body; he finds the King familiar, but never sees him for what he is. Then the King vanishes.

From a certain perspective, Childermass now has everything he could want. His King has heaped every benefit on him — all except for the gift of knowing the Raven King. Childermass has his heart's desire; the King has returned — but he is never allowed to know it. I will be honest: I do not know if that scene is intended as the tragedy for which I took it. But I do know that when I reached the end of that scene, and Childermass failed to recognize the King for whom he had longed, and the King did not reveal himself, I felt as though something in me shattered. I carried the grief for days. How could the King treat Childermass "as a parent who cleans something from a child's face," and yet make no step toward letting himself be known?

As though to add insult to injury, the Raven King does appear to Strange and Norrell in such a way that they can consciously appreciate it (especially Strange, though Norrell is informed by Strange of what went on). He seems to do this precisely so that, having seen him, Strange and Norrell will decide not to pursue him further. Both these magicians are the sort who are abashed at realizing their own smallness; in the awe of something truly beyond them, they feel no corresponding draw toward it. I think Childermass (always a lower-to-the-ground person than the gentleman magicians) would not have been thus deterred; and it is perhaps for this reason that Childermass does not get to see. The Raven King does not want to risk the true pursuit of being known.

A friend of mine has pointed out that the King is not without mercy towards his subjects. He appears and gives good gifts, as he does to Childermass; he wants to receive their taxes and honor. But he does not give of himself. My friend thinks perhaps it is simply that the time is not yet come, that one day he will let himself be known. Perhaps so. Perhaps it is not an unresolvable tragedy; but it has a jagged edge, all the same.

In looking at Childermass's fate, I found my own desires suddenly clarified. I spend a lot of time praying for the sorts of things that Childermass receives — for healing, or a calling, or direction, or being physically provided for, or being respected. But what would any of these things be to me, if I received them without knowing my King and recognizing his face? Yes, he comes whether I do this or not, and it is of course of far more importance that he knows me than that I know him. And knowing him is terrifying, I do not deny — but I would rather be terrified and without all the benefits I usually ask for, while knowing that I see his face. I can see now that it is a tragedy to be content with all the blessings God gives, while failing to see him.

[florenceyaxley]

BASIC INFORMATION

FULL NAME: Florence Emilia Yaxley MEANING: Flowering, Excel, Cuckoo wood REASONING: Her mother just thought they were pretty names that sounded important. NICKNAME(S): Flo, Florrie, She loves any and all nicknames given to her PREFERRED NAME(S): Any BIRTH DATE: 24th of May AGE: 26 ZODIAC: Gemini GENDER:  Cis female PRONOUNS: She/Her ROMANTIC ORIENTATION:  Bi SEXUAL ORIENTATION: Bi NATIONALITY: English ETHNICITY:  Caucasian CURRENT LOCATION: London LIVING CONDITIONS: With the help of her brother she just about convinced her parents to let her move out into her own flat

BACKGROUND

BIRTH PLACE: England HOMETOWN:  London SOCIAL CLASS: Upper class EDUCATION LEVEL: Completed her NEWTS BLOOD STATUS: Pureblood FATHER: Benjamin Yaxley MOTHER: Evelyn Yaxley SIBLING(S): Her brother, Corban BIRTH ORDER: Second born, youngest CHILDREN: None PET(S): She has a papillon dog called Millie OTHER IMPORTANT RELATIVES: N/A PREVIOUS RELATIONSHIPS: TBD ARRESTS?: None PRISON TIME?: None

OCCUPATION & INCOME

PRIMARY SOURCE OF INCOME: Family money CONTENT WITH THEIR JOB (OR LACK THERE OF)?: Most of the time yeah, sometimes she would like more of a real job PAST JOB(S): None SPENDING HABITS: Spends so much money, buys something pretty much everyday MOST VALUABLE POSSESSION: A very fancy set of oil paints she bought on holidays

