#I'm desperate and disillusioned sure however

[leconcombrerit]

It's gonna be time to get back on the streets and defend what democracy we've got left if that bastard tries to bypass the Assembly again. Good thing is, many people are used to being beaten up by cops and very very angry, which is never a good mix for the government.

Now I'm not saying we should bring back guillotines I'm just saying it's an old tradition we had way back and you know --

[aceof-stars]

(Edited to adjust my argument).

I think RTFA confirming that Miles Edgeworth didn't intentionally forge evidence aligns with his established character in the first four cases. It does take away some audience interpretation but personally I'm fine with that.

First of all I don't think the rest of AA1 ever confirmed it one way or the other. There are a few instances where Phoenix thinks of Edgeworth as an evidence forger but it's not like Phoenix would know for sure either. (Do correct me, with specific lines please, if I'm wrong though).

But more importantly, if you only look at the first four cases of AA1 Edgeworth being an evidence forger doesn't make sense with his character. Why would a prosecutor forge evidence? Not including reasons like being blackmailed. 1) If they don't care (enough) about the truth (prioritizing things like success over it), or 2) if they truly believe the defendant is guilty and are desperate for a conviction (aka the reason Adrian Andrews forges evidence in 2-4).

Does Edgeworth care about the truth, before the start of his redemption arc at the end of 1-3?

Yes... kind of. I don't think he prioritizes the truth or consciously cares about it. As the "Demon Prosecutor", Edgeworth cares about justice, and achieving it through punishment. However, convicting the wrong person would not be justice to him. Which is what makes Edgeworth change sides to convict the right person in 1-3. So in that sense, he does care about the truth.

You could argue that Edgeworth had already lost once to Phoenix and thought "screw this, my perfect record is already gone, another loss wouldn't change that fact". But compare him to two characters who are actually obsessed with their perfect records. Manfred, a perfectionist control-freak, getting a penalty (not even losing!) unraveled him so much that he killed Gregory in the heat of the moment. Franziska after losing in 2-2 declares that: "That spirit channeling trial was a sham! I refuse to acknowledge its legitimacy! It did not count!" She doesn't even want to admit that she lost. Edgeworth, on the other hand, doesn't act like someone who truly prioritizes his win record over the truth.

Because Edgeworth didn't just let himself lose in 1-3, he made himself lose. He made Vasquez testify again. She would have gotten away if Edgeworth didn't say anything. And after the trial he tells the judge "Will Powers was innocent. That he should be found so is only natural… not a miracle."

Okay but if Edgeworth does care about the truth (to some extent), and believed that every defendant being guilty was the truth, he could have easily gone down the path of forging evidence to ensure the verdict reflected what he believed to be true. That leads me to my next question:

2. Does Edgeworth truly believe that every defendant he prosecutes is guilty?

Actually no. He says this in Turnabout Sisters: "Innocent"...? How can we know that? The guilty will always lie, to avoid being found out. There's no way to tell who is guilty and who is innocent! All that I can hope to do is get every defendant declared "guilty"! So I make that my policy.

Yeah I think that line speaks for itself.

Miles Edgeworth can't bring himself to consciously care about or prioritize the truth, but the moment it's presented in front of him he also can't bring himself to ignore it. He doesn't think it would be just to knowingly convict an innocent person, but he's so disillusioned and distrusting of people that he's lost faith in finding the truth.

So, he commits himself to getting guilty verdicts because he believes that's the best shot he has at enacting justice, even if he accidentally convicts innocent people from time to time.

And to me that aligns with his reaction to finding out he unknowingly used forged evidence in 1-5. Edgeworth was so disillusioned with finding the truth that he has accepted that some collateral damage would inevitably happen as a result of his mindset. However, because he still can't let go of his dedication to the truth, he wouldn't want to lie or rewrite the facts to achieve his verdicts.

[thegayhimbo]

Stranger Things Rebel Robin (Book and Podcast) Review (Part 1 of 2)

WARNING: The following review contains MAJOR SPOILERS from the book and podcast!

If you haven’t yet, be sure to check out my other Stranger Things Reviews. Like, Reblog, and let me know what your thoughts are regarding the show or the upcoming season! :)

Stranger Things Comics/Graphic Novels:

Stranger Things Six

Stranger Things Halloween Special

Stranger Things The Other Side

Stranger Things Zombie Boys

Stranger Things The Bully

Stranger Things Winter Special

Stranger Things Tomb of Ybwen

Stranger Things Into The Fire

Stranger Things Science Camp

Stranger Things “The Game Master” and “Erica’s Quest”

Stranger Things and Dungeons and Dragons

Stranger Things Kamchatka

Stranger Things Erica The Great

Stranger Things “Creature Feature” and “Summer Special”

Stranger Things Tie-In Books:

Stranger Things Suspicious Minds

Stranger Things Runaway Max (Part 1 of 3)

Stranger Things Runaway Max (Part 2 of 3)

Stranger Things Runaway Max (Part 3 of 3)

Stranger Things Darkness On The Edge Of Town (Part 1 of 3)

Stranger Things Darkness On The Edge Of Town (Part 2 of 3)

Stranger Things Darkness On The Edge Of Town (Part 3 of 3)

NOTE: If you would like to listen to "Surviving Hawkins," the companion podcast to Rebel Robin, you can find all 6 episodes here.

Synopsis: As Robin struggles to survive her sophomore year of High School, she becomes desperate to break free from the viciousness of high school conformity and her depressing living situation in Hawkins. To this end, she forms an escape plan to travel to Europe (which she calls "Operation Croissant") and becomes determined to get both the money for her trip and a companion to travel with her. However, as she attempts to accomplish these goals, she begins to discover things about herself, and the people around her, that leaves her woefully unprepared for how to deal with her situation............

Observations:

I've talked before in previous reviews about which comics and tie-in novels I've enjoyed, and which I haven't. However, the one that really connected with me on a personal level was Rebel Robin. Both the book and the podcast. I guess I shouldn't be surprised since this is a coming-of-age story about someone finding their own identity in a world that values forced conformity over individualism, and is also about coming to terms with one's own sexual orientation while growing up in a town that's deeply homophobic.

I should know: I lived Robin's story in my own way.

Those of you who follow my blog know I identify as gay (my username is literally titled TheGayHimbo), but I've never really gone into my own experiences about living in denial for years regarding my attraction to men (which might have actually saved my life in high school), how I dealt with homophobia and bullying (even as an adult) and how I tried playing the same game Robin initially does of trying to "fit in" to survive before growing disillusioned and staging my own rebellion when it became clear there would always be people out there who would never accept me as I am.