SKILLS & ABILITIES

LANGUAGE(S) SPOKEN: English, French, and a tiny bit of Italian a boy taught her on holiday once DRIVE? No JUMP-STAR A CAR?: Nope CHANGE A FLAT TIRE?:No RIDE A BICYCLE?: Yes SWIM?: Yes PLAY AN INSTRUMENT?: Yes, badly PLAY CHESS?: Yes BRAID HAIR?: Yes TIE A TIE?: Yes, purely because she thinks it would be sexy to do it for a man PICK A LOCK?: No

PHYSICAL APPEARANCE & CHARACTERISTICS

FACE CLAIM: Abigail Cowen EYE COLOUR: Blue HAIR COLOUR: Red hair HAIR TYPE/STYLE: Naturally pretty wavy/big curls. But she always always styles it, either wavy or perfectly straight. GLASSES/CONTACTS?:  Nope DOMINANT HAND: Left handed HEIGHT: 5′6′’ WEIGHT: Eh I don’t think she even knows her own weight BUILD: Slim and toned. Not particularly muscular, but works out a bit to stay toned and fit. EXERCISE HABITS: Works out a couple of times a week, does yoga every morning, loves to hike on the weekends. TATTOOS: None PIERCINGS: Her ears pierced a couple of times. MARKS/SCARS: Lots of freckles all over her body. NOTABLE FEATURES: Her red hair. USUAL EXPRESSION: A bright smile or a flirty one CLOTHING STYLE: Very ‘instagramable’, mostly wears dresses or skirts - even in winter, will wear trousers more often than jeans and never ever ever is seen in tracksuits outside of her bedroom. Always wear heels unless she’s exercising.  JEWELLERY: It switches up depending on her outfit ALLERGIES: Allergic to shellfish DIET: Eats pretty healthily, but mostly indulges on sweet things because she has a huge sweet tooth PHYSICAL AILMENTS: None

PSYCHOLOGY

MORAL ALIGNMENT: True Neutral TEMPERAMENT: Sanguine PRIMARY INTELLIGENCE TYPE: Bodily-Kinesthetic Intelligence APPROXIMATE IQ: 115 MENTAL CONDITIONS/DISORDERS: None SOCIABILITY: Highly sociable PHOBIA(S): None ADDICTION(S): None DRUG USE: Has experimented with a few but doesn’t do any regularly ALCOHOL USE: Drinks at least one day a week because she usually goes out with her friends and the weekends and does so then PRONE TO VIOLENCE?: Not at all

MANNERISMS

SPEECH STYLE: Casual, flirty, cheerful. QUIRKS: Tilting her head to the side when she teases people or is really listening to what they’re saying. HOBBIES: Drawing and painting, hiking, watching shitty muggle romcoms. HABITS: Touching other people when she gets excited. NERVOUS TICKS: Pulling her sleeves down over her hands, biting the insides of her cheeks. DRIVES/MOTIVATIONS: Happiness. POSITIVE TRAITS: Loving, generous, artistic. NEGATIVE TRAITS: Bitchy, extremely sentimental, clingy. SENSE OF HUMOR: Witty. DO THEY CURSE OFTEN?: Occasionally. CATCHPHRASE(S): I’m always right.

FAVORITES

ACTIVITY: Hanging out with her favourite people ANIMAL: Dogs BEVERAGE: Pink lemonade COLOUR: Pink DESIGNER: Currently Teuta Matoshi FOOD: Cake FLOWER: Pink orchids. GEM: Rose quarts. HOLIDAY:  Christmas. MODE OF TRANSPORTATION: Apparition. MOVIE: How to Lose a Guy in 10 Days. MUSICAL ARTIST: Too many to pick just one. SCENERY: Tropical, beaches, that sort of thing. SCENT: Sweet, floral perfume. SPORT: lmao none. SPORTS TEAM: Whatever team someone she knows is on at the time. WEATHER: Sun. VACATION DESTINATION: Croatia.

ATTITUDES

GREATEST DREAM: To be loved completely. GREATEST FEAR: Losing Corban in some way. MOST AT EASE WHEN: With her friends. (also im including Corban in all the talk of friends) LEAST AT EASE WHEN: Someone she’s not already close with is trying to see past her outward persona.

[redhead-reporter]

— character info sheet.

name: mary jane "mj" watson parker

name meaning: mary (hebrew: "drop of the sea", beloved) jane (hebrew: "god is gracious"), watson (english/scottish: "son of watt", "powerful ruler")

alias/es: mj, red, and every conceivable pet name in the english language

ethnicity: american, british isles heritage (ireland, scotland, england, etc)

one picture you like best of your chara:

three h/cs you never told anyone:

mj has a multi-step SKIN CARE ROUTINE that she follows every single morning and night. doesn't matter if she's crawling into bed drunk at 2 AM or waking up at the ass crack of dawn, she does it. if you're dating her? say goodbye to your bathroom counter space.

mj sat at aunt may's bedside the ENTIRE time that peter was out trying to stop otto and get the devil's breath cure. she genuinely couldn't imagine herself anywhere else and knew peter would WANT someone who loved her to stay with her. they talked about everything and nothing, and before she died may reiterated how much she HOPED that mj and peter would work things out. (and yes, she mentioned the 'beautiful babies' thing to mj, who AGREED)

mj has thrown out multiple items of peter's clothing once they got unforgivably ratty and then pretended she didn't know what happened to them. of course she always bought him REPLACEMENTS, but if new york's greatest hero ever suspected her of the crimes? he's never been able to PROVE it.

three things your character likes doing in their free time: 

TRASHY. REALITY. TV - specifically dating shows like love is blind, 90 day fiancé (and all of its variants), and the ultimatum. she finds them hilarious, and they're frankly a fascinating look into human PSYCHOLOGY. but they also serve a selfish secondary purpose of making her feel really SMUG about her own relationship and how much healthier/better it is than anything on the shows, even on their worst days.

mj is a new yorker who LOVES her city - if she's got spare time she likes to wander in neighborhoods she doesn't know that well, find cool local restaurants or little street fairs to get lost in. anything to feel like she's part of the city's HEARTBEAT

mj still has a deep love for the THEATER, even if she chose a different career path for herself. whenever there's enough time and spare cash laying around (which is rare) she likes to go see shows. on or off broadway, doesn't matter - she just likes BEING there when the lights go down and the magic begins

six people your character likes / loves:

peter parker - soulmate is too weak a word ❤️ peter is her everything

great aunt anna - mj credits her with saving her life as a child

harry osborn - best friend, voice of reason, shoulder she cries on

miles morales - surrogate little brother, "team" member, a godsend

aunt may - family, inspirational figure, beloved and missed every day

silver sable - bestie (terrifying), badass, gifted her (and by that i mean she realized she was never getting it back) the TASER

two things your character regrets:

breaking up with peter instead of TALKING things through - though they both grew immensely in their time apart and learned valuable lessons from it, she can't get over how they wasted so much PRECIOUS time together that they'll never get back.

not paying better attention to her best friend when he NEEDED her most - harry can be a good liar when he wants to be (hi have you met his dad?), but mj's convinced she WOULD'VE noticed his accelerating illness if she'd stopped being so self-centered and taken the time to really clock his odd behavior before he left for "europe". if he hadn't returned? she NEVER would've forgiven herself.

one phobia your character has:

peter's death. that's it, that's the FEAR. it claws at her every single day, so much so that she can't even watch live news footage of his fights. people treat it like a SPORTING EVENT, cheering like a real person's life isn't literally on the line, and it makes her sick.

[my-deer-history]

Francis Kinloch in Müller's letters to his family

These extracts are from Johannes von Müller: Sämmtliche Werke, volume 7 (1810).

My translations here, original German and French transcriptions below the cut. I have added some paragraph breaks for legibility.

From the introductory Lebensgeschichte, von ihm selbst beschrieben (Biography, as described by himself)

Meanwhile, at the home of Charles Bonnet, for whom and whose wife he [Müller] developed the tender attachment of a son and who was treated as such by them, he met a young man from South Carolina, Francis Kinloch. He had an extraordinary thirst for knowledge, a great fire, many fine qualities and very pleasant morals. 