This book, and the podcast, hit a lot of personal nerves. That's not a bad thing because both were not only excellent, but also managed to perfectly capture what it's like growing up as an LGBT+ teen and constantly putting up with bullshit on top of that. It also does a great job encapsulating that feeling of desiring to escape the place you've been raised in for most of your life, and wanting to explore the world. I had the same dream Robin had as a teenager of leaving the United States and traveling to Europe. Unfortunately, it's only been in the last 2 years that I've finally made that dream a reality. Maybe it's for the better though since I'm a lot more wiser about the world than I was at the age of 17.

But I'm getting ahead of myself: Let's talk about the book and the podcast.

Part 1: Robin's Journey

Do you remember Mrs. Click's history class? Mrs. Clickity-Clackity? That's what us band dweebs called her. It's was first period, Tuesdays and Thursdays, so you were always late. And you always had the same breakfast: Bacon, egg, and cheese on a sesame bagel. I sat behind you. Two days a week for a year. Mister Funny. Mister Cool. The King of Hawkins High himself. Do you even remember me from that class? Of course you don't. You were a real asshole, you know that?.......... But it didn't even matter. It didn't matter that you were an ass. I was still.....obsessed with you. Even though all of us losers pretend to be above it all, we still want to be popular, accepted.......normal.

Do you remember what I said about Click's class? About me being jealous, and like, obsessed? It isn't because I had a crush on you. It's because............she wouldn't stop staring at you. Tammy Thompson. I wanted her to look at me.

Both of these conversations Robin has with Steve in season 3 are what make up a good chunk of the plot of Rebel Robin: Her infatuation with Tammy Thompson. Her dislike of Steve (a lot of it rooted in preconceived notions about him). Figuring things out about herself and how she relates to Hawkins and the world around her.

The way the book is written reminds me of the type of John Hughes movies that came out in the 80s: Sixteen Candles (which is one of the films that plays at the theater Robin initially works at), The Breakfast Club, Pretty in Pink, Ferris Bueller's Day Off, etc. All of these were stories focused on teenage identity, questioning high school stereotypes, rebelling against conformity and authority, and characters coming to terms with hard truths about themselves. The big difference here is that the book looks at these themes through a queer perspective, as well as the self-esteem issues that come with growing up in a homophobic environment.

For most of the book, Robin doesn't really put together that she likes girls. She's constantly infatuated with Tammy Thompson, but she tries framing it in her head as being interested in Tammy only because she's a nice person who's passionate and has a lovely voice. Robin also can't understand why Tammy would be interested in Steve when he barely has any interest in her.

When it finally does hit her that she's attracted to Tammy, she's completely caught off-guard by the epiphany since she's always pegged herself as a logically-thinking person:

This isn't something rooted in logic though, but emotion. I would even argue Robin's initial ignorance about her sexuality was a defense mechanism. Her whole conflict in the book is about trying to survive Hawkins High and blend in so that no one notices her. In the podcast, when she's talking with Mr. Hauser (who's one of the only people at that point who knows Robin's secret and figured it out before she did), she tells him that she deliberately makes herself average and uninteresting because it's the best camouflage. Those who try to be different don't last long, and get eaten up by the metaphorical monster that is "forced conformity" in Hawkins. Robin has seen that with Sheena Rollins, the girl everyone bullies because she's odd (which is sadly similar to the bullying El is subjected to in season 4 by Angela and the students of Lenora High School). Even though there are moments Robin considers stepping in on Sheena's behalf, she's either held back by her so-called friends, or she becomes worried that her intervening is just going to make things worse for Sheena (which, again, is similar to what happens when a teacher intervenes on El's behalf in season 4, and Angela later punishes El for it by publicly humiliating her at Rink-O-Mania).

Side Note: Whenever I see fans make stupid excuses for bullies like Angela by claiming they're children who aren't responsible for their behavior, and it was the lack of adults that's to blame, I wonder if those morons ever factor in how certain adults (like Miss Garvey here) enable people like Angela and other kids to become vicious brats BECAUSE they refuse to step in. When Robin is forced to take the bus later after her parents freak out over Will and Barb's disappearance, there are several instances (in both the book and podcast) where Robin is catcalled and harassed by other guys, and yet the bus driver refuses to do anything about it because they don't care to. "It was the lack of adults" my ass. 🙄

For me, growing up as a gay man who was also in denial about his sexuality for years (similar to Robin), I never had to deal with bullying when I was in high school. I was raised in a Conservative/Republican suburban neighborhood, and in a church that had an anti-homosexual stance, but I never got subjected to the vicious cruelty that Mike, Will, Lucas, Dustin, El, and Sheena were put through. For the most part, our high school cracked down hard on bullying, and I was never made to feel unsafe when I went there. I was even an AP student and never received grief for it, which is why I find it depressing when Robin tries justifying to Mr. Hauser in the podcast that she won't do AP classes because she wants to go unnoticed. She's lowering herself for people who don't care about her. I know I grew up in a different time period from Robin, and haven't had the same exact experiences she's had, but I have been in her position before of shrinking myself for others, and it is painful.

The irony is it wasn't until later in my life, when I finally accepted myself as homosexual and was moving through college and adulthood, that the homophobia and bullying I got subjected to started.

There are plenty of examples I could give, but one particularly disgusting instance I remember came from a Reddit user who intentionally went out of her way to target me on multiple occasions because I was gay (and because she saw me as an SJW) and did everything in her power at the time to diminish me, make me feel bad about my sexuality, and repeatedly tried to gaslight me into thinking there was something wrong with me. Unfortunately, she is still active online to this day, and continues the same cycle of bullying, belittling others, mocking people for caring about social issues, and then hypocritically positioning herself against bullying. Despite being reported multiple times for her behavior (which continues to be as bigoted and nasty as ever), the Sitewide Administration for Reddit has refused to do a damn thing about it (which I guess shouldn't be surprising since they've also kept up the accounts of users who've literally told others to kill themselves). This happened years ago when I was still new to the internet (having been sheltered from online discourse prior to attending college) and didn't have the skills set and knowledge at the time to deal with condescending assholes like her. I have avoided this user since, and I want nothing to do with her (or Reddit for that matter), but it's experiences like this which have hardened me and made me cynical about people and life in general.

On an unrelated note, it's why I have no sympathy for Angela when El finally has enough of her bullying and smashes her face in with a roller-skate. I don't usually condone violence, but I'd be lying if I said I didn't get some dark satisfaction in seeing this moment:

Cry me a river of blood and tears, sweetheart. You deserve it.