They determined a plan to live together; every day, for several hours in the morning, they would study Tacitus and Montesquieu, or any other authors found worthy enough to stand beside them, and in the rest of the time, the one friend would read Blackstone and other English or American books, and the other would study Swiss documents, and on top of that, between spending time in the company of Bonnet and others, they would alternate between Roman, French and English classics. 

Tronchin was too much Müller’s friend to keep him from this plan, and even more pleased was Kinloch’s guardian, Thomas Boone - the former governor of South Carolina, and at the time the director of the large London Custom-house, a man in whom, in thirty years of acquaintance, Müller never found fault, though he always found exemplary reason, firmness and generosity. 

The friends lived for a year and a half in a modest country house on the hill of Chambeisy, surrounded by the highest mountains in the old world, the majesty of Lac Leman*, the incomparable culture of the shore, enjoying the masterworks of the human spirit, in daily association with Bonnet, but also with Voltaire, and brought together for a while with Mr Alleyne Fitzherbert, who was already developing the talents with which he later shone as Lord St Helens. After that, the storms of the North American revolution tore them apart.

*Also known as Lake Geneva.

Undated, 1775, Müller to his sister

After this little introduction, I ask you to take a map of the Geneva region to hand. Here, on the Swiss side of the lake on the border of Geneva on French land, lies the town of Chambesis – on a hill that overlooks the lake, all of the estates, the entire republic and the glaciers. Now take the map of America. Here is Charlestown, the capital of Carolina. And here on the third map is Scotland; in the middle of which lives an ancient family called Kinloch; one of these left Europe at the time of the civil war of the Stuart kings, and found with many others there a beautiful country and freedom. One of these Kinlochs now commands 1200 negroes, and is a gentleman of great standing and much greater spirit and character; he is twenty years old. 

He came to Geneva; in the last 5 to 6 months, we have seen each other for 23 hours each day and read the most profound writers together. Through this, we got to know and love each other’s characters. 

Mr Kinloch has rented a small country house with six rooms in Chambesis, and is paying 12 new Louis d’or a month for this and table, breakfast and supper, for the next five summer months. In this solitude, he wants to study. He has such a noble character that he is highly estimated by everyone. Lord North, the prime minister of the king of England, is very fond of him; K risked his life for his son and saved him from mortal danger. 

He has invited me to move in with him, and to spend this summer in the lap of scholarship and friendship. We would read and study together, occasionally go into the mountains, occasionally to Pays de Vaud. [...] And [Tronchin*], who loves me, and wants to see and promote my happiness, gave his permission, and his two children will spend this half of the year in a boarding house in the city and learn there. Thus, Mr Tronchin and they and I and Nassau and Bonnet and Kinloch are all content, and I will still see Mr Tronchin at Bessinge once every eight days.

*Müller was employed as a tutor to Tronchin’s two young children at the time.

Undated, 1775, Tronchin to Müller’s father

Have no concern, sir, about your son; everybody loves him, he is lively and good, his conduct has always been very wise, and all of our men of letters would vouch for him. The choice that he makes, to go and live with Mr Kinlock [sic] shall not, I hope, be without utility for him. He is a young man who has lived here for a long time, and who is generally and singularly esteemed both by his compatriots and by the Genevese, whether for his morals or for his character. The desire that he has to benefit from your son’s knowledge must be a guarantee of what I have told you.

From the introductory Lebensgeschichte, von ihm selbst beschrieben (biography, as described by himself)

Indeß lernte Müller bei Karl Bonnet, für den und dessen Gemahlin er die zärtliche Anhänglichkeit eines Sohnes faßte, und von welchen er ganz wie ein solcher behandelt wurde, einen Jüngling aus Süd - Carolina, Francis Kinloch, kennen. Dieser hatte eine ungemeine Wißbegier, viel Feuer, viele Güte und sehr angenehme Sitten. Es entstand ein Plan des Beisammenlebens; täglich sollten in ein paar Morgenstunden Tacitus und Montesquieu, und wenn etwa noch einer würdig erfunden würde neben diesen zu stehen, in den übrigen von dem einen Freunde Blackstone und andere englische oder amerikanische Bücher, von dem andern die schweizerischen Urkunden studiert, und hierauf zwischen Bonnets und anderer Gesellschaft, und Durchlesung römischer, französischer und englischer Klassiker abgewechselt werden. Zu sehr war Tronchin Müller's Freund, um ihn hievon abzuhalten, und noch mehr freute sich Kinloch's Vormund, Thomas Boone, gewesener Gouverneur von Süd- Carolina, noch jetzt Director des großen Londner Custom-house's, ein Mann, an welchem in dreißigjährigem Verhältniß Müller nie einen Fehler, wohl aber vortreflichen Verstand, Festigkeit und Edelmuth immer gleich gefunden hat. Auf dem Hügel von Chambeisy in einem bescheidenen Landhause, dem aber die höchsten Gebürge der alten Welt, die Pracht des lemanischen Sees, die unvergleichliche Cultur der Ufer entgegenlagen, im Genuß der Meisterstücke des menschlichen Geistes, im tåglichen Umgange Bonnets, auch mit Voltaire, und eine Zeitlang vereiniget mit Herrn Alleyne Fitzherbert, welcher die Talente schon entwickelte, durch welche er nach diesem als Lord St. Helens in den größten Geschäften geglänzt, so lebten die Freunde bei anderthalb Jahre. Hierauf rissen die Stürme der nordamerikanischen Revolution sie auseinander.

Undated, 1775, Müller to his sister

Nach dieser kleinen Einleitung bitte ich dich, eine Karte vom Genfergebiet zur Hand zu nehmen. Hier auf der Schweizerseite des Sees an den Genfergränzen auf französischem Boden liegt das Dorf Chambesis, auf einer Höhe, welche den See, alle Landgüter, die ganze Republik und die Eisberge übersieht. Nun nimm die Karte von Amerika. Hier ist Charlestown, die Hauptstadt von Karolina. Und hier auf der dritten Karte ist Scotland; in der Mitte desselben wohnt ein altes Geschlecht, genannt Kinloch; einer aus demselben verließ Europa zur Zeit der innerlichen Kriege der Könige Stuart, und fand mit vielen andern daselbst ein schönes Land und die Freiheit. Einer von diesen Kinlochs gebeut nun 1200 Négern, und ist ein Herr von Stand und noch weit größerm Geist und Charakter; er ist zwanzig Jahre alt. Er kam nach Genf; letzte 5—6 Monate haben wir uns alle Tage 23 Stunden gesehen und mit einander die tiefsinnigsten Schriftsteller gelesen. Hiedurch haben wir einer des andern Charakter kennen gelernt und lieb gewonnen. Herr Kinloch hat in Chambesis ein kleines Landhaus mit sechs Zimmern gemiethet, und zahlt hiefür und Tafel, Morgens und Abendessen, künftige fünf Sommermonate hindurch monatlich 12 neue Louis d'ors. In dieser Einsamkeit will er studieren. Er hat einen so edlen Charakter, daß er von jedermann hochgeschätzt wird. Er ist sehr beliebt bei Lord North, erstem Staatsminister des Königs von England; dessen Sohn hat K. einst aus Todesgefahr gerettet und sein eignes Leben für ihn gewagt. Er hat mich eingeladen zu ihm zu ziehen, und diesen Sommer im Schooß der Wissenschaften und der Freundschaft zuzubringen. Wir würden mit einander lesen und studieren, bisweilen in die Berge gehen, bisweilen ins Pays de Vaud. [...] Und [Tronchin], welcher mich liebt und mein Glück gern sieht und befördert, gab seinen Willen, und seine zwei Kinder werden dies halbe Jahr in einer Pension in der Stadt bleiben und daselbst lernen. So daß also Herr Tronchin und sie und ich und Nassau und Bonnet und Kinloch, wir alle zusammen zufrieden sind, und ich Herrn Tronchin dennoch alle acht Tage einmal zu Bessinge sehe.