Getting back to the review, having read this book and listened to the podcast, I related stronglym with Robin during this. I also grew to appreciate Mr. Hauser. He's the one who encouraged Robin to be herself and not let the small-mindedness of other people keep her down. He's the one who supported her plan to travel to Europe (Operation Croissant) and encouraged Robin to find a companion to go with her because he understood that happiness and memories are better shared with others. There's a very powerful scene in the podcast when Robin is at a low point, having come to believe there's something wrong with her, and Mr. Hauser firmly reassures her that she isn't broken and that she doesn't need to change herself for others.

Hearing that, especially as someone who deals with anxiety and depression on a daily basis, nearly moved me to tears.

I wish there were others out there who had a Mr. Hauser in their lives. I met mine on Tumblr years ago, and I'm grateful to know her. If she's reading this, she knows who she is. :)

I should mention at this point that the companion podcast for the book only covers a specific part of the novel (i.e. Chapters 15-29) and they mostly focus on the conversations between Robin and Mr. Hauser that aren't in the book. They're deep conversations about what it's like living in Hawkins, how the books they're reading relate to their current situations, discussions about other characters like Steve, Barb, and Will, having to work in a rigid system that focuses on molding people into becoming productive members of society, and so on. All of it is wrapped in a mystery surrounding Mr. Hauser that Robin begins to piece together.

I read the book first before I listened to the podcast, so I already had the twist regarding Mr. Hauser spoiled, which made the build-up to the mystery feel redundant. I'm sure the podcast is meant to be listened to at the same time you're reading the book, but I don't think it truly matters which order you go in. Even if you haven't read the book or listened to the podcast, it is EXTREMELY EASY to figure out what Mr. Hauser's secret is. If you've been paying attention to what I've been talking about in this review, you've likely figured it out for yourselves.

In any case, it makes what happens to Mr. Hauser later all the more heartbreaking.

It's also the reason why Robin finally has enough when her plans get derailed, and she finally goes full Rebel Robin: She's sick of trying to survive. She's sick of confining herself to a box for people who either don't care for her, want to use her for their own self-serving purposes (i.e. her former friend Dash), or will criticize her no matter what she does. She also realizes that, for all of her scheming on Operation Croissant, it wasn't going to fix her problems:

I can relate. Recently, I got back from a trip to Italy and Greece. While I had a fun time (and brought back some nice souvenirs and pictures), the issues I've had for years didn't magically go away either. Running away doesn't fix your problems, and sometimes you have to face hard truths if you want to move on. I'm still getting there, and I'm glad Robin was able to get there as well.

The climax of this book comes off as a combination of 10 Things I Hate About You, National Lampoon's Animal House, and Mean Girls: It takes place at a school dance, there's a lot of wacky shenanigans that involve damaged property, a sleazebag who's been the antagonist for most of the story rightfully gets humiliated, and there's some kind of reconciliation. Robin doesn't exactly get what she wants (and her behavior is what causes her to end up working alongside Steve Harrington at Scoop's Ahoy), but she does get catharsis and a special moment where she can be herself with someone who also understands her. After spending most of the book wishing for that, it's at least something for her to hold onto.

Part 2: Robin's Relationship With Other Characters

We get to meet Robin's parents in this novel, who are both hippies from the counterculture movement of the 60s. Robin notes that both of them have traveled around most of their lives (which is one of the reasons she's inspired to create Operation Croissant and travel to Europe), they both have other hippie friends who've been on their own exciting adventures, they are relaxed in their parenting of Robin (to the point Robin admits to feeling like the adult in the family), and they taught Robin to question authority and not trust the government (which comes into play for her during her later adventure with Steve, Erica, and Dustin). However, when Will and Barb disappear, they end up becoming a lot more strict with Robin, confiscating her bike and forcing her to take the bus for her own safety.

While Robin is unhappy, it's understandable why they act like this, and it was absolutely the right call considering what was going on at the time. There's even a scene where Robin has a near encounter with the Demogorgon on the night Will disappears, and only barely avoids the monster:

On top of that, when her parents accidentally discover Robin's plans to run away to Europe, they're rightfully upset about it. They make a bunch of incorrect assumptions, but at the same time, this situation was avoidable if Robin had sat down with her parents beforehand and trusted them with what she was planning. I know Robin tries to justify to herself why she didn't, but even though I wanted Robin to explore Europe, I also understand why her parents reacted the way they did. Robin did not think all aspects of her plan through. If I had pulled what she almost did where I ran away during high school and only called my parents once I reached Paris, I know EXACTLY how that would have gone: Not well.

This book also reveals that Robin used to be friends with Barbara Holland back in grade school, only for them to drift apart later. There were certain factors, from Barb hanging out with Nancy more, to Barb becoming more of an overachiever in academics whereas Robin did not, but it wasn't anything bad that ended their friendship. When Barb disappears, Robin constantly projects this idea that Barb managed to get away from Hawkins and isn't truly missing (which is something Mr. Hauser calls Robin out on in the podcast). It gets pretty uncomfortable to read about, especially when the audience already knows what actually happened to her:

Barb acts as the ghost that's still in the room for many characters. Robin speculates on where she went, Nancy is later found sobbing her eyes out in the theater bathroom by Robin, and there's even a scene at the end of the book where Robin sees Nancy and Steve looking alone and scared. Even though Barb isn't mentioned by name, her presence is there:

I know that when it comes to the show, Barb's death had the biggest impact on Nancy, and it's usually Nancy's grief/guilt that gets the most focus, but I wish we'd gotten to see Robin's reaction to learning about Barb's death. It could have even been a bonding moment between Robin and Nancy when they were working together in season 4. Maybe it'll be talked about in season 5, but I'm not holding my breath.

Robin's former friends (Dash, Kate, and Milton) were a mixed bag. Milton was probably the one I like the best, but I wasn't impressed at him distancing himself from Robin later on because he was looking to date Wendy and didn't want people to spread gossip about him dating Robin. Kate was frustrating, and the way she kept trying to push Robin to date other boys (despite Robin insisting she wasn't interested) didn't impress me. Nor was I impressed with her dating Dash. To her credit, she does wise up and apologize to Robin later on, but I do find it telling that her relationship with Robin deteriorated and that Robin refers to both her and Milton as ex-friends by the end.

Dash is straight-up awful. I will talk more about him in the second post for this review, but his character struck a nerve. For all of his posturing about being an intellectual nerd, he's a sleazy womanizer (similar to Billy Hargrove) and a serial cheater. I loathe him the same way I hate Billy, Angela, and Dr Brenner.

Something I appreciated with this book is how it goes out of its way to invert the social dynamic with certain characters. I've seen criticisms before about how the popular kids on Stranger Things are always portrayed as monstrous, and the nerds/outcasts as the heroes, which isn't completely true. Chrissy Cunningham for instance was one of the most popular girls at Hawkins High, and yet was shown to be a sweet (if troubled) person. Steve, despite some initial hiccups, also demonstrated himself to be a good guy, willing to own up to his behavior and put his life on the line for others. By contrast, Henry/One/Vecna portrayed himself to El as being a social outcast growing up, and yet is not only a straight-up sociopath with no empathy for remorse for his actions, but ultimately the Big Bad of the series.

In Rebel Robin, Tammy Thompson is popular in school and has a circle of popular friends, but she's also a kind individual. She's repeatedly nice to Robin, and goes out of her way to talk to Sheena at one point to help her after she gets bullied again. By contrast, Dash labels himself as a band geek/nerd, and yet reveals himself as one of the most condescending, unkind individuals in the series. It's a major reason Robin washes her hands of him, and wants nothing to do with Dash when he shows his true colors. All of this adds a little complexity to the series beyond Popular = Bad and Nerd/Outcast = Good.

And then there's Steve himself: Even though Robin thinks about him in a negative light for most of the novel, I can only recall one or two instances where they briefly interact before the Epilogue (which is when Robin starts working for Scoops Ahoy).

I've seen fans repeatedly debate whether Steve was a bully to others pre-season 1, and the answer this book gives is a firm NO. Steve's shown to be self-absorbed and insensitive at times, but not vicious to others the same way bullies like Troy, Billy, and Angela were. He wasn't malicious, and he didn't go out of his way to torment others for his amusement. At one point, in the podcast, Mr. Hauser point-blank asks Robin if Steve's bullied her, and she denies it. Part of Robin's feelings against Steve are her projecting her issues on to him, part of it is making assumptions about him without the whole context (like when she thinks Steve made Nancy cry at the movie theater when Nancy was actually crying over Barb's death), and part of her dislike occasionally has some merit (like when Steve runs into Robin in the hallway during the podcast and acts like a douche).

All of this makes Steve and Robin bonding with one another in season 3 feels more meaningful. She gets to see a different side to Steve after constantly assuming that people don't change, and he comes to value her as a friend. She shared her secret with him (albeit under the influence of the Russian truth serum), and not only did he accept her for who she was and kept her secret, but also encouraged her to start dating Vickie in season 4. He's the friend she deserves to have.

Assuming that both Robin and Steve survive season 5, I'd love to see Robin fulfill her dream of traveling to Europe, and that she takes Steve with her. He's the true companion to have while they visit museums, cafes, the countryside, and eat plenty of croissants. 🥐

Overall, I strongly recommend both the book and podcast. Both are entertaining and quick to get through, both enhance the show and Robin's character while adding new details, and both are great examples of LGBT+ representation.

To be continued in Part 2..........

[griffinsanddragons]

This is Aestria, a high elf paladin who broke her oath.

My second playthrough of BG3 has been a blast, and I understand why paladin is so popular. It offers such great role-play possibilities.

From the start, I played Aestria as disillusioned Oath of Vengeance Paladin, someone who did good but in the worst possible way: demanding payment, using deception, threatening people, etc.

She's grew tired of carrying out other people's justice.

But then she broke her oath in the underdark by pure happenstance. She made a mistake, which made 'the gods' (the game) believe she sided with Nere.

She didn't become an oathbreaker right away. Instead, this is the moment she began to have a crisis of faith. She was tired, she was weary, but surely this isn't what she wanted? To have her God's favor torn away after one bad decision?

She didn't know what to do.

But when she got to the Githyanki Creche, Aestria convinced Lae'zel not to follow in Vlaakith's orders. Desperate to feel something, anything, she took the Blood of Lethander, which resulted in the entire building being blown up. Then she watched helplessly as Elminster told Gale Mystra's orders.

Aestria asked Elminster asked why the God's have them fighting alone and didn't like the answer she was given. The God's can't help them; instead, they turn away the moment someone makes a mistake buy demand so much in return.

Thar night, she went to the Oathbreaker and took him up on his offer. If the God's won't help them, she'll take things into her own hands...

...I'm looking forward to Act 2. I think meeting Kethric will be an interesting experience for her.

This may be a good 'everyone becomes the worst version of themselves' run. However, I'm also interested in Aestria helping her friends become their best selves and, in turn, being inspired to take back her oath (or have withers...assist her in swearing a new oath altogether).

[livgr3]

Viewing Response: The Umbrellas of Cherbourg / Les Parapluies de Cherbourg

Sorry to the haters but I looove this film and I was so excited to watch it again! It's of course so visually beautiful and narratively tragic, but I realized more this time around just how meaningful and intentional Demy's stunning visuals are to story and the character's journeys. Duggan's analysis of Umbrellas as a fairy tale that warps into a melodrama was quite an astute way of reading the film and is reflected in all it's formal elements, from its fading color palette to its fluctuating dramatic music. However, I found that Duggan's analysis of gender to fall short, particularly overlooking the patriarchal constraints placed on working class women.

In "Fairy Tale and Melodrama," Duggan writes:

"The Umbrellas starts off as a fairy tale whose movement toward wish fulfillment is blocked by war, social pressures, and the heroine’s own weakness, and the film quickly moves into the melodramatic narrative about loss, impotence, and disillusion" (40).

I agree with Duggan's description of the way Demy defies the Fairy Tale's narrative expectations by emasculating his "heroic" male characters. However, the author repeatedly refers to Genevieve as "weak" or incompetent in her inability to truly wait for Guy, and implies that she was easily seduced by Roland's wealth. I think that such an analysis does not take into account the women's financial struggles, the implications of Genevieve's pregnancy and the broader societal pressures upon Genevieve and her mother Emery as two working-class women trying to merely get by on their own.

The constraints of gender are especially prominent in the film's Part Two. As Duggan does rightfully note, Genevieve begins to fade out of her pastel colors and wears red like her mother, "which symbolizes, as is clear in its use in the brothel scene, the loss of innocence" (31). Feeling ill from her pregnancy and grieving the departure of Guy, Genevieve is detached and despondent. Her mother, by contrast, is frantic and desperate to remedy their situation, though her approach does come off as overbearing. I still don't think her overbearing nature makes her quite the antagonistic figure that Duggan implies, as her desperation to have Genevieve married only harkens the two larger truths that 1) Genevieve will receive great shame for pregnancy out of wedlock and 2) it is ultimately unlikely for two working-class unmarried women to make significant financial strides on their own, let alone raise a child on top of the burden of their struggling shop.

Genevieve's despondent melancholy creates larger questions around the implications of "waiting for a prince to come." Her sadness in this section of Umbrella's really really reminded me of Sofia Coppola's most recent film Priscilla, in which the glamorous superstar of Elvis Presley is so simply subverted by the mere boredom and loneliness experienced by the wife of the most famous man in the world. Though I'm not sure if Coppola was directly influenced by Demy's film, I still find that both films display the restrictive sense of "waiting" expected of women which, in this comparison, even extends beyond class. As women are practically associated to the home by default while men are expected in public spaces, the home becomes the space of women's waiting. Even the beautifully kitschy home attached to Madame Emery's umbrella shoppe or the ornate halls of Graceland begin to feel lonely and inescapable. As tragic as it became, I don't think it is any critical flaw of Genevieve's that this endless waiting grew to sicken her.

I don't think this analysis is too much of a stretch from Demy's original intentions of the film, given his general message that the happy, idyllic endings of fairy tales simply cannot and do not work in the modern world. Jacques' actions are understood as sort of obligatory given his circumstances: he simply has to enlist in the military, and in the end, marrying Madeline seems like the most obvious solution to his tremendous solution to his guilt and lonesomeness. Thus I don't think it should be read as an incompetence that Genevieve and her mother simply abide by their unpleasant expectations as women in a patriarchal environment.

[burning-sol]

Thinking abt themzt. I feel like I never rlly talked abt the general concept for the eldritchstrings au, so I'm just gonna do a little ramble here while my brain refuses to focus on anything else.

The way the story starts is pretty much exactly the same and everything is about the same until Rumi and Peter meet Thanatos. In the original work, Rumi and Thanatos are able to find some common ground that gives way to them fighting side by side without issue. In the common eldritchstrings au, the single force that completely alters the timeline is Rumi not being able to establish chemistry with Thanatos. Rumi doesn't agree with Thanatos' ideology, and moreover Rumi is already feeling a complete incongruence between their visions and reality that's making them react very not normally. They're able to defeat the first blight together, but Rumi feels disillusioned/confused/troubled enough by the circumstances that they politely part ways with Thanatos, and take Peter with them - the one who Rumi is most sure they're meant to be with, the one who agrees with them, their emotional support.

Rumi doesn't know if parting with Thanatos was a good choice or not, and being even further off script than intended will create a big internal conflict going forward.

Thanatos will continue to proceed as he had in the original narrative, but Rumi and Peter are going about their adventure differently. They take frequent stops and meet other people, which actually puts them *ahead* of Thanatos since they usually end up knowing where to go. This is also incredibly self-indulgent for Rumi, since performing for others boosts their own morale and helps affirm their identity which they're very in need of (and later this is to affirm them of their morals too). However, this is pretty much the only benefit of them separating from Thanatos.

Since there is no longer a third member to make the party stronger, Exandroth has become an unavoidable and essential part of the cast. Rumi *cannot* ignore Exandroth and *cannot* undermine her like they'd done in the original story. Rumi and Exandroth are weaker so they actually have to talk and strategise, and their intense dependency is highlighted by the fact that every god fight from now on is going to nearly KILL them. This will cause Peter to have a very depressing character arc as Peter comes to think of himself as being completely worthless, as seems to be proven by his inability to fight like Exandroth, so yeah the structure of the team really does its own work in shaping the narrative.

That is everything that sets up the eldritchstrings au, that's how I have come to imagine how the eldritchstrings dynamic could even be a conceivable thing. From here there's a lot of different decisions you can make abt how you want the story to go, but yeah that's the set up.

I could rant abt a lot of things from here, but like you know. I just find it to be such a brain worm to think about how Rumi ends up falling for Exandroth. All the interactions and the dependancy building up to, "shit, I actually like Exandroth," and Rumi then has an absolute mental breakdown over it. Rumi doesn't like Exandroth, Rumi doesn't approve of Exandroth's existence, Rumi hates Exandroth for what it does to Peter, but Rumi being forced to interact with her makes it undeniable that Exandroth is its own whole entity. Exandroth can say things, feels things, Exandroth can be funny, and it's incredibly hard to maintain a b&w view of Exandroth when Rumi is forced to confront its humanity ig. It's a brain worm to think about Peter's own quiet emotional struggle in the face of everything, his desperate longing to feel wanted, and although Rumi tells him he's wanted he just can't feel that when he (feels) *knows* he has nothing to give. Peter has nothing to give Rumi that'll help contribute to Rumi's goals, so Peter can't even entertain the idea he has value. And Exandroth.. Well, Exandroth is so fucking wild. I don't even have the brain capacity to get into her rn.

Also, shoutout to Exandroth and Rumi maybe killing Thanatos. Holding up a flag that reads "doom" on it like wow. You have selected the bad ending for this adventure. "Are you sure you want to kill your old companion, definitively turning away from idealistic path you had initially longed for, as well as proving your unwavering will to become god no matter the obstacle in your path?"

As I think I put succinctly in a prev post...

Rumi is trying to be so nice and explain that they're the god slayers and they're the good guys and that you should put your trust in them then Exandroth says loudly, "GIRL, WE KILLED THANATOS". "No. No we didn't. Exandroth loves to joke around ahahah cause you see he's a celestial so Exandroth doesn't really know what human humour is like so don't mind him-" "GIRL WE HAD A DRAMATIC DIALOGUE AND THEN VERY DELIBERATELY KILLED SOMEONE WHO YOU SAID WE WERE DESTINED TO KILL THE GODS WITH. I THINK WE'RE FUCKING EVIL OR SOMETHING." "We are not evil." "WE ARE FUCKING VILLAINS." "We are not villains." "WE ARE GOING TO BE THE SECOND WORST THING TO HAPPEN TO THIS EARTH."

[lichdragon-fortissax]

ok I'm trying to do some lore connecting here, and you have a good grasp. Did Marika and Ranni kill Godwyn? Did the GO/Fingers kill Godwyn? Is it a little bit of both? Meant to be ambiguous with no clear answer?

My belief is that Marika helped Ranni steal Destined Death so that she could sever herself from her mortal body, and that the GO/Fingers had the Black Knife Assassins also kill Godwyn with it as a punishment for her betrayal. I believe this because the item description for the Cursemark of Death makes it sound like something disrupted the ritual, and because Marika herself had no incentive whatsoever to kill Godwyn. In fact, it was his death that triggered the Shattering, which pretty much screams 'desperate attack borne of grief and anger' from someone who was already trying to struggle free from her chains in the first place.

This cursemark was carved at the moment of Death of the first demigod, and should have taken the shape of a circle.

However, two demigods perished at the same time, breaking the cursemark into two half-wheels.

Likewise, while the Black Knife Assassins were Numen, just like Marika, they primarily seem to serve the Golden Order. Ranni gets attacked by them after she kills her Fingers, so it's not too far off to think that they would have punished Marika for stealing Destined Death from Maliketh by killing her one unblemished son. Because seriously, Godwyn was like, her only kid that wasn't cursed in some way, so the thought of her intentionally ordering his death during a period of time that we KNOW she was questioning the Golden Order just doesn't line up with any sort of reasoning whatsoever

As for why Marika helped Ranni- like I said, at the time of the Night of the Black Knives, it was heavily implied that she had grown disillusioned with the Golden Order, and Ranni was an Empyrean who not only had the cunning to take over, but was also chafing at the bit seeking for a way to snap free from the Fingers and bring on her own realm. By helping Ranni steal Destined Death- and her partial suicide- she gave her the chance to free her from her mortal shackles so that she could scheme in the shadows. If she got away with it, then Ranni would have been able to go under the radar and craft a weapon capable of killing the Elden Beast, thus ending the reign of the Golden Order and freeing Marika from her ties to the Greater Will. But she didn't, so she went for plan B, and we saw exactly how that turned out, lmfao

However, this is just my interpretation- I'm pretty sure that the actual answer is supposed to be ambiguous with no clear answer, since you're pretty much investigating a crime scene that happened centuries in the past

[gffa]

I love your Star Wars Meta so - if Hypothetically you got Self Inserted into the GFFA via being reincarnated as Obi-Wan (possibly a female Obi-Wan if you're a woman so you don't have to deal with dysphoria) what would you do? How would you go about saving the galaxy (I'm gonna say that you only know about he movies and the clone wars series and the other stuff isn't canon). What do you do when training Anakin - or DO you train Anakin, or does Qui-Gon? What would you do?

This is such an interesting question, because so much depends on who knows what and when they’re coming into the timeline from!  So, I’m in the position of Obi-Wan–rather than Obi-Wan himself, who I think would probably do things differently than I would–and have his approximate level of influence and ability, but I know the events unfolding of I - VI + TCW and I’m being sent back to the time of The Phantom Menace.First things, Obi-Wan absolutely needed to be the one to train Anakin, because Qui-Gon would have been a disastrous pairing with him, they were too alike in all these terrible ways and too different in all these other terrible ways.  Qui-Gon’s difficulty with actually telling people the praise he thinks about them and his tendency to misunderstand those around him would be terrible for Anakin, who needs someone that can read between the lines better, someone who will be more clear about their praise, without laying the whole Chosen One prophecy on him too deeply.In the movies and TCW, the whole Chosen One thing doesn’t really seem to be much of a thing, they hardly ever mention it, nobody says it to or about Anakin much, and when it comes up, it’s usually in the, “Ehhhh, we don’t really know if that’s true.  I guess there’s something there, but it’s too vague to be of use.”  Qui-Gon, I think, would have had trouble separating out prophecy from Anakin as just another person.However, I would make sure he lived, so Obi-Wan wouldn’t have to deal with the grief, as well as keeping a more closely knit lineage.  Yoda was there for Obi-Wan any time he needed, but with Qui-Gon there, possibly they could have helped bring Dooku back or at least kept him away from Sidious.  That’s another thing I would work on–getting Dooku turned to better things.  It’s hard to say why, precisely, he joined Sidious and headed up the CIS, other than that he was disillusioned by the Republic, so he may not be able to be swayed, but I would keep a closer eye on him and not just assume he was off starting his own school of Force users.I would also put Anakin in with the other kids in the creche for a year or two, with the absolute promise that, yes, Anakin, you will be a Jedi, you just need some time to adjust first, because I think he desperately needed that promise hence why he was moved to Padawan so quickly.  I think this would give Anakin a bit more time with less independence/more needing direct supervision (I go with the idea that Padawans tended to have a bit more freedom, but if a child is still in the creche, then they need more direct watching by an older Padawan or a Knight or Master) and thus easing up on the Palpatine thing.  The Jedi still weren’t allowed to say no, he forced their hand, but they could then say, “He’s still an Initiate, he needs a guardian to go with him.” and that would make it easier to discuss what Palpatine said later and keep him from having so much direct influence.And I would probably make some sneaky exceptions for Anakin–like, letting him know how Shmi was doing and I would work to tone down his obsessive thoughts over Padme, now that I know they’re there and how dangerous they have the potential to be.  A lot more conversations wouldn’t be dropped with the assumption that Anakin would come around in time, that he always found his balance again, and it would be a delicate line to walk because he often tended to lash out or change the subject or turn away whenever Obi-Wan tried to talk to him, it would be difficult to balance respecting his boundaries versus knowing there’s more going on there, but knowing that there isn’t as much time to let things settle, conversations with Anakin would be moved up even higher on the priority list.Also, so much depends on what the actual source of his dreams are–are they his own anxieties?  Are they from the Force?  Are they a disastrous plot from Palpatine?  I tend to go with the last option because Anakin doesn’t have prophetic dreams regularly, but discovering the root of them, because now I know that they’re significant and need to be addressed more directly, instead of assuming they’re like everyone else’s dreams and that they’re just a reflection of your own worries.I would also talk to the politicians that I know can be trusted–Bail, Mon, Padme, etc.–and let them know, hey, this is going to all go to shit if we don’t get Palpatine out of there, because without Palpatine’s influence, I think they could have had at least a reasonably good ending.  This wouldn’t be easy, he’d have contingency plans after contingency plans and, honestly, I don’t know what to do about the clones, because I think Sifo-Dyas had already put in the order by that point?  And they belonged (ugh) to the Senate and Palpatine knew they were there, so he’d have found a way to make sure they were discovered, if it hadn’t been revealed in Obi-Wan’s plot in AOTC.  He’d just order new ones if the order was cancelled.  Possibly alter the chips so that, even if the GAR still exists (which it hopefully wouldn’t, setting Bail and Mon and Padme on it even earlier), they still have free will.I think the combination of Obi-Wan training him + easing of the lineage stuff + downplaying Palpatine’s influence + downplaying Anakin’s obsessive thoughts + even more priority placed on getting Anakin to talk about his feelings (now knowing there are faults that run down to the foundation, instead of trusting Anakin to be open to help) + giving a heads up to the politicians that the Senate actually listens to would have the best possible chance of keeping Anakin in the light.Anakin wants to be a good person, there is a good heart in there underneath the willingness to turn into being a monster, but he needed a lot more self-examination than he wanted to put in, so that would have to be pushed even harder.  And that might mean that he would have to leave the Jedi path, if he doesn’t want to control himself or doesn’t want to let go of his thoughts on Padme/still wants to be with her–so long as special accommodations were made to help watch over him, because Palpatine would quite possibly snatch him up, if he weren’t under the Jedi’s protection.But I believe there was still hope for the Republic, that there were enough good people and enough good in Anakin, that if Palpatine hadn’t pulled the strings closed on this crapsack purse of a galaxy, they genuinely had a chance.

[sanctamater]

something to talk about: how amelia was condition and brainwashed to the point where she thought she loved comstock. so, in a twisted & manipulated sense, she was actually upset about elizabeth and thinking that comstock had an affair? because she I'm sure being the 'mother of the savior' was a big part of the conditioning/brainwashing and something comstock made her feel 'worthy' with.

the indoctrination began the moment lady comstock sat down in his congregation and decided to come back. the thing to know is that this was a cult from the get-go, and there are certain steps that have to be followed to create this dynamic between cult leader and followers. indoctrinating one into a cult isn’t a quick process; but in the case of lady comstock, she was picked by comstock for specific reasons to be his bride and groomed her within the congregation.to start off, amelia was an insecure and desperate 18 year old who had been isolated from society due to her own choices and reputation ( “to those who loved me, i was the most generous of souls. there was no pain i would deny them, no betrayal i would not gladly give. and when i had scorched the hearts of all who loved me …” UNCONDITIONAL.). i also believe amelia to be part of american high society, the knickerbockers; which would give her considerable wealth and political prestige that zachary would need to further his ideas and cement the cult into a place of power. lady comstock, when she met her husband, was a vulnerable teenager, and he used her.

there are eight steps to indoctrinating a cult member, which i will explain below as it pertains to lady comstock and zachary’s courtship and marriage.

STEP ONE: IDENTIFY, INVITE.

most cults (i.e: scientology) target those with money. comstock would have been no different. he needed access to senate, congress, and washington, and the funds to do it; which an unmarried knickerbocker heiress would have. he’d have known of her, and had her pointed out to him in crowds. target acquired: one ruined, isolated and single heiress. i don’t think the selection nor courtship was random: he had every intention of making her his wife and wanted to groom her to fit the part.  invitation is when most cults attempt to get the target involved with them. maybe a luncheon, a retreat, a class. we’re going to assume that lady comstock was already attending sermons because it moved her and made her feel better about the direction her life was going, and would have given her hope that her life could improve given time. she already thought highly of zachary: in a moment of informal introduction, he begins to involve her personally with him.

STEP TWO: LOVE BOMB.

this is characterised by a period of support and affection from the indoctrinator. it’s to associate the cult with good feelings: i’m going to call the courtship a love bomb. this would have been a period where zachary would have made her feel special, given her affection, and made her know just how special she was. to quote her again: “the prophet said: ‘there is nothing you can do for which i will not forgive you. for god has granted me sight, and in his eyes, even you are loved.’” (UNCONDITIONAL.) he would have made it obvious that she was the favourite, and venerated her as something for others to strive for.

STEP THREE: DANGLING THE PRIZE.

cults promise shit. zachary promised redemption to his followers, and a second chance. that was lady comstock’s end goal: to be redeemed and given a second chance. it’d be a ‘join me, get this.’ in this case, it’s also his love and zachary would likely hold himself as a ‘prize’ for her to attain.

STEP FOUR: EXTRACTING AN AGREEMENT.

the cult leader will then seek a verbal agreement that you do indeed want this prize. cults want the target to feel as though this extraction, this ‘yes, i need this’ is the target’s idea, not the cult’s. this would have marked her baptism, but not her marriage. that was a later prize.

STEP FIVE: SHUTTING DOWN DISSENT. 

at this point the target is encouraged to do things and get more involved; things they might not want to do. donate in the name of the cult, devote more time, cut off family and friends, adopt more extreme beliefs; and if there is dissent, the cult will threaten to withhold the prize. amelia was…. extremely connected to her family. they were a support system for her. in order to make her more reliant on him, zachary would have asked that she turn her back on ‘non-believers’. she would have refused; and he, in turn, would have threatened to call off the courtship. she, now reliant on his approval and still reeling from the love bomb, would have complied. they marry. 

STEP SIX: GUILT.

now that the target is in and no longer asking questions, the target - now recruit - must be made to feel guilty. they are shamed as it makes them more vulnerable to manipulation. for the already indoctrinated - like lady comstock at this point - this makes them stay true to The Cause. in this case the guilt was zachary and lady comstock’s inability to produce a child, which we know he blamed amelia for. “the archangel tells me that columbia will only survive so long as my line sits the throne. yet lady comstock produces no child. i have done what a man can do, yet there is no child!” ( A BROKEN CIRCLE. ) he very likely blamed her for their infertility despite the fact that he was the sterile one, and made sure she knew that in order to keep her close.

STEP SEVEN: CARROT/STICK.

behaviour is reinforced by rewarding “good” and punishing “bad”. this is mirrored in her later voxopones. “tonight, the prophet moved against his political enemies. he preaches mercy, but 40 souls lie tonight dead, in unmarked graves. if there was ever a man… unworthy of grace, it would be my husband. but when i was beyond redemption, he offered it anyway. how can i deny forgiveness to one who, with love, granted it to me?” ( BEYOND REDEMPTION. ) it’s implied here he sought to control her by having her forgive him for… mass killing dissenters. that would have been good behaviour she was rewarded for. which also turns to backfire on him when she becomes disillusioned, but – this would have been the reward for her failing to produce an heir.

STEP EIGHT: CONTROL OF IDENTITY, INFORMATION, ENVIRONMENT.

this is technically the final step. i would like to say that i believe that lady comstock is…. an ideal, not a person. she’s a character in comstock’s narrative that amelia was indoctrinated into playing. she’s only ever referred to by her own initial; her image dots the city and zachary has constructed her into something holy, something inhuman that can transcend everything. lady comstock even has issues processing that zachary hale comstock is a monster, capable of atrocious things. he is so confident in his indoctrination of her that he shows her what he can do to those who oppose him, and she still she attempts to rationalise it. “i know the prophet is a liar, but he cannot be. i know the prophet is a murderer, but… he cannot be. for if the future lies only in the imagination of god, why would he reveal it to such a…. monster?” ( THE IMAGINATION OF GOD. ) she is so deep within this web that her processing of the situation has been affected. however, in terms of who he has turned her into, amelia says: “the child is no more divine than i.” ( NO LONGER. ) at this stage of disillusionment, amelia does not see herself in that narrative. she does not see elizabeth in the narrative. she is, of course, upset. she was 19 years old when elizabeth was brought to her and very much believed in her husband. it was a genuine upset: i’d be highly upset too if my spouse brought home a child for me out of the blue and told me she was cut from the holy cloth; another action which shows that comstock was confident in his grooming of her. she, already at a rickety stage in her belief, gained cracks in a foundation, and logically assumed it was an affair; which he did not refute. that upset was legitimate and valid given the situation. he hurt her. yet at the point where she records no longer, she no longer wants to be in his narrative; does not see herself fitting in that narrative, and wants to set things right. now seeing that he had lost control over her, zachary chose to do what he does to all of those who dissent: kill her. 

[scripttorture]

So, I have a character that was born in a sort of containment facility for the captives of a fringe extremist group, so he is in the unique position of never having set foot outside the compound. The guards were ordered to torture him from a young age(14-16) , but I'm not sure what techniques they would have used in this situation. The intent of this torture was to make the character fear the extremist group, make him vulnerable to indoctrination. For background, the story is set in- (1/2)

-an alternate universe, in the equivalent of the medieval era. The area the captives are located is based on South America, it's tropical and sweltering. The group that handles this torture is one that prioritizes tradition over reason. Can you please tell me if there is a method that would accomplish this, and what effects the character would sustain?Thank you! (2/2)

Thisbeing an alternate universe I’m assuming historical accuracy is a secondaryconcern.

 Which isgood because there aren’t a lot of good written sources I can access on1200-1500 tropical regions of South America. (And I will take any excuse to read about Brazil-)

 I hope I’ve got the right idea with thescenario but I’ll summarise what I’ve understood of it in case I haven’t.

 Thecharacter is born in a compound to parents who were presumably accused of being extremists/criminals.And he’s being tortured because he’s seen as being potentially part of this extremistgroup.

 That’s apretty realistic motivation for torture.

 Buttorture isn’t going to work the way these torturers intend it to.

 If thetorturers think that by torturingthis character they’ll stop him becoming an extremist that is perfectly realistic. That’s a mistake torturers make all thetime.

 Howeverif you actually want the torture tostop this character from becoming an extremist then torture doesn’t work that way.

 Growingup in this compound and being tortured, especially when he’s so young, isreally likely to turn this character againstthe guards. In an environment where the guards are constantly telling him theseextremists are the enemy- well to a kid like that that makes these extremists look like heroes.

 Theydon’t actually have to be heroes. Andif he ever meets them later he might be thoroughly disillusioned. But the waythese guards are acting? That’s the kind of thing that will drive peopletowards this extremist group and this young man is a prime candidate for recruitment.

 Essentially,the guards will end up indoctrinating this kid with their enemy’s ideas.

 Which brings me to actual methods-

 So I alwaysmention beating, because it happens everywhere and fits every setting.

 I’m notsure if you want scarring tortures as well as ‘clean’ non-scarring ones. Theones I’m listing don’t leave marks.

 Becauseof the tropical climate stress positions outside would be particularly nasty.This would also give the torture/punishment a public element. A popular onefrom the British army in army circa 1700s was ‘the crucifixion’. The victim wastied to a ‘fixed object’ usually a large artillery wheel, with their hands andfeet spread out like a X. Sometimes weights were put on their arms but usuallythey were left in the heat. This was usually done for several hours a day overseveral days. So the victim would be kept in the stress position for perhaps6-10 hours a day, released and then the torture was repeated the next day.

 Becausethey were often attached to metal objects,this was particularly brutal in tropical climates where the object heated up inthe sun.

 A stressposition that was actually used in Brazil (much later than your setting, whenit came under Portuguese control) was bucking.

 Thevictim’s legs are bent in front of them and their feet are tied together, thearms go around their knees and the hands are tied together. The torturer thenputs a stick under their knees and over their elbows and lifts them off theground. The stick digs in to the tendons at the knees and elbows and it becomesexcruciating in minutes.

 Victimsare often beaten while in this position.

 GenerallyI think using temperature would certainly make sense (because I have been thereand passed out from dehydration and it’s not fun). There’s a method that usedto be used in America, prisoners were put in a cell near the furnace thatheated the whole building. These cells were always uncomfortably hot but tomake it worse they’d throw old rubber tires into the fire, making a thick blacksmoke that went into the cell next door. You could use something similar, witha furnace made just for the purpose of torment, and smoky unpleasant woods usedin place of rubber.

 Thatcould also be added to by forcing prisoners to collect, chop and carry the woodused to punish other prisoners.

 So far Ithink these are falling more into the range of ‘camp punishment’ tortures thensomething aimed at an ideology.

 I thinkfor that a mixture of relay interrogations ala the Chicago police force andgroup recriminations ala Mao’s China.

 Relayinterrogations involve changing the interrogator/guard regularly. The aim ofthis is to keep the victim sleep deprived and (often) in a stress position (ietied to a chair). The cell this takes place in is often made deliberatelyuncomfortable for the victim, with bright lights and by manipulating thetemperature (in this case it would be too hot and the victim would probably notbe allowed to drink). Usually this is in the context of trying to force aconfession.

 In this case it would probably be more inthe form of lectures on the guards’ ideology and traditions with shouting,slapping and verbal abuse when he starts to fall asleep or when it looks likehe’s not listening. He’d probably be made to memorise passages of their coretexts and told to recite them over and over again.

 Thiswould go one for perhaps 2-2 ½ days straight before he’s allowed to sleep.

 Grouprecriminations are basically a bullying tactic that’s aimed to make peoplebetray each other, throwing others under the bus in a desperate attempt toescape blame. You gather a group (this could include prisoners as well asguards) around the victim in a circle and take it in turns to criticise them.

 Itessential amounts to having a group of people take turns to yell abuse atsomeone, who is then expected to defend their actions and grovelingly apologisefor their ‘mistakes’.

 It canalso include beatings, sleep deprivation and a standing stress position.

 Timeframes can be up to about 24 hours at once or over several days with breaks (morefor the guards benefit than the victim’s).

 Thesetechniques might well make him afraid of being labelled an extremist however they’re no more likely to make himagree with the guards than any other torture. He might tell them he agrees to make them stop, but that’s not the same asactually agreeing.

 I thinkif you want him to actually agree with the guards’ ideas then the smart thing to do would have been toremove him from the camp as a baby and place him with a ‘loyal’ family. Thishappened in Argentina and there’s a group called ‘The Grandmother’s of thePlaza de Mayo’ dedicated to finding children who were stolen from their parentsand raised by other families. The children usually don’t know they wereadopted.

 However not doing that fits with the idea of agroup that prizes tradition over everything else. It sounds like a newinnovation they might not trust.

 The endresult is I think your character would probably end up sympathising verystrongly with the extremists, even if he regularly has to curse their names andspit on their portraits.

 I hopethat helps. :)

Disclaimer