Undated, 1775, Tronchin to Müller’s father

Ne soyez, Monsieur, d'ailleurs point en peine de Mr. Votre fils; tout le monde l'aime, il est vif et bon, sa conduite a toujours été très sage, et tous nos gens de lettres en font le plus grand cas. Le parti qu'il prend, d'aller vivre avec Mr. Kinlock ne sera pas, j'espère, sans utilité pour lui. C'est un jeune homme qui demeure ici depuis long tems, et qui y est généralement et singulièrement estimé tant par ses compatriotes que par les Genevois, soit pour ses moeurs, soit pour son caractère. Le désir qu'il a de profiter des lumières de Mr. Votre fils, Vous doit être un garant de ce que je Vous dis.

[sins-of-the-sea]

-The Voyage of the Devil's Eye-

This is mostly a plotting aid for anyone who wishes to find the Devil's Eye and defeat the Master. Or however you want to do with the Eye yourself.

-To Start the Voyage-

You will need to find The Compass (La Brújula), once held in possession by the Montego Family from Manila, Philippines, though it is said there is no one left of St. Emilio's lineage after 1711.

If you are to go by the Main Story, the Compass will be located in Kingston, Jamaica.

Appearance-wise, this doesn't look any different from any other old rusted compass, though it lacks a face.

However, as this is no ordinary compass, as it will "track" whatever you ask for, no matter where it is in the world, no matter how far or far removed. With that said, it can't point to you the direction of something as vague as "my true love" or "the greatest wealth in the world"; it has to be something specific, such as "my missing car keys" or "my deadbeat father". Brújula won't HAVE to know what those keys look like or who that deadbeat father is; what matters is that the object being tracked is concrete and real.

Brújula is capable of moving her needle should the target move as well, so if one is searching for a living bounty, it is possible for her to change directions as the target is on the move.

Do note, however, as this is a compass, the object cannot talk, tell you the distance of the object tracked, nor give you directions via map or charts. You have to be on foot and follow where the needle points at all times.

From here, to find the Eye, you must find the Seven Keys of St. Emilio. Skipping this step will not allow you to get the Devil's Eye, though feel free to try. You'll regret it.

-Seven Seas, Seven Keys-

To properly get to the Devil's Eye, you will need to get the Seven Keys of St. Emilio. Without them, you will not be able to access the Eye itself.

Each Key has different 'steps' in reaching them, usually entailing the following:

Identifying the location in the globe first.

Entering the location and getting past guards, security, etc., if the place is a nationally guarded area.

Getting past the Keys' personal guardians, if applicable

Touching the case holding the Key, or the Key itself

Enter a pocket dimension which your muse must pass a trial. What kind of Trial? I ain't tellin you shit.

If you pass, the Key is yours to take and carry with you for the rest of the voyage.

If you fail, the Key will be untoucheable for you and you must rely on someone else to pass the Trial. Usually a buddy, partner, a Crewmate, etc.

Rinse and repeat six more times.

During this Voyage, your muse will be traveling in different parts of the world. In the Main Story, these include England, Rome, the Levant, China, and so forth. In the Modern Day or even Far Future AU, the locations can be up in the air and we can plot where they can be, if they are still split up at all by that point.

-Reaching the Devil's Eye-

Once you have the 7 Keys, you'll be able to reach the Devil's Eye, which in itself can be its own Trial (hence why you need the Keys). The Locker containing the Eye is a puzzle box in itself which requires solving in addition to needing the complete set to open.

And once you open the Locker, the Devil's Eye will be within your grasp.

What will you do with it? Keep it? Put it in a museum? Gift it to someone else? Replace your own Eye and use it? Purify it? Give it to the Master? Or destroy it once and for all?

It's imperative you make a decision and stick with it--the longer you keep the Eye in your grasp, the more you'll feel your own darkest desires, impulses, and vices rise up without any inhibition or moral fiber to temper it all down. While it doesn't literally "whisper" to you or force you to go 'My preeeecioooous', it can compel you do to things you'd never think you would. Intrusive thoughts become harder to escape. The idea of murdering someone for any reason at all starts to feel easier and easier to fulfill. And the worst part--you can gain your own powers to which no holy man, priest, or shaman can defeat.

Though be wary. The longer you hold onto the Eye and not destroy it, the closer the Master and his Seven Sins may come